St Joseph Residence
495 Mammoth Rd, Manchester, NH 03104 · Non profit - Church related · 22 certified beds · (603) 668-6011 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 31.9% | 22.7% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.0% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.1% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.8% | 2.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.5% | 13.7% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.0% | 4.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 22.1% | 17.5% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.9% | 19.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.7% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.4% | 25.7% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.1% | 17.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.55 | 1.64 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.86 | 1.87 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 37% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 22 beds and averages 21.9 residents a day — about 100% occupied, or roughly 0 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.90 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.22 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.99 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 5.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.24 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.47 to 0.62 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · F2025-12-23 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a Licensed Nurse was on duty for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 8 of 12 days reviewed for Fiscal Year Quarter 4 (July 1, 2025 - September 30, 2025). Findings Include: Review on 12/22/25 of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data [NAME] Report for Fiscal Year Quarter 4 2025 revealed that the facility failed to have Licensed Nursing coverage 24 hours a day on the following dates: 7/5/2025, 7/12/2025, 7/19/2025, 7/26/2025, 8/2/2025, 8/9/2025, 8/16/2025, 8/23/2025, 8/30/2025, 9/6/2025, 9/7/2025, and 9/21/2025. Review on 12/23/25 of the facility's schedules and corresponding nursing time punches for the above days revealed that there was not a licensed nurse coverage on duty 24 hour a day on 7/5/2025, 7/12/2025, 7/26/2025, 8/2/2025, 8/9/2025, 8/16/2025, 9/6/2025, and 9/21/2025.Interview on 12/23/25 at approximately 8:30 a.m. with Staff C (Human Resource Manager) confirmed the above findings.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to implement and review, at least annually, the facility's water management plan that has the potential to effect the facility census of 22 residents.Findings include:Review on 12/22/25 of the facility's water management plan dated 11/13/2017 revealed the following: . Areas of greater risk in the nursing home would include the following:Resident showers and whirlpool tubs where droplets and moisture are in the air that resident are breathing while bathing. Plumbing fixtures such as sinks and showers that are located at the end of a dead leg pipping, or in an area that is rarely used allowing hot water to stagnate.Control measures should include the following:. 2. Assess and eliminate dead legs in plumbing system wherever practical. 3. Run hot water for several minutes at least once a week from fixtures in seldom used areas or at the end of dead legs that cannot be easily eliminated. 7. Remove and clean shower heads (including handheld wands) used for resident.Review on 11/22/25 of the facility's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physicians orders for 1 out of 3 residents observed during medication administration (Resident Identifier #20). Findings include: Standards: [NAME], [NAME] A., and [NAME]. Fundamentals of Nursing. 7th ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby Elsevier, 2009. Page 336- Physicians' Orders The physician is responsible for directing medical treatment. Nurses follow physician's orders unless they believe the orders are in error or harm clients. Therefore you need to assess all orders, and if you find one to be erroneous or harmful, further clarification from the physician is necessary . Observation on 10/29/24 at approximately 9:30 a.m. of Staff B (Medication Nursing Assistant) during medication preparation, revealed that Staff B poured one tablet of Docusate Sodium 50 milligrams (mg)/Sennosides 8.6 mg for Resident #20 into a medication cup. Review on 10/29/24 of Resident #20's physician orders revealed an order dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-31 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders for a nutritional intervention for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for nutrition in a final sample of 12 residents (Resident Identifier #19). Findings include: Review on 10/30/24 of Resident #19's Weight Summary revealed that the Resident's #19's weight was 104.9 pounds on 9/16/24. Further review revealed that on 10/21/24, Resident #19's weight was 101 pounds. Resident #19's first weight recorded after admission was on 9/1/24 was 109 pounds. Review on 10/30/24 of Resident #19's physician's orders revealed a current order dated 8/31/24 for Ensure three times a day for Ensure high plus protein 3 times a day with meals [sic]. Review on 10/30/24 of Resident #19's Nutritional Assessment, dated 9/3/24, revealed: .Has order for Ensure TID [three times a day], [discussed with] nurse, has not yet received it. Suggested homemade shake if accepted, nurse to review . Plan . Ensure or high calorie shake . This was signed by Staff C (Registered Dietician). Observation on 10/30/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-31 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident was offered and/or provided the Pneumococcal vaccine for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for immunizations (Resident Identifier #18 ). Findings include: Review on 10/30/24 of Resident #18's medical record revealed that Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Further review revealed that Resident #18 consented to receive the PPSV23 (pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine) on 9/20/23 and no documentation was available to show Resident #18 received the vaccine. Interview on 10/30/24 at approximately 2:30 p.m. with Staff A (Infection Preventionist) revealed that Resident #18 had not been given the PPSV23 that Resident #18 consented to receive. Review on 10/31/24 of facility policy titled, Immunizations: Pneumococcal Vaccinations of Residents PPSV23, PCV20, PVC15, dated 6/9/22, revealed: . a. All residents age [AGE] years or older will be offered appropriate vaccination, if applicable, based on their prior…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents' environment remained free of accident hazards as is possible regarding storage of chemical cleaning solutions on 3 of 3 units observed (North Hall, East Hall, South Hall). Findings include: Observations on 11/6/23 at 9:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. of the North Hall revealed that one of the shared residents bathroom door was open with a bottle of GC2010 chemical cleaning solution hanging on the wall within reach of residents. Observation on 11/6/23 at 12:35 p.m. of the corner of the East and South Halls revealed that the Shower Whirlpool