Grand Islander Center
333 Green End Avenue, Middletown, RI 02842 · For profit - Corporation · 146 certified beds · (401) 849-7100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $21,548 in federal fines (most recent 2025-11-25)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 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 2 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 | 27.3% | 19.6% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.1% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.9% | 2.5% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 27.5% | 17.2% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 7.4% | 3.6% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 22.9% | 16.8% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.0% | 16.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.1% | 95.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.2% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.5% | 22.3% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.5% | 22.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 2.0% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 74.2% | 78.2% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.4% | 24.3% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.0% | 14.6% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.55 | 1.59 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.08 | 1.68 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
59.8% 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 187 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 44.6% 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 112 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 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 64% 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 | 59.8%CMS range 52.8–65.6 | 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 | 9.4%CMS range 7.2–12.8 | 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 | 44.6% | 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 | 50.0% | 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 | 42.0% | 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 | 99.3% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 0.7% | 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 | 1.4% | 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 | 6.0%CMS range 3.6–10.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.10 | 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 146 beds and averages 112.1 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 34 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 is below 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 3.16 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.45 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.71 to 0.50 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
40 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-11-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident receives adequate assistance during transfers to prevent accidents for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, resulting in a left spiral distal tibia fracture (a break in the lower shinbone near the ankle, fracture line that spirals around the bone, often caused by a twisting force) and a [NAME] bilateral distal fibula fracture (a break in the fibula bone of both ankles), Resident ID #2. Findings are as follows:Record review of a facility reported incident submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 9/3/2025 reveals that Resident ID #2 complained of pain in his/her left lower extremity and groin. Nursing assessed the resident and found his/her left lower extremity to be swollen and painful. The resident was ordered to be sent to the emergency room to rule out a deep vein thrombosis (DVT - a blood clot in a vein located deep within the body, commonly found in the leg). The facility was informed that the resident had sustained a left…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-10-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure each resident receives adequate supervision to prevent accidents relative to 1 of 3 residents reviewed for falls with injury, Resident ID #1.Findings are as follows:Record review of a facility reported incident submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 10/21/2025 indicates that Resident ID #1 was coming out of his/her room with Nursing Assistant (NA; Staff A) when the resident let go of his/her walker and fell backwards, landing on his/her buttocks. When the resident was getting up s/he grabbed the door, which swung open and hit the resident on the head. The resident then went to get up and the staff heard a pop in his/her hip area. The resident complained of hip pain and was transferred to an acute care hospital where s/he was diagnosed with a hip fracture.Record review revealed the resident was readmitted to the facility in October of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, fracture 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 before2025-12-05 · 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 residents receive care, consistent with professional standards of practice, relative to 1 of 1 resident reviewed for abnormal blood work, Resident ID #1.Findings are as follows: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 physician's orders unless they believe that the orders are in error or would harm the clients.Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in April of 2024 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, hyperosmolality and hypernatremia (conditions related to abnormally high levels of sodium in the blood stream).Review of a progress note dated 10/25/2025 at 8:20 PM revealed that Resident ID #1's bloodwork was reviewed with the provider who gave several new orders that included, repeat a basic metabolic panel (BMP, a blood test that measures substances in your blood to assess overall health) on Monday…
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 · D2025-12-05 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
