Vermont Veterans' Home
325 North Street, Bennington, VT 05201 · Government - State · 177 certified beds · (802) 447-6510 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (29% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Jun 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- 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 (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,278 in federal fines (most recent 2026-03-11)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 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 | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 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 | 25.6% | 19.3% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.5% | 6.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.8% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.8% | 2.4% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.6% | 13.0% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 8.0% | 5.9% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.1% | 17.4% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.6% | 16.4% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.7% | 97.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.2% | 5.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 28.8% | 26.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 24.3% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.7% | 22.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.8% | 17.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.14 | 1.52 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.12 | 2.88 | 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 17% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.8%CMS range 6.3–17.4 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.8% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.84 | 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 177 beds and averages 83.3 residents a day — about 47% occupied, or roughly 94 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 5.32 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.19 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.66 to 0.76 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 29% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
16 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-03-11 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident remained as free from accidents as possible related to the use of supplemental oxygen while smoking and failed to maintain effective supervision that would reduce the likelihood of incident or injury for 1 of 2 residents in the applicable sample (Resident #93). As a result, Resident #93 suffered a facial burn that resulted in pain, redness, and loss of skin. This is a repeat deficiency for this facility, with the violation cited during the previous re-certification survey, dated 1/29/25. Findings include:Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident remained as free from accidents as possible related to the use of supplemental oxygen while smoking and failed to maintain adequate supervision for 1 of 2 residents in the applicable sample (Resident #93). As a result, Resident #93 suffered a facial burn that resulted in pain, redness, and loss of skin. Findings include:Per a record review, Resident #93 was recently admitted to the facility's long term care unit from…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-09 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — patternProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of three sampled residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) remained free from misappropriation of property. Findings include: #1 Per record review, Resident #1 has diagnoses that include Parkinson's Disease, PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), dementia, schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, and psychotic delusions. Per an MDS (Minimum Data Set, a resident assessment tool) dated 10/2/25, Resident #1 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 15, indicating fully intact cognition (the ability to perceive, learn, remember, reason, and problem-solve). Per review of the facility investigation, Resident #1 told the LCSW (Licensed Clinical Social Worker) that he had been giving LPN #1 money. S/he reported that LPN #1 asked for it for gas and cigarettes. LPN #1 did not repay the money. Per review of the police report, Resident #1 he had given LPN #1 money for gas and cigarettes when she didn't have money. S/he could not recall how…
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 · F2026-03-11 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety and failed to ensure freezers were maintained at the appropriate temperature. Findings include:Per observation of the kitchen freezer on 3/9/26 at 11:36 AM there was a pack of three sausages and a package of smart dogs opened in the freezer with no date or label. In the dry storage area, there was a 10-pack of instant grits with an expiration date of 11/25. There was a 13.7-ounce bag of cheese queso that had expired on 6/12/25. An interview was conducted with Kitchen Staff Member #1 on 3/9/26 at approximately 11:40 AM. The Kitchen Staff Member confirmed these items were expired. He confirmed that the package of sausages and smart dogs were opened and unlabeled.Per observation of the kitchen on 3/11/26 at 9:01 AM there was one package of open and undated hot dog buns and two packages of hamburger buns with no date or initial. The package of sausages and smart dogs were still in the freezer. An interview was conducted with Kitchen 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 · E2026-03-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for residents who reside on one of three units of the facility. Findings include: Per observation on 3/9/26 at 1:53 PM in the bathing room on the 500 halls of the Cardinal memory care unit, the tub had chipped paint on both the seat and the tub itself. There were damaged tiles and debris in one of the two shower stalls. The toilet backrest had cracks in the padding and rust on the framing. On both the 500 and 600 halls of the Cardinal memory care unit, there were stained and damaged ceiling tiles, including outside of room [ROOM NUMBER]. The room number signs were missing outside of rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], with the room numbers instead written in with magic marker on the walls outside the room. These items were reviewed and confirmed per interview and tour with the Administrator, Director of Nursing, and Quality Assurance Nurse on 3/11/26 at 10:45 AM.