Home / Massachusetts / Brewster
383 South Orleans Road, Brewster, MA 02631 · Barnstable County · (508) 240-3500
135 certified beds, about 125 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1995
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 225667 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 10, 2026, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Massachusetts average is 6.8, the national average 9.2).
Of 50 health citations since September 2023, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $298,483 in the last three years; the largest was $298,483, and the latest is dated March 19, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.35 hours per resident per day, against 3.86 across Massachusetts and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.79 of those hours.
50.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Massachusetts average 38.2%).
CMS links it to Marquis Health Services, an affiliated group of 90 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 50 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for food safety and sanitation to prevent the potential spread of foodborne illness to residents who are at high risk. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure food was properly stored in the walk-in refrigerator in the main kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two Residents (#4 and #82), out of a total sample of 24 residents, had their call bell devices accessible and within reach to call for staff assistance while in their rooms.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan, including measurable goals and individualized interventions for one Resident (#7), out of a total sample of 24 residents, who suffered from symptoms of depression and was prescribed antidepressant medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and maintenance of a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC-a flexible tube inserted through a vein in one's arm and passed through to larger veins near the heart, used to deliver medications intravenously (IV)), consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#126), out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to measure and document the external catheter length to ensure the PICC line had not migrated (moved from the heart to another area, which could have significant impact on treatment, or cause serious harm) and measure and document arm circumference.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed Contact enteric precautions and donned (put on/wore) the correct personal protective equipment (PPE) to prevent a potential spread of Clostridioides difficile (C. diff - bacterium that causes diarrhea and colitis), for one Resident (#143), out of a total sample of 24 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were followed for two Residents (#39 and #24), out of a total sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: 1. For Resident #39, a. The diagnosis of schizophrenia added after admission had supporting documentation in the medical record; and b. Eye ointment was administered per physician's orders and the physician was notified timely of the medication being unavailable for administration; and 2. For Resident #24, to follow Pharmacy/MD recommendation to do an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) test assessing for tardive dyskinesia (an involuntary neurological movement disorder that is usually a side effect of certain dopamine receptor blocking drugs).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure staff stored drugs and biologicals used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure open drinks were not stored in the medication freezer, in one of two medication rooms observed; and 2. Ensure medications are not left unsecured and unattended in the Resident room and on top of the medication cart, during a medication pass.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and potential transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure contact tracing and outbreak testing were completed on two occurrences in February 2025.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide education, assess for eligibility, offer and administer Pneumococcal vaccinations per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations for four Residents (#19, #60, #61, #78), out of a total sample of five residents reviewed for immunizations.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide education, assess for eligibility, offer and administer COVID-19 vaccinations per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations for five Residents (#54, #19, #60, #61, #78), out of a total sample of five residents reviewed for immunizations.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure quality of care based on professional standards of practice for one Resident (#20), out of a sample of 23 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff fully assessed Resident #20 who was observed to be in respiratory distress, resulting in a delay in treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed for one Resident (#89), with a history of trauma, out of a total sample of 23 residents, to assess the history of trauma and failed to develop a plan of care accounting for the Resident's experiences and preferences to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for food safety and sanitation to prevent the potential spread of foodborne illness to residents who are at high risk. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure food was properly stored in the walk-in refrigerator in the main kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who required physical assistance of staff with Activities of Daily Living (ADL), the Facility failed to ensure they maintained a complete and accurate medical record, related to Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) ADL Flow Sheets, when daily documentation by CNA's (for all three shifts) were not consistently completed, with flow sheets left blank.
Inspectors wroteBased on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was experiencing a decline in condition, was on comfort measures at end of life and receiving Hospice Services, the Facility failed to ensure that nursing followed acceptable standards of practice related to complete and accurate documentation in clinical records regarding documentation of his/her decline in condition up to and including his/her death, and that an RN pronouncement had been done.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1) who had physician orders for wound dressing changes, the facility failed to ensure they maintained complete and accurate resident Treatment Administration Records (TAR) in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) when Resident #1's TAR's, related to documentation of dressing changes, were not consistently completed during the months of May 2024 and June 2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), the Facility failed to ensure that after an administrative staff member (Director of Nurses #1) was made aware on 4/08/24 that Resident #1 was found with an injury of unknown origin (facial bruising), that it was reported to the Department of Public Health (DPH) within two hours, as required, when it was not reported to the DPH until 4/09/24, the following day.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record reviews, and policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician about a change in condition in order to re-evaluate the potential need to alter the treatment plan for two Residents (#2, #61), out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #2, to notify the physician regarding a 12.66% severe significant weight loss in three months (11/21/23 to 2/3/24) and 5.39% in one month (2/3/24 to 3/8/24); and 2. For Resident #61, to notify the physician regarding a 6.95% (10/21/23 to 11/21/23) severe significant weight loss in one month, as well as a 10.54% (10/21/23 to 1/25/24) severe significant weight loss in three months and an additional 10.74% severe significant weight loss in three months (11/30/23 to 3/18/24).