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 provide medically related social services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for behaviors, resulting in a transfer to an acute care hospital, Resident ID #1.Findings are as follows:Review of a facility reported incident submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 10/28/2025 revealed, Resident ID #1 was displaying disruptive and self-injurious behaviors, and the provider was notified, and ordered to send the resident to the hospital for an evaluation. Additionally, while awaiting transfer, the resident was found in his/her room with a plastic bag over his/her head. Further, staff immediately removed the bag and then s/he was placed on a 1:1 supervision until s/he was transferred to the hospital.Review of a facility job description for a Social Services position revised 11/17/2020 states in part, Advocacy.Works with patients/residents, families, and significant others to provide support 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 before2025-11-25 · 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, the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives care consistent with professional standards of practice relative to physician's orders for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for wound care, Resident ID #1Findings are as follows:Review of a facility reported incident submitted to the Rhode Island of Health on 10/1/2025 states in part, that the resident's daughter had made an allegation of neglect against the facility.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 physician's orders unless they believe that the orders are in error or wound harm the clients.Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in August of 2022, with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, basal cell carcinoma (skin cancer).Record review of a progress note dated 8/21/2025 revealed, the resident had a MOHS surgery (a surgical procedure to remove skin cancer) on 8/19/2025.Record review of a Continuity of Care Consultation…
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 before2025-08-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who had actual fall with injury, Resident ID #1, and for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for transfers, Resident ID #2.Findings are as follows:1. Record review revealed Resident ID #1 was re-admitted to the facility in July of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, displaced intertrochanteric fracture of left femur (a broken hip).Record review of a progress note dated 7/20/2025 revealed, Resident ID #1 had been found lying on the floor at 8:00 AM in the doorway of his/her room. The resident indicated that s/he had pain to his/her left hip with swelling noted. The resident was emergently sent out to the hospital for further evaluation.Further review of his/her progress notes revealed that the resident was admitted to the hospital with a hip fracture and would require surgery to repair prior to returning to the facility.Review of a care plan focus area for falls dated 9/12/2023, failed to…
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 before2025-08-20 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff have the appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care related to abuse and neglect training for 1 of 3 Nursing Assistants (NA) reviewed, Staff A. Findings are as follows:Review of a facility reported incident of alleged staff to resident abuse that was reported to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 7/28/2025, revealed on 7/27/2025 Resident ID #5 alleged that s/he was abused by NA, Staff A.Record review of a facility policy titled Abuse Prohibition Policy last revised 10/24/2022 states in part, .Training and reporting obligations will be provided to all employees -through orientation, Code of Conduct training, and a minimum of annually-and will include. the Abuse Prohibition…
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 · Ecited before2025-05-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's comprehensive person-centered care plan was implemented relative to weekly skin assessments for 3 of 7 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 29, 32 and 172. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review for Resident ID #29 revealed s/he was re-admitted to the facility in February of 2025 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, stroke. Record review revealed a care plan dated 2/27/2024 to conduct a comprehensive skin inspection weekly. Record review of the resident's weekly skin inspection documentation failed to reveal evidence that a weekly skin inspection was completed since 5/2/2025, indicating that the skin assessment was not completed on 5/9/2025. During a surveyor interview on 5/14/2025 at 3:06 PM with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), she was unable to provide evidence that the resident's skin assessment was completed weekly, per the plan of care. 2. Record review for Resident ID #32 revealed s/he was admitted to the facility in May 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 · Ecited before2025-05-14 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 nursing staff have the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety, to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing of each resident, as determined by resident assessments, and considering the number, acuity, and diagnoses of the facility's resident population, in accordance with the facility assessment, for 4 of 4 nurses reviewed, Staff B, D, E and F. Additionally, the facility failed to have the appropriate competencies and skill sets relative to a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC; a long flexible tube that is inserted into a vein in the arm and threaded through a larger vein leading to the heart, used to administer intravenous [IV] fluids and medications), for 3 of 3 nurses reviewed, Staff G, H, and I. Findings are as follows: Record review of the Facility Assessment dated 2/12/2025, states in part, .Center staff .receive initial training .staff…
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 · E2025-05-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observation and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to store and label drugs and biological's in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 3 of 7 medication carts observed, and for 2 of 3 medication rooms. Findings are as follows: According to the facility policy titled, Disposal of Medication Waste dated 7/1/2024, states in part, .All medications will be disposed of in accordance with applicable federal, state and local regulations . Medications for disposal include: -Medications which are not taken with the patient upon discharge; -Discontinued, expired, or contaminated medications not returned to the pharmacy . 1a. A surveyor observation on 5/13/2025 at 4:45 PM of the Homestead Unit medication cart, revealed a medicine cup with one round white pill on top of the medication cart located in the hallway, unattended. Certified Medication Technician (CMT), Staff K, was observed exiting the restroom and walking towards the medication cart. During a surveyor interview immediately following the above observation with…