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-11 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interviews the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments for 3 of 7 medication carts on two units. Findings include: Per observation on the [NAME] Unit on 3/9/26 at 2:01 PM a medication cart and a treatment cart were found unlocked, with no staff in the hallway. One resident observed ambulating near the medication cart.Per interview with the Registered Nurse (RN) assigned to the medication cart on 3/9/26 at 2:19 PM confirmed the medication and treatment cart were both unlocked. The medication cart contained medications, inhalers, topical patches, syringes, topical medications, Insulins, prescribed resident specific medications and narcotics in a separate locked compartment. The treatment cart contained wound cleansers, prescription topical creams/pastes, and prescription topical powders.Per interview with RN Unit Manager of the [NAME] Unit on 3/9/26 at 2:24 PM confirmed that medication carts left unattended in common areas with residents…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan that addressed the smoking needs of 1 of 2 residents in the applicable sample (Resident #93). Findings include:Per a record review, Resident #93 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included nicotine dependence and respiratory failure.A smoking assessment dated [DATE] states that Resident #93 is capable of holding his/her own cigarette and smoking unsupervised. The assessment also states that his/her lighter would need to be secured by nursing and would be available as needed.A nursing progress note dated 2/12/26 states that Resident #93 went to smoke several times that day and had to be reminded repeatedly to wear O2 (oxygen). Another nursing progress note dated 2/13/26 states that the Resident went to smoke that day.Further review of nursing progress notes reveals that on 2/16/26 at 6:51 am Resident #93 approached the door of the North unit medication room with black soot on their nose and their…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that infection control measures regarding hand hygiene were followed during medication administration for two (Resident #1 and Resident #89) of 9 residents sampled. Findings include:During observation of medication administration on 3/11/2026 at 11:50 AM, there were 9 missed opportunities for proper hand hygiene. An LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) did not use hand sanitizer or soap and water as required before or after wearing gloves, when preparing and administering medications, or when using and cleaning a glucometer (a device used to collect blood for measurement of glucose). The LPN failed to cleanse hands before and after glove use to: Prepare an oral medication for Resident #1Administer an oral medication to Resident #1Prepare eye drops and glucose testing for Resident #89Instill eye drops for Resident #89Test Resident #89's blood glucose level with a glucometer Cleanse the glucometer and dispose of used testing suppliesPrepare an insulin injectionAdminister insulin by injection 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 · Ecited before2025-01-29 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 4 out of 17 sampled residents (Resident #13, #17, #40, #52) received sufficient supervision to prevent resident to resident altercations, and failed to ensure the environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible for 1 of 17 sampled residents (Resident # 1). Findings include: 1). A facility investigation report of a resident to resident altercation on 6/20/24 submitted to the State Agency stated staff heard veterans yelling in the porch area. When staff found the two residents [Resident #40] was holding [Resident #52's] right forearm. [Resident #52] stated, [S/he] hit me. Per the facility investigation, both residents were in the porch area without staff present when the altercation occurred. Per an Incident Note dated 6/13/24, [Resident #52] had red areas on the right lateral forehead and one red area on the left temple and mild redness on right lateral forearm. Per review of Resident #40's care plan dated 8/24/22…
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 · D2025-01-29 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that two residents [Res. #29 & #33 ] of 13 sampled residents who are trauma survivors receive culturally competent, trauma-informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice and accounting for residents' experiences and preferences in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident. Findings include: 1. Per review of Res.#29's medical record, the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that include Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD]. Review of Physician Notes dated 12/27/24 record the resident is well known to myself and the staff here from past admissions. The Physician recorded when [Res.#29] gets irritable, [s/he] goes and hides because afraid [s/he] will blow up, at high risk of decompensation, very depressed, Military History: Army/ combat / communications - was all over Vietnam / still with flashbacks at times, startles easily - if have to awaken [h/her] - touch toes…
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 · D2025-01-29 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide routine dental services for 1 resident [Res. #26] of 3 residents sampled with identified dental issues. Findings include: Per review of Res. #26's medical record, the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including dysphagia [a condition with difficulty in swallowing food or liquid]. Review of Res. #26's Nutrition Assessment conducted for admission to the facility dated 10/28/2024 assessed the resident as having some 'chewing' difficulty related to temporary dentures only with the resident edentulous [lacking teeth], Has temporary dentures. Needs permanent ones. Further record review reveals Res. #26 was seen by a dentist on 10/31/24. Dental Notes record The patient had teeth extracted in June or July and expected a new set [of dentures] to be made after healing. I will contact [Veterans Administration] and see what has been approved and whether I can take over here. An interview was conducted with Res. #26 on 1/27/25 at 3:00 PM.…