Room door was open with a bottle of GC2010 chemical cleaning solution on a cart and a hot to the touch Hydrocollator that was on within reach of residents. Interview on 11/6/23 at approximately 1:00 p.m. with Staff A (Licensed Practical Nurse) revealed that 4 residents between the 3 halls have been identified to wander and that GC2010 was stored in the shared resident bathrooms. Observations on 11/7/23 at approximately 7:35 a.m. of the North Hall…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-08 · tag F0943 — patternGive their staff education on dementia care, and what abuse, neglect, and exploitation are; and how to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that training and education was provided to staff on abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property for 2 of 5 staff reviewed (Staff Identifiers are Staff E and J). Finding include: Review on 11/7/23 of Staff E's (agency Licensed Nursing Assistant) education file revealed no training or education for abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property. Review on 11/8/23 of Staff J's (agency Licensed Practical Nurse) education file revealed no training or education for abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property. Interview on 11/8/23 at approximately 10:30 a.m. with Staff B (Director of Nursing) confirmed that above findings. Staff B stated that they did not have an education process for the agency staff at this time. Review on 11/8/23 of facility policy titled Abuse Prevention and Reporting, revised on 10/24/22, revealed .2. Training- Employees will be educated on abuse prevention and reporting .Employees will be educated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, to prevent food borne illness for one of one kitchens observed. Findings include: Observation on 11/6/23 at approximately 9:00 a.m. of the kitchen refrigerator revealed the following: 24 raw eggs with a manufacturer's best by date of 10/30/23; 2 raw eggs with a manufacturer's best by date of 10/19/23; 2 unopened sour cream containers with a manufacturer's use by date of 10/28/23. Observation on 11/6/23 at approximately 9:00 a.m. of the kitchen storage room refrigerator revealed a plastic container covered with plastic wrap labeled pumpkin puree 10/10/23 use by 10/31/23. Further observation of plastic container revealed whitish growth like substance on the pumpkin puree. Interview on 11/6/23 at approximately 8:45 a.m. with Staff G (Senior Cook) confirmed the above findings. Review on 11/6/23 of facility policy titled Food Storage and Labeling, revised on 6/29/23, revealed . Refrigerated items: .2. Unopened will…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-12-23 · tag F0851 — patternElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined that the facility failed to submit accurate data for 7 of 92 days reviewed for Fiscal Quarter 4 (July 1, 2025 - September 30, 2025).Findings include:Review on 12/22/25 of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data [NAME] Report for Fiscal Year Quarter 4 2025 revealed that the facility failed to have Licensed Nursing coverage 24 hours a day on the following dates: 7/19/25, 8/23/25, 8/30/25, and 9/7/25 and failed to have a Registered Nurse for 8 consecutive hours on 9/6/25, 9/7/25, and 9/21/25.Review on 12/23/25 of the facility's schedules and time punches for the above days revealed that there was a licensed nurse for each 24 hours period and a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours on the above listed dates. Interview on 12/23/25 at approximately 8:30 a.m. with Staff C (Human Resources Manager) confirmed that there were hours worked and not reported for PBJ for the Licensed Nursing Staff on the above four (4) days and the Registered Nurse Staff on the above three (3) days.Review on 12/23/25 of Centers for Medicare…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-10-31 · tag F0851 — patternElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined that the facility failed to submit complete and accurate data for 5 of 91 days reviewed for Fiscal Quarter 3 (April 1, 2024 - June 30, 2024). Finding include: Review on 10/31/24 of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data [NAME] Report for Fiscal Year Quarter 3 2024 revealed that the facility failed to have Licensed Nursing coverage 24 hours a day on the following dates: 4/23/24, 5/26/24, 6/9/24, 6/21/24 and 6/23/24. Review on 10/31/24 of the facility's schedules for the above days revealed that there was licensed nurse coverage for each 24 hour period for the above listed dates. Interview on 10/31/24 at 11:50 a.m. with Staff H (Human Resources) confirmed that there were missing hours reported for PBJ for the Licensed Nursing Staff on the above 5 days. Review on 10/31/24 of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Electronic Staffing Data Submission Payroll-Based Journal Long-Term Care Facility Policy Manual, Version 2.6, effective date June 2022, revealed: .Accuracy: Staffing information is required to be an accurate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-11-08 · tag F0851 — patternElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined that the facility failed to submit complete and accurate data for 6 of 92 days reviewed for Fiscal Quarter 3 (April 1, 2023 - June 30,2023). Finding include: Review on 11/7/23 of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data [NAME] Report for Fiscal Year Quarter 3 2023 revealed that the facility failed to have Licensed Nursing coverage 24 hours a day on the following dates: 4/8/23, 4/22/23, 5/6/23, 6/3/23, 6/4/23 and 6/24/23. Review on 11/7/23 of the facility's monthly staffing schedule for April 2023 through June 2023 revealed that there was licensed nursing coverage for a 24 hour period for each of the above listed dates. Review on 11/7/23 of the nursing time punches for the above listed dates, revealed that there was appropriate nursing coverage the 24 hour periods listed above. Review on 11/7/23 of the centers PBJ report submissions for the above listed dates revealed the following hours for nursing was submitted: 4/8/23-23.84 nursing hours; 4/22/23-23.75 nursing hours; 5/6/23-23.91 nursing hours; 6/3/23-23.80 nursing hours;…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| AUCOIN, LORRAINE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/15/2025 |
| CONNORS, KELLY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/15/2025 |
| GAUTHIER, HOLLY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/15/2025 |
| LALIBERTE, ANNETTE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 10/11/2012 |
| LAROCHELLE, THERESE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/15/2025 |
| MAKOWSKI, MARLENE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/27/2025 |
| RIVARD, SUZANNE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/15/2025 |
| NH CATHOLIC CHARITIES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/01/2002 |
| BERNARD, ALAIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/04/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $55K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in NH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New Hampshire Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 305088. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-23, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.