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 · Ecited before2025-05-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 infections, relative to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP; involves using a gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities) for 2 of 2 residents reviewed with wounds, Resident ID #s 34 and 47, and for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with a urinary catheter, Resident ID #88. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, .Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) In addition to Standard Precautions, (EBP) will be used when Contact Precautions do not otherwise apply .It employs targeted personal protective equipment [PPE] use during high contact patient/resident .activities is .Implementation of EBP .Patient Status .a wound or indwelling medical device without secretions or excretions that are unable to be covered or contained . Record review of the facility procedure for EBP last revised on 5/1/2025 states in part, 1. Post the appropriate…
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 · D2025-05-14 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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, staff and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide, based on the comprehensive assessment, care plan and the residents' preferences's, an ongoing program to support the residents' choice of activities which reflect the residents' interests, for 3 of 3 residents reviewed that were unable to watch television in their room from 5/9/2025 through 5/13/2025, Resident ID #'s 2, 86, and 99. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #2 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a chronic lung disease that causes damage to the lungs). Record review of his/her Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Further review of the MDS, Section F, revealed that it is very important to the resident to keep up with the news. Record review of a care plan 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.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-14 · 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 and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers (localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue, usually over a bony prominence, as a result of intense and/or prolonged pressure) for 1 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #43. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in April of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, right femur fracture and osteoarthritis. During a surveyor interview with the resident on 5/12/2025 at 11:27 AM, s/he revealed that s/he has bed sores on his/her buttocks and the areas are red. Additionally, s/he revealed that they sometimes apply a cream to both his/her butts. Record review revealed a care plan dated 4/28/2025 indicating that the resident is at risk for skin breakdown, with interventions that include, but are not…
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 before2025-05-14 · 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 record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight, for 1 of 5 residents reviewed, who experienced an actual weight loss and the facility failed to follow their own policy relative to weight monitoring, Resident ID #173. Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled Weights and Heights states in part, .Obtaining and Documenting Weight: 1.1 A licensed nurse or designee will weigh the patient. 1.1.1 Admissions and re-admissions will be weighed within 24 hours of admission . 1.1.4 If the body weight is not expected, re-weigh the patient . 2.1 Significant weight changes will be reviewed by the licensed nurse for assessment . 2.2 The licensed nurse will: 2.2.1 Notify the physician .Dietitian of significant weight changes . Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in April of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, sepsis due to Enterococcus (a bacteria that enters the bloodstream and may cause a widespread…
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 · D2025-05-14 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
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 meet professional standards of practice, in accordance with physician orders and the comprehensive person-centered care plan, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who was receiving antibiotics via a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC; a long flexible tube that is inserted into a vein in the arm and threaded through a larger vein leading to the heart, used to administer intravenous (IV) fluids and medications), Resident ID #173. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in April of 2025 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, enterococcal bacteremia (a bacteria that enters the bloodstream and may cause a widespread inflammatory response). Record review revealed the resident was receiving the following antibiotics: -Ampicillin (an antibiotic prescribed to treat various infections) 2 grams intravenously, every 4 hours. -Ceftriaxone (an antibiotic prescribed to treat various infections) 2 grams intravenously, every 12 hours. Record…
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 before2025-05-14 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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 a resident who requires dialysis (a treatment that filters blood when kidneys fail to adequately remove fluids and waste) receive such services consistent with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed receiving dialysis, Resident ID #83. Findings are as follows: Record review of a facility policy titled, Dialysis: Hemodialysis External Catheter Evaluation and Maintenance last revised 5/1/2025, states in part, .The licensed nurse will ensure that the dialysis access site (e.g. AV shunt or graft [a synthetic tube used to surgically connect the artery and vein, used for dialysis access]) is checked before and after dialysis treatment and every shift for patency [free from blockage or open] by auscultating for bruit [whooshing or swishing sound heard with a stethoscope] and palpating [feeling] for a thrill [a vibration felt with the fingertips when touching the AV shunt or graft] . Record review revealed 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 · D2025-05-14 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 the irregularities identified by the Clinical Consultant Pharmacist during the monthly pharmacist Medication Regimen Review (MRR) were acted upon for 3 of 6 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 29, 76 and 96. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review for Resident ID #29 revealed a physician's order dated 2/21/2025 for Lantus insulin (a medication prescribed to lower blood sugar), 16 units daily at bedtime, and Sitagliptin (a medication prescribed to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus), 150 milligrams (mg) daily. Record review of the pharmacist's MRR, dated 4/15/2025, revealed the following recommendations: - to consider decreasing the resident's Lantus insulin 16 unit dose at bedtime, by 2 units - to evaluate the Sitagliptin 150 mg daily dose, as it exceeds the maximum recommended manufacturer's dosing of 100 mg daily 2. Record review for Resident ID #76 revealed a physician's order dated 2/6/2025 for lorazepam (a medication prescribed to treat anxiety disorders) 0.5 mg every 6 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-14 · 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 1 resident reviewed for Warfarin/Coumadin therapy (an anticoagulant medication prescribed to reduce the blood's ability to clot, preventing or treating blood clots), Resident ID #21. Findings are as follows: Review of a document titled, A Guide to Taking Warfarin created by the American Heart Association, states in part, .It's important to monitor the INR [International Normalized Ratio, a standardized way to measure the prothrombin time [PT] of a blood sample. The INR is used to monitor the effectiveness of Warfarin] at least once a month and sometimes as often as twice weekly to make sure the level of Warfarin remains effective. If the INR is too low, blood clots will not be prevented, but if the INR is too high, there is an increased risk of bleeding . Record review revealed Resident ID #21 was admitted to the facility in February of 2025 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, unspecified atrial…
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 · D2025-05-14 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observation and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to disposed of garbage and refuse properly relative to 1 of 1 outside dumpster and the surrounding area. Findings are as follows: Surveyor observation of the outside dumpster area, in the presence of the Food Service Director on 5/14/2025 at 8:51 AM revealed the following: - Various sizes of cardboard boxes, broken down, on the ground surrounding the dumpster - Scattered used surgical and N95 masks on the ground - A tall, thin cardboard box containing 2 white wood wall baseboard pieces and 2 additional baseboard pieces on the ground - Used bubble wrap located on the ground - A mattress - 5 pieces of wood located on the ground - A large metal bed frame During a surveyor interview with the Maintenance Director on 5/14/2025 at 9:11 AM, he acknowledged the above-mentioned items and indicated that the area surrounding the dumpster needed to be cleaned and the items needed to be discarded.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-14 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
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 establish an Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) that must include an antibiotic stewardship program for antibiotic use protocols for 2 of 3 residents, Resident ID #s 100 and 172. Findings are as follows: According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) document titled, The Core Elements of Antibiotic Stewardship for Nursing Homes states in part, Standardize the practices which should be applied during the care of any resident suspected of an infection or started on an antibiotic. These practices include improving the evaluation and communication of clinical signs and symptoms when a resident is first suspected of having an infection, optimizing the use of diagnostic testing, and implementing an antibiotic review process, also known as an antibiotic time-out, for all antibiotics prescribed in your facility. Antibiotic reviews provide clinicians with an opportunity to reassess the ongoing need for and choice of an antibiotic when the clinical picture is clearer…
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 · D2025-04-22 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
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 immediately inform the resident's representative of an accident involving the resident, which resulted in injury and the decision to transfer the resident to an acute care hospital for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Record review of a community reported complaint submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health, on 4/17/2025 alleged that the resident's representative was not informed of a fall with injury that required the resident to be transferred to an acute care hospital. Record review of a facility policy last revised on 7/1/2024 titled Change in Condition: Notification of . states in part, .A Center must immediately inform the patient, consult with the patient's physician, and notify, consistent with their authority, the patient's representative, where there is: An accident involving the patient which results in injury and has the potential for requiring physician intervention .A decision to transfer or discharge the patient from the Center .…
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 before2025-04-22 · 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 record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality relative to evaluating a resident's neurological status after a fall for 2 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 1 and 3. Findings are as follows: Record review of a community reported complaint submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health on 4/17/2025 alleged that the facility did not complete neurological assessments (neuro check, a critical component of resident care, enabling nurses to evaluate and monitor the neurological system. This assessment helps in identifying changes in a resident's neurological status, which can be indicative of underlying conditions or responses to treatment. The assessment includes evaluating mental status, cranial nerves, motor function, sensory function, reflexes, and gait and balance) for Resident ID #1, after s/he sustained a fall with a head injury which required a transfer to an acute care hospital. Record review of a facility policy…
