Tockwotton on the Waterfront
500 Waterfront Drive, East Providence, RI 02914 · Non profit - Corporation · 52 certified beds · (401) 272-5280 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (29% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- the CMS record shows $8,628 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-13)
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 held steady at 5 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 | 13.3% | 19.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.3% | 5.1% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.5% | 0.9% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.9% | 2.5% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.7% | 17.2% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 3.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.3% | 16.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.4% | 16.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.9% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 3.2% | 22.3% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.6% | 22.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 6.8% | 2.0% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 80.7% | 78.2% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 33.6% | 24.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.7% | 14.6% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.93 | 1.59 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.72 | 1.68 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
61.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 194 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 70.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 79 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.47 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 78% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 | 61.8%CMS range 55.8–68.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.1%CMS range 6.7–11.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 70.9% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 59.5% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 67.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 98.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.3%CMS range 3.6–10.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.87 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 52 beds and averages 48.5 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.86 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.10 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.11 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 4.07 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.18 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.26 to 0.73 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 29% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-02-25 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents are free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #1 relative to Metoprolol use (a medication prescribed to treat high blood pressure and to control heart rate), resulting in hospitalization due to extremely low heart rate from an overdose of Metoprolol which caused bradycardia ((a severely low heart rate) that can deprive the brain and other organs of oxygen in the body from the reduced blood circulation). Findings are as follows: Review of a facility reported incident submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 2/24/2025 revealed that Resident ID #1 received an overdose of Metoprolol and was admitted to the hospital due to cardiac concerns after receiving a dose of 62.5 milligrams (mg), instead of his/her prescribed dose of 37.5 mg on 2/23/2025. Review of a facility policy titled, Administering Medications last revised in April of 2019 states in part, .Medications are administered .as prescribed .The individual…
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 · E2026-04-16 · tag F0849 — patternArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that hospice services meet professional standards of principles that apply to individuals providing services in the facility for 2 of 2 residents reviewed who are receiving hospice services, Resident ID #s 6 and 8.Findings are as follows:1. Record review revealed that Resident ID #6 was admitted to the facility in March of 2026 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, dementia.Record review revealed the resident began receiving hospice services on 3/23/2026.a. Record review failed to reveal evidence that a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was completed within 14 days from the date s/he began receiving hospice services, as per the regulation.During a surveyor interview on 4/15/2026 at 10:39 AM with the MDS Coordinator, Staff C, she revealed that Significant Change Assessments are completed when a resident begins receiving hospice services, and the assessment should be completed within 14 days. Additionally, she acknowledged that the Significant Change Assessment had not been…
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 · D2026-04-16 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services related to monitoring output for 2 of 4 residents reviewed with an indwelling catheter (a flexible tube that collects urine from the bladder and leads to a drainage bag), Resident ID #s 9 and 10.Findings are as follows:According to Brunner & Suddarth's Textbook of Medical-Surgical Nursing Volume 2, 10th Edition, page 1282 and 1284 states in part, .For patients with indwelling catheters, the nurse assesses the drainage system to ensure that it provides adequate urinary drainage. The color, odor, and volume of urine are also monitored. An accurate record of fluid intake and urine output provides essential information about the adequacy of renal function and urinary drainage .to reduce the risk of bacterial proliferation [rapid increase in numbers] empty the collection bag at least every 8 hours through the drainage spout - more frequently if there is a large volume of urine .Review of an undated facility policy titled, Emptying a Urinary Collection Bag states in part,…
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 · Dcited before2025-02-25 · 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
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to follow a physician's order relative to a significant change in condition for 1 of 1 resident reviewed whom experienced bradycardia (a low heart rate), Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility reported incident submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 2/24/2025 revealed that Resident ID #1 received an overdose of Metoprolol (a medication prescribed for high blood pressure and to control heart rate) and was admitted to the hospital after receiving a dose of 62.5 milligrams (mg), instead of his/her prescribed dose of 37.5 mg on 2/23/2025. According to Mosby's 4th Edition, Fundamentals of Nursing page 314, states in part, The physician is responsible for directing medical treatment. Nurses are obligated to follow physicians' orders unless they believe the orders are in error or would harm the clients. Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in November of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, congestive heart failure (when…
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 · F2025-02-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to prepare, store, and distribute food according to professional standards of food service safety, relative to the main kitchen. Findings are as follows: 1. Review of the Rhode Island Food Code, 2018 Edition, section 3-501.17 states in part, .(B) .refrigerated, ready-to-eat time/temperature control for safety food .shall be clearly marked, at the time the original container is opened in a food establishment .and: (1) the day the original container is opened in the food establishment shall be counted as Day 1; and (2) The day or date marked by the food establishment may not exceed a manufacturer's use-by date . During the initial tour of the main kitchen on 2/10/2025 at approximately 8:30 AM of the reach in refrigerator unit 4 was observed with the following: -one 32 ounce jar of Sysco capers with an open date of 1/4/2025 and a use by date of 2/4/2025. -one jar of pepperoncini peppers with an open date of 12/25/2025 and a use by date of 1/25/2025. -six Styrofoam…