Inspectors wrote4. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility in February 2021 with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder, type II diabetes, hypertension, and depression. Review of the MDS assessment, dated 1/24/24, indicated Resident #2 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a BIMS score of 6 out of 15. Further review of the MDS assessment indicated Resident #2 had a history of two or more falls and required assistance from staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing and hygiene. On 3/12/24 at 10:17 A.M., the surveyor observed Resident #2 at the nurses' station seated in a high back wheelchair, leaning forward and to their right side. Resident #2 was observed to be restless in his/her wheelchair and continuously calling out I am going to fall. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to monitor the nutritional status for two Residents (#2, #61) with an unplanned significant weight loss, out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #2, to continue to monitor the Resident's nutritional status after they experienced a severe significant weight loss of 12.66% in three months (11/21/23 to 2/3/24), resulting in a continued significant weight loss of 5.39% in one month (2/3/24 to 3/8/24) which the facility did not identify or address; and 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, policy review, and record review, the facility failed for nine Residents (#24, #226, #49, #14, #26, #58, #94, #44, and #114), out of a total sample of 24 residents, to develop and implement individualized person-centered care plans to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs. Specifically, the facility failed: 1a. For Resident #24, to develop and implement a care plan that identified risk factors as well as interventions designed to reduce or prevent the development of pressure related ulcers/injuries upon which the Resident developed a facility acquired full thickness unstageable (actual depth of ulcer is completely obscured by slough and/or eschar in the wound bed) left heel ulcer; and b. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#24), out of a total sample of 24 residents, received care and treatment per professional standards of practice to promote optimal wound healing and to prevent the development of a facility acquired unstageable (actual depth of ulcer is completely obscured by slough and/or eschar in the wound bed) left heel ulcer, full thickness. [...]
Inspectors wrote6. Resident #58 was admitted to the facility in October 2023 with diagnoses including: Alzheimer's dementia and depression. Review of the most recent BIMS for Resident #58 indicated he/she was severely cognitively impaired with a score of 1 out of 15 and his/her healthcare proxy (HCP) was invoked. Review of the medical record indicated the Resident's last Activity Assessment and documentation was completed on 10/31/23 and indicated but was not limited to the following information: - Religious/Spiritual information: Resident #58 is Catholic and would be interested in attending religious services and receiving religious visits. - Interests/Preferences: gardening, music, Boston sports, movies, newspapers, cats and being with people is number one thing he/she enjoys - Participation Expectations: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, the facility failed to ensure the activity program was directed by a qualified professional from November 17, 2023, through the survey exit date 3/19/24.
Inspectors wroteBased on document review and interview, the facility failed to conduct and implement a comprehensive facility wide assessment that was inclusive of resources necessary to provide both emergency and day to day care of the population the facility currently serves. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Consistently and accurately identify and implement their nursing staffing pattern for optimal resident care; and 2a. Ensure the identification for residents with special treatments and conditions the facility consistently provides services for such as IV medications, isolation and quarantined individuals with infectious disease, those requiring dialysis, and the level of assistance with activities of daily living, and b. Provide a full-time Activities Director to meet the needs of the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents in one of two dining areas experienced a dignified and homelike dining experience.
Inspectors wroteBased on a resident group meeting, staff interviews, and document review, the facility failed to ensure grievances and concerns from the Resident Council were documented to ensure they were acted upon timely and included the facility response and rationale for response.