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 before2024-11-22 · 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 record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for significant weight loss and/or gain, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Record review of a facility's policy titled, Procedure: Weights and Heights states in part, .Admissions and re-admissions will be weighed within 24 hours of admission .If the body weight is not as expected, reweigh the patient .Significant weight change is defined as .5% in one month .10% in 6 months .notify the physician .Dietitian of significant weight changes . Record review of a facility policy titled, Nutrition/Hydration Care and Services states in part, .Staff will provide nutritional and hydration care and services to each patient .Observe and document oral intake of meals, supplements and snacks . 1. Record review revealed the resident was re-admitted to the facility in October of 2024, with diagnoses including, but not limited to, malignant neoplasm of the brain (brain…
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 · D2024-08-27 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's Advanced Directive to refuse lifesaving treatment was followed for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #1. Findings are as followings: Review of a facility reported incident received by the Rhode Island Department of Health on [DATE], revealed that a resident passed away in the facility within 24 hours of admission. Record review revealed the resident was readmitted to the facility in August of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Atrial Fibrillation (a heart condition that causes irregular and often rapid heartbeat), acute osteomyelitis (an infection in the bone) of the left hand, and diabetes. Record review revealed a document titled, Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) dated [DATE] states in part, .Do Not Attempt Resuscitation [a person who has decided not to allow cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in an event their breathing or heart stops] .(Allow…
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 before2024-07-31 · 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
Based on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that services being provided meet professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 residents reviewed relative to wound care, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: According to Mosby's Fundamentals of Nursing Concepts, Process and Practice, 4th Edition, page 809, states in part, .a Registered Nurse checks all transcribed orders against the original order for accuracy and thoroughness . Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in June of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, bacteremia (an infection in the bloodstream), methicillin susceptible staphylococcus infection (a bacterial infection) and a wound to the left ischium (the lower and back part of the hip bone). Record review of a hospital document provided to the surveyor, titled, Wound Care Note dated 6/24/2024, indicated the resident has a Stage IV (full thickness loss of skin and tissue exposing muscle, tendon, bone) pressure injury (localized injury to the skin and underlying tissue]) to…
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 before2024-07-31 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
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 a resident's drug regimen is free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 1 resident reviewed receiving intravenous (medication administered via the vein) antibiotics, Resident ID #1. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in June of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, bacteremia (an infection in the bloodstream), methicillin susceptible staphylococcus infection (a bacterial infection) and osteomyelitis (an infection of the bone). Record review of the physician's orders revealed the following: -6/28/2024 for Meropenem Intravenous Solution, use 1 gram intravenously every 8 hours for osteomyelitis for 49 doses. Record review of the July 2024 Medication Administration Record revealed the Meropenem was administered beyond the ordered 49 doses, indicating the resident received 4 additional doses on the following dates and times: -7/15/2024 at 10:00 PM -7/16/2024 at 6:00 AM -7/16/2024 at 2:00 PM -7/16/2024 at 10:00 PM During an…
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 · Fcited before2024-05-31 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on surveyor observation and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that food is stored and distributed in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, relative to the main kitchen and 3 of 3 kitchenettes observed. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review of the Rhode Island Food Code, 2018 Edition, Section 3-501.17 states in part, .READY -TO-EAT-TIME/TEMPERATURE CONTROL FOR SAFETY FOOD prepared and held in a FOOD ESTABLISHMENT for more than 24 hours shall be clearly marked to indicate the date or day by which the FOOD shall be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded when held at a temperature of 5 degrees Celsius or 41 degrees Fahrenheit or less for a maximum of 7 days. The day of preparation shall be counted as Day 1 . During the initial tour of the kitchen in the presence of the Food Service Director (FSD), on 5/28/2024 at 8:45 AM, the following was observed in the walk-in refrigerator: - 1 large package of hot dogs, opened with approximately 6…
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 · E2024-05-31 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — patternProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
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 assist residents in obtaining routine dental services for 2 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 37 and 69. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #69 was admitted to the facility in July of 2020 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, cognitive communication deficit and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing food or liquid). Review of an annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status Score of 5 out of 15 indicating his/her cognition is severely impaired. A surveyor observation of the resident on 5/29/2024 at 8:32 AM revealed that the s/he had multiple missing teeth. The resident was unable to answer questions related to his/her cognition. Record review revealed a physician's order dated 7/1/2020 for Podiatry, Dental and Ophthalmology consult, and treatment as needed for patient health and comfort. Record review of a progress…