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 · D2025-02-13 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents with pressure ulcers receive the necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with a pressure ulcer (skin and tissue injuries caused by constant pressure to a specific area of the body), Resident ID #250. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in February of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia and abnormalities of mobility. Review of a Safe Patient Handling assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was dependent on staff for bed mobility. Review of a document titled Skin Integrity Events dated 2/5/2025 revealed an unstageable pressure ulcer (characterized by full-thickness tissue loss where the depth cannot be assessed due to the presence of dead tissue) was observed to the resident's right heel measuring 1.5…
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 · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents are free from any significant medication errors for 1 of 2 residents reviewed with a sliding scale insulin (Insulin dosage based on blood glucose reading), Resident ID #6, and 1 of 4 residents observed during the medication administration task, Resident ID #13. Findings are as follows: Review of a policy titled Administering Medications states in part, .Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame .within one (1) hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified . 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #6 was admitted to the facility in August of 2017 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, diabetes mellitus. Record review of the physician's orders revealed the following: -11/4/2024- Novolog (insulin) 100 unit/milliliter(ml) administer 6 units three times a day, hold for blood glucose reading less than 65. -11/5/2024-Novolog (insulin) 100 unit/ml to be given three times daily before eating if: -the…
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 · D2025-02-13 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide and prepare food in a form designed to meet individual needs for 1 of 2 residents reviewed with a physician's order for thickened consistency fluids, Resident ID #301. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in February of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dysphagia (difficulty in swallowing), pneumonia (infection of the lungs), and dementia. Record review revealed the following physician's orders: - 2/4/2025: Aspiration precaution (guidelines to prevent food or liquid from entering the airway while eating or drinking) - 2/6/2025: 120 milliliters (ml) of nectar (mildly thick) house supplement (nutritional supplement) once in the morning - 2/10/2025: Diet order for honey thick (moderately thick) liquids Record review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for February 2025 revealed the order for the house supplement nectar thick consistency was signed off by the staff on 2/11/2025 and…
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 · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that medical records are accurately documented for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for sliding scale insulin (Insulin dosage based on blood glucose reading), Resident ID #6, and for 1 of 4 residents observed during the medication administration task, Resident ID #13. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #6 was admitted to the facility in August of 2017 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, diabetes mellitus. Record review revealed the following physician's orders dated 11/5/2024: -Novolog (insulin) 100 units/milliliters (u/ml) to be given three times daily before eating if: -the blood glucose reading is between 0-180- give no insulin -the blood glucose reading is between 181- 250- give two units of insulin -the blood glucose reading is between 251-300- give four units of insulin -the blood glucose reading is between 301-400- give eight units of insulin -the blood glucose reading is above 400- add ten units of insulin Record review of the February 2025…
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 · D2025-02-13 · 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 surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infection, relative to droplet/contact precautions (utilized when a resident is known or expected to be infected to prevent the spread of germs that can be transmitted through respiratory droplets expelled when a person coughs, sneezes, or speaks) for 1 of 2 residents reviewed on droplet/contact precautions for influenza (a highly contagious respiratory illness caused by the influenza viruses which spreads through respiratory droplets), Resident ID #19. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility's policy titled, Isolation-Categories of Transmission-Based Precautions states in part, Transmission-based precautions are initiated when a resident develops signs and symptoms of a transmissible infection .and is at risk of transmitting the infection to other residents .Contact Precautions: are implemented for residents known or suspected to be infected…
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 · Dcited before2024-02-29 · 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
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that services provided meet professional standards of quality, relative to following a physician's order for 1 of 1 resident reviewed relative to a respiratory diagnosis, Resident ID #19. Findings are as follows: Mosby's 4th Edition, Fundamentals of Nursing page 314 states, The physician is responsible for directing medical treatment. Nurses are obligated to follow physician's orders unless they believe the orders are in error or would harm the clients. Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited, to Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV, a virus that affects the respiratory tract). Record review revealed a physician's order dated 2/1/2024 for Mucinex tablet extended release, 600 milligrams, with instructions to administer 2 tablets, twice a day. Record review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for February 2024 revealed, the resident missed 11 out of 14 opportunities for the administration of…
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 · Dcited before2024-02-29 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are accurately documented and complete for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for falls, Resident ID #18, and 1 of 1 resident reviewed for a Foley catheter, Resident ID #18. Findings are as follows: 1a) Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in September of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, cerebral infarction (stroke) and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Record review of a progress note dated 1/4/2024 at 2:15 PM, revealed that the Nurse Practitioner (NP) entered a new order to remove the resident's Foley catheter and to proceed with a trial void (an assessment of the resident's ability to spontaneously urinate). During a surveyor interview on 2/29/2024 at 10:47 AM with the Unit Manager, Licensed Practical Nurse, Staff A, she revealed that the resident had a successful trial void on 1/4/2024 and s/he no longer has a Foley catheter. Record review revealed the following progress notes: - 1/23/2024 at…
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
$8,628 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,628 — penalty dated 2025-02-13
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALLEN, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/08/2018 |
| ATCHISON, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/12/2020 |
| BARHAM, LONNIE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/12/2015 |
| BONE, ARTHUR | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/14/2013 |
| BOSS, ALYSSA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/14/2019 |
| DASILVA-TAVAREZ, EMILIA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2022 |
| HEIDTMAN, DEBORA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/11/2021 |
| KROESSLER, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/12/2015 |
| LAFAUCI, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/09/2017 |
| MCCANCE-KATZ, ELINORE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/11/2021 |
| RAIMONDO, MARIANNE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/10/2016 |
| YEPEZ, RAFAEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/12/2020 |
| MCGEE, CHRISTOPHER | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 13 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.
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.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. 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, FY2023). 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 RI
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 Rhode Island 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 415113. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-16, 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.