Inspectors wrote5. Review of the facility's policy titled Physician - Consultations, dated as last revised 10/2022 indicated but was not limited to the following: -It is the policy of this organization that all residents receive medical care in a timely manner. -Follow up: to be done within the time frame requested by the consultant and approved by attending physician. Resident #108 was admitted to the facility in April 2023 with diagnoses which included urinary retention. Review of the MDS assessment, dated 1/10/24, failed to indicate a BIMS had been completed. Review of the MDS Assessment, dated 10/17/23, indicated Resident #108 had scored a 15 out of 15 on the BIMS, indicating he/she was cognitively intact. Review of the medical record indicated Resident #108 was hospitalized in June 2023. Review of the Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated but was not limited to the following: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to follow their policy and professional standards of practice for food safety and sanitation to prevent the potential spread of foodborne illness to residents who are at high risk. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Properly label and date food products, and maintain safe and clean equipment in two of two nourishment kitchenettes; 2. Handle ready-to-eat food (food which does not require cooking or further preparation prior to consumption) utilizing proper hand hygiene to prevent cross contamination (transfer of pathogens from one surface to another). In addition, to ensure the use of gloves was limited to a single use task; and 3. Properly label and store resident food items in the Southwest Unit medication refrigerator which was unintended for resident food storage use.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and potential transmission of communicable diseases and infections within the facility. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1a. Implement COVID-19 testing every 48 hours for all staff during a COVID-19 outbreak for 11 out of 11 sampled staff members in accordance with their policy, state, and national standards, when the facility was experiencing an outbreak of COVID-19 infections, and b. Implement COVID-19 testing every 48 hours for all residents during a COVID-19 outbreak in accordance with their policy, state, and national standards, when the facility was experiencing an outbreak of COVID-19 infections; 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were not self-administered without a physician's order and an assessment for self-administration was completed for one Resident (#41), out of a total sample of 24 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#94), out of a total sample of 24 residents, was assessed for a less restrictive device based on the Resident's medical symptoms.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff developed and implemented a baseline care plan within 48 hours of the resident's admission, which included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care to the resident and provide the resident and/or their representative with a summary of the baseline care plan for two Residents (#38 and #108), out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #38, to provide him/her a written summary of the baseline care plan by completion of the comprehensive care plan and document receipt of the information within the Resident's clinical record; and 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure care plans were reviewed with the interdisciplinary team (IDT) as required for one Resident (#2), out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to review and revise the fall care plan with the IDT after each Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to provide services, equipment and assistance for one Resident (#26), out of a total sample of 24 residents, to prevent the decline and discomfort of his/her left-hand contracture.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#108), was not catheterized unless required by his/her clinical condition to manage urinary continence/incontinence and prevent urinary tract infections (UTI), out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed for Resident #108 to ensure staff provided training and education on self-catheterization technique, provided education on symptoms and complications, evaluated, and re-evaluated the Resident's ability to self-catheterize, developed, and implemented a care plan timely, and to make a follow up appointment with a urologist as recommended.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed for one Resident (#49), out of a total sample of 24 residents, to ensure staff provided the necessary care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions of oxygen (O2) tubing and equipment to help decrease the risk of potential contamination and infection and administer the O2 flow rate per physician's orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented dialysis care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#226), out of one total Resident receiving dialysis, by a. providing ongoing communication between the nursing facility and dialysis facility, and b. consistently documenting assessments of the Resident's condition and left Arteriovenous (AV) fistula (surgically created for hemodialysis treatment) site.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure monthly medication regimen reviews were maintained as part of the permanent medical record and failed to ensure recommendations made by the pharmacy consultant were addressed timely for 1 Resident (#69), out of 5 residents selected for an unnecessary medication review.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff stored and properly labeled all drugs and biologicals used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure staff properly labeled, once opened, all drugs and biologicals stored in one of three medication carts reviewed; and 2. Ensure one (North 1 Unit) of three medication storage rooms reviewed was locked and secured.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide one Resident (#26), out of a total sample of 24 residents with a meal consistent with his/her allergies.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure services were coordinated with the hospice provider to implement the resident's plan of care as required in the provider contract agreement for two Residents (#12 and #70), out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. For Resident #12, to provide ongoing documentation, and maintain a complete medical record of services to ensure prompt and effective communication and continuity of care for the Resident. 2. For Resident #70, to provide ongoing documentation, and maintain a complete medical record of services to ensure prompt and effective communication and continuity of care for the Resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to implement policy and procedures to ensure residents/resident representatives were educated on benefits and potential side effects of immunizations, documented consent, or refusal of the immunization, and offered and administered the influenza and pneumococcal immunization in a timely manner for one out of five residents sampled. Specifically, the facility failed for Resident #32, to educate on benefits and potential side effects, offer the immunizations, and document in the medical record consent/refusal for the influenza and pneumococcal vaccines.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to implement policies and procedures to ensure residents/resident representatives were educated on benefits and potential side effects, documented consent or refusal of the immunization and offered and administered the COVID-19 immunization and/or booster in a timely manner for 1 out of 5 residents sampled. Specifically, the facility failed for Resident #61 to educate, offer, and administer the immunization, and document in the medical record consent/refusal.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment that accurately reflected the status of one Resident (#108), out of a total sample of 24 residents. Specifically, for Resident #108, Section C of the MDS, the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), was not assessed and Section H, indicated Resident #108 had an indwelling catheter and he/she did not.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and staff education review, the facility failed to ensure training on Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) was included as mandatory training for 11 out of 11 sampled staff members.