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 · Ecited before2024-05-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the transmission of infections related to a wound dressing change for 1 of 2 residents, Resident ID #329. Additionally, the facility failed to maintain Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP; an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms in nursing homes) for 4 of 5 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 75, 97, 115, and 329. Finding are as follows: Review of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention document titled Implementation of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Use in Nursing Homes to Prevent Spread of Multidrug-Resistant Organisms (MDROs) Last Reviewed: August 1, 2023, states in part, Enhanced Barrier Precautions expand the use of PPE and refer to the use of gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDROs to staff hands and clothing .MDROs may be indirectly transferred from resident-to-resident…
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 before2024-05-31 · 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 surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice relative to following physician's order for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for fortified diets, Resident ID #s 63 and 88. Findings are as follows: 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 physician's orders unless they believe the orders are in error or would harm the clients. Record review of a document titled Corporate Recipe-Fortified Foods provided to the surveyor by the Food Service Director, revealed the facility offers three items as fortified food choices; Fortified Cinnamon Oatmeal, Fortified Pudding Parfait, and Fortified Mashed Potatoes. 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #63 was admitted to the facility in November of 2022 with diagnoses including, but…
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 · D2024-05-31 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on surveyor observations, record review, staff and resident representative interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives assistive devices to maintain hearing abilities for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #63. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed Resident ID #63 was re-admitted to the facility in November of 2022 with a diagnosis including, but not limited to, sensorineural hearing loss (hearing loss from damage to cells or nerve fibers in the inner ear). Record review of a care plan dated 4/28/2023 revealed the resident .has impaired communication as evidence by .impaired hearing .assist resident/patient with proper care and maintenance of hearing aids . Further record review of the care plan revealed it is important to the resident that s/he has the opportunity to engage in daily routines that are meaningful relative to his/her preferences. Additional record review revealed the resident enjoys listening to music and keeping up with the news by listening to the radio. Review of the May 2024 Medication…
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 · D2024-05-31 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 a resident with limited range of motion appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and or to prevent further decrease in range of motion for 1of 3 residents reviewed for a mobility device, Resident ID #89. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was re-admitted to facility in April of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness of one side of the body) following cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting the left non-dominant side and weakness. Record review of the care plan dated 4/3/2024 revealed, the resident is expected to be discharged due to his/her admission for a skilled short-term stay for rehabilitation. Further record review revealed interventions including, but not limited to, functional mobility and a need for an assistive device. Record review of a physical therapist note dated 4/24/2024 revealed, Physical Therapist (PT) was to…
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 · D2024-05-31 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff and resident interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services for 1 of 2 residents reviewed with constipation, Resident ID #103. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in August 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, muscle weakness and urinary incontinence. Review of a Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Further review revealed the resident was occasionally incontinent of bowels and was dependent on staff for toileting. Review of a care plan dated 8/8/2023 revealed, the resident exhibits or is at risk for gastrointestinal symptoms or complications related to constipation. Further review revealed interventions including, but not limited to, monitoring, and recording of bowel movements, and to assess and report signs and symptoms of decreased bowel movements. During…
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 before2024-05-31 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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 who require dialysis (a blood purifying treatment given when kidney function is not optimum) receive such services consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for dialysis, Resident ID #64. Findings are as follows: Review of the facility policy titled Dialysis: Hemodialysis (HD) Provided by a Certified End-Stage Renal Facility [ESRD] revealed in part, .Professional standards of practice include .Ongoing communication and collaboration with the certified ESRD facility . Record review revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in March of 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, end stage renal disease (when your kidneys can no longer support your body's needs) and hypertension. Record review of a care plan dated 3/26/2024 revealed, the resident exhibits or is at risk for impaired renal (kidney) function and is at risk for complications related to hemodialysis. Further review of the care plan revealed, the resident…
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 · D2024-05-31 · tag F0825 — isolatedProvide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a resident.