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 · D2024-02-13 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure that an allegation of staff to resident abuse was reported to the State Licensing Agency as required. Findings include: During an interview on 2/12/2024 at 2:30 PM Resident #1's significant other reported that she/he had placed a camera with no sound recording in Resident #1's room when visitation was being restricted due to COVID. The significant other stated that on 1/22/2022 while viewing the camera she/he witnessed a licensed nursing assistant (LNA) abuse her/his spouse. According to the significant other this allegation was not reported to the facility until 1/4/2023, on the same day an email was sent to the Deputy Administrator reporting the allegation. At this time the significant other was under the impression that the LNA was let go. On 12/5/2023 approximately one year after the initial allegation, while visiting Resident #1 she/he saw the LNA walk down the hall that Resident #1 resides in and realized that the LNA was allowed to return to work. Per the significant other she/he was very upset to see…
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 5 citations
- Potential for harm · E2023-12-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse by a resident for 3 of 6 residents in the sample (Resident #1, #3, and #4). Findings include: 1 . Per record review Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease. Review of Resident #1's progress notes and care plan reveal that Resident #1 has exhibited aggression toward staff and other residents, such as yelling, slapping, throwing dishes, grabbing, and being combative with care. Review of Resident #2's record reveals that s/he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease and resides on the facility's licensed memory care unit. Resident #2's progress notes and care plan reveal that Resident #2 can be territorial with his/her perceived space and can exhibit aggression towards others. On 10/26/2023 at 8:30 PM Resident #1 was found by staff in Resident #2's room on the floor on top of Resident #2. 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 · D2023-10-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that staff treated each resident with respect and dignity for 1 of 26 sampled residents (Resident #18) by making remarks related to call bell usage. Findings include: Resident #18 was admitted to the facility in August 2023, and prior to admission Resident #18 had suffered a cerebral vascular accident (a blockage or rupture of an artery to the brain blocking the blood flow to the brain) resulting in right-sided hemiplegia (paralysis of the right arm and leg), and right-hand contracture (shortening and stiffening of the joints preventing normal movement). On October 23, 2023, when Resident #18 was asked if s/he felt they were treated with dignity and respect s/he stated Not when someone comes in and says you rang your bell twice in the same hour and the other guy did too. We're not going to spend the whole night coming down here. Resident #18 became visibly upset with a furrowed brow and raised tone as s/he described needing assistance due 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 · D2023-10-25 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who was capable of self-administration of medications was able to store them safely and securely. Findings include: During an interview with Resident #50 on 10/23/23 at 3:12PM it was noted that there were several bottles of dietary and herbal supplements on their overbed table, dresser, shelf, and in a three-drawer plastic bin. These supplements included Chewable Vitamin C, Inflama-Rest (support for healthy inflammation response), RejuvenZyme (heart, joint, and immune support), Magnesium [NAME], Wellness Formula, Ashwagandha (rejuvenating tonifier), Tums, and Ultra-Cal Night, Daily essential Enzymes. Per record review Resident #50 has been assessed as capable for self-administration of these supplements. A physician's order states that the resident may self-administer [his/her] supplements based on [his/her] last self-administration assessment. Review of the facility policy titled Veteran/Member Supplement Use…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-25 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that each resident has a person-centered comprehensive care plan developed and implemented to address the resident's medical needs for 1 of 26 residents sampled (Resident #18) regarding impaired cardiac output. Findings include: Resident #18 was admitted to the facility in August 2023, prior to admission Resident #18 had suffered a cerebral vascular accident (a blockage or rupture of an artery to the brain blocking the blood flow to the brain) resulting in right-sided hemiplegia (paralysis of the right arm and leg), and right-hand contracture (shortening and stiffening of the joints preventing normal movement). Additional diagnoses include permanent atrial fibrillation (an abnormal heart rhythm characterized by rapid and irregular beating of the heart) and unspecified bradycardia (an abnormally slow resting heart rate). Per record review on 8/31/23 Resident #18 was sent emergently to the hospital with symptomatic bradycardia and long pauses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 upon interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the plan of care for 1 resident [Res.#83] of 20 sampled residents with falls was reviewed and revised to prevent future falls and injury. Findings include: Review of Res. #83's medical record reveals the resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Degenerative Arthritis with severe chronic pain. Per review of Res. #83's Care Plan, the resident is identified as at risk for fall related injury related to deconditioning, symptoms of pain from arthritis, reports history of fall prior to admission along with sustained a witnessed fall with no injury, related to Poor Balance, Unsteady gait. Review of Res.#83's medical record reveals the resident suffered 4 falls between August and September 2023. Progress notes record: - 8/16/2023 Incident Note. Resident was calling for help, when LNA [Licensed Nurse's Aide] went to room, [Res.#83] was sitting on the floor in front of [their] recliner. [They] stated [they] slid off recliner .…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,278 — penalty dated 2026-03-11
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| JACKSON, MELISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/03/2011 |
| MCCLAFFERTY, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/26/2012 |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in VT
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 Vermont 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 475032. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-11, 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.