Inspectors wroteBased on records reviewed and interviews, for five of eight sampled residents (Resident #2, #7, #8, #5 and #6), the Facility failed to ensure medications were administered in accordance with the acceptable standards of nursing practice, when scheduled medications were administered late.
Inspectors wroteBased on records reviewed and interviews, for one of eight sampled residents (Resident #8), who was alert, oriented and whose preference include being able to receive a shower, the Facility failed to ensure nursing staff honored his/her right to self-determination related to his/her choice of receiving a weekly shower.
Inspectors wroteBased on records reviewed and interviews, the facility which maintained an average daily occupancy of greater than 60 residents (averaging 113 residents per day), failed to ensure the Director of Nurses (DON) did not serve as a charge nurse on a unit.
Inspectors wroteBased on records reviewed and interviews, the facility failed to ensure narcotic reconciliation was completed and documented for four of four medication carts.
24 fire safety citations on file: 2 on June 10, 2026, 5 on May 8, 2025, 17 on March 19, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 19, 2024 | Fine | $298,483 |
| March 19, 2024 | Payment Denial | 38 days from May 2, 2024 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Massachusetts | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.35 | 3.86 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.79 | 0.65 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.01 | 3.48 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.88 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.68 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 50.0% | 38.2% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 53.1% | 42.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.20 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.49 on weekdays and 3.01 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.5% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.59 in April to June 2025 to 3.35 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.35 | 0.79 | 3.49 | 3.01 | 0.5% | 0 of 90 | 125 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.36 | 0.77 | 3.56 | 2.84 | 0.6% | 0 of 92 | 126 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.40 | 0.83 | 3.58 | 2.95 | 0.4% | 0 of 92 | 118 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.59 | 0.93 | 3.84 | 2.95 | 5.5% | 0 of 91 | 114 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Massachusetts, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.79 | 0.61 | 3.94 | 3.41 | 5.0% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Massachusetts, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.44 | $21.32 to $23.94 | 38,130 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $38.57 | $34.91 to $40.66 | 13,210 |
| Registered nurses | $50.27 | $42.05 to $65.44 | 88,200 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Massachusetts | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 33.1 | 16.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.7 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 24.5 | 15.4 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 25.8 | 21.4 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.1 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 14.2 | 11.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Cape Cod Post Acute Care's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (60.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
60.7% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Massachusetts: 121 better, 19 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 423 eligible stays.
9.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Massachusetts: 4 better, 15 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 424 eligible stays.
7.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Massachusetts: 5 better, 4 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 221 eligible stays.
61.0% this home
Median of homes: Massachusetts51.6% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 210 residents counted.
0.3% this home
Median of homes: Massachusetts0.4% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 307 residents counted.
2.9% this home
Median of homes: Massachusetts2.0% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 307 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Massachusetts99.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 79 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: CAPE COD OPERATOR LLC. CMS links this home to Marquis Health Services, a group of 90 nursing homes averaging 3.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skilled Venture LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 09/12/2024 | |
| Kahanow, Aviva | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Rokeach, Fraide | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Forbright Bank | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 10/31/2024 | |
| Harman, Dina | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Lordan, Nancy | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 02/17/2025 | |
| Stevens, Joel | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Viroja, Yogesh | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/31/2024 | |
| Reliant Pro Rehab LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Lordan, Nancy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/17/2025 | |
| Posen, Mindee | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Zanfes, Zachary | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Flagler, Osher | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 02/26/2025 | |
| Levovitz, Tzvi | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 02/26/2025 | |
| Rokowsky, Yitzchok | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 07/22/2025 | |
| Cape Cod Property LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/31/2024 | |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 02/11/2025 | |
| Nfr 2020 Irrv Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Quinto Nexgen LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Reliant Pro Rehab LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Rsbrmk Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Sk Nexgen Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Tryko Nexgen Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Uak 2020 Irrv Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/11/2025 | |
| Ukr Nexgen LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/13/2025 | |
| Yk Nexgen Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/13/2025 | |
| Yr Nexgen Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/13/2025 | |
| Harman, Dina | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/13/2025 | |
| Lordan, Nancy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/17/2025 | |
| Posen, Mindee | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Stevens, Joel | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/13/2025 | |
| Viroja, Yogesh | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/31/2024 | |
| Zanfes, Zachary | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/31/2024 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.