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, staff and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitation services such as physical therapy that were required per the resident's comprehensive plan of care for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for rehabilitation services, Resident ID #93. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility in January of 2023 and has diagnoses including, but not limited to, cerebral infarction (stroke), hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) affecting left dominant side, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 14 out of 15 indicating intact cognition. The MDS further indicated that the resident requires total dependence for bed mobility and transfer. During a surveyor interview on 5/28/2024 at 11:11 AM with the resident, s/he revealed that s/he would like to receive more…
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 · Fcited before2023-04-27 · 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 store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety relative to the main kitchen. Findings are as follows: Record review of the facility document titled, Labeling and Dating Inservice, states in part, .All foods should be dated upon receipt before being stored. Food labels must include .The date of preparation/receipt/removal from freezer .The 'use by' date .Leftovers must be labeled and dated with the date they are prepared and the 'use by' date . During the initial tour of the main kitchen in the presence of the Food Service Director (FSD) on 4/25/2023 at 8:48 AM, revealed the following: 1. The walk-in freezer: - one 10-pound (lbs.) bag of sliced pepperoni open and not dated 2. The walk-in refrigerator: - two approximately ¼ lbs. packages of sliced deli meats labeled salami, dated 4/14/2023 - one container of lettuce and tomato salad labeled with the date 4/20 and use by date 4/23. Additionally, the lettuce…
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 · Ecited before2023-04-27 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff and resident interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a residents environment remains as free from accident hazards as possible for 2 of 4 housekeeping closets observed on the Homestead Unit and Transitional Care Units (TCU). Findings are as follows: Review of a facility policy titled, ENV101 Storage last revised on 7/15/2022 states in part, .Storage areas are locked when not in operation to prevent unauthorized access . 1. During surveyor observations of the secured memory care unit, Homestead Unit, on 4/25/2023 at 9:10 AM, 9:57 AM, 10:36 AM, and 11:09 AM, the housekeeping storage closet door was unlocked. Additionally, this closet contained multiple chemicals including, but not limited to, peroxide multi surface and disinfectant, toilet cleaner, and floor cleaner on low shelving. During a surveyor observation on 4/25/2023 at 11:09 AM, Resident ID #53 began to open the unlocked housekeeping closet door where 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 · Dcited before2023-04-27 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 of 2 residents reviewed, relative to wandering, Resident ID #53. Findings are as follows: Record review revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility in December of 2017 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia with other behavioral disturbances, restlessness and agitation, psychotic disorder with delusions, and major depressive disorder. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6 out of 15, indicating the resident's cognition is severely impaired. Record review of a behavioral health assessment note dated 3/28/2023 revealed the resident has a history of exit seeking behaviors. During a surveyor observation on the following dates and times the resident was observed wandering on the unit, attempting to open the unit exit…
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 before2023-04-27 · 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 being provided meet professional standards of quality related to following physician's orders for 1 of 4 residents relative to blood sugar monitoring, Resident ID #47. Findings are as follows: According to 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 re-admitted to the facility in October of 2022 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, type 2 diabetes mellitus and long term (current) use of insulin. Record review of the April 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed a physician order with a start date of 3/16/2023 for fingerstick monitoring (blood sugar) two times a day at 6:00 AM and 4:00 PM and notify the physician if blood sugar value is less than 70 or more than 400. Further record review of the MAR failed to…
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 before2023-04-27 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
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 a resident's drug regimen is free from unnecessary drugs for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for cardiac medications with parameters, Resident ID #s 36 and 417. Findings are as follows: 1. Record review revealed Resident ID #36 was re-admitted to the facility in March of 2023 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, chronic diastolic congestive heart failure (abnormal heart condition characterized by an improper filling of blood in the heart causing a reduced amount of blood pumped out to the body), and hypertension (high blood pressure). Record review of the April 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed a physician's order with a start date of 4/4/2023, revised on dates 4/25/2023 and 4/26/2023, for metoprolol tartrate (a medication used to treat high blood pressure by relaxing blood vessels and slowing heart rate to improve blood flow and decrease blood pressure) oral tablet 12.5 mg (milligrams) by mouth every 6 hours for hypertension, hold for heart rate (HR) less than…
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
$21,548 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $12,438 — penalty dated 2025-11-25
- $9,110 — penalty dated 2025-10-24
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to GENESIS HEALTHCARE — 184 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 183 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 183; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GENESIS RI HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/01/2011 |
| FC-GEN OPERATIONS INVESTMENT LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/01/2011 |
| GEN OPERATIONS I LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/01/2011 |
| GEN OPERATIONS II LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/01/2011 |
| GENESIS HEALTHCARE INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/02/2016 |
| GENESIS HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/01/2011 |
| GENESIS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/02/2015 |
| GENESIS OPERATIONS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/04/2025 |
| GHC HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/01/2011 |
| SUN HEALTHCARE GROUP INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/02/2015 |
| WHITMAN, ARNOLD | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/31/2011 |
| FISHMAN, STEVEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 12/31/2011 |
| BERG, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/01/2012 |
| BRIDGEFORD, LAURA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| MENDELSON, AVI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| LOPES, RONICIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/04/2025 |
| VERMA, SUNIL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
10 organizational owners 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 $3.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 415034. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-14, 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.