Home / Rhode Island / Smithfield
80 Douglas Pike, Smithfield, RI 02917 · Providence County · (401) 231-2700
100 certified beds, about 87 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1974
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 415039 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 18, 2025, inspectors cited 15 health deficiencies (the Rhode Island average is 9.3, the national average 9.2).
Of 67 health citations since September 2023, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $8,827 in the last three years; the largest was $8,827, and the latest is dated September 16, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.74 hours per resident per day, against 3.71 across Rhode Island and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.56 of those hours.
39.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Rhode Island average 40.6%).
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 67 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote wound healing and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (an injury to the skin and underlying tissue caused by prolonged pressure on the skin over a bony prominence), Resident ID #2. Specifically, the resident was admitted to the facility without any skin impairments and while at the facility s/he developed a stage III pressure ulcer (an ulcer that has completely broken through the top 2 layers of skin and into the fat layer below) and an unstageable pressure ulcer (an ulcer that occurs when the wound bed is completely covered by dead tissue, slough, or eschar, preventing clinicians from assessing the depth and extent of tissue damage accurately).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide care in accordance with a resident's plan of care for 3 of 3 resident's relative to turning and repositioning, Resident ID #s 1, 2, and 4.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that assessments accurately reflect the resident's status for 1 of 3 residents reviewed related to pressure ulcers (an area of localized damage to the skin and/or underlying tissue that develops as a result of prolonged pressure), Resident ID #2.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice relative to care of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC line- is a type of Central Venous Catheter (CVC), inserted peripherally, typically in the upper arm. It is a long thin tube that is inserted through a vein in the arm and passed through to the larger veins near the heart) for 2 of 2 residents reviewed with a PICC line, Resident ID #s 1 and 2.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to keep residents free from abuse for 1 of 5 residents reviewed, Resident ID # 4.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that services provided meet professional standards of quality relative to following physician's orders for medication administration, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, Resident ID #2.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observations, clinical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete and accurately documented, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for falls, Resident ID #7.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident received adequate supervision for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who was able to successfully elope from the facility, Resident ID #15.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide and prepare food in a form designed to meet individual needs for 2 of 4 residents reviewed with a physician's order for moderately thickened (honey) consistency fluids, Resident ID #s 49 and 19.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, and resident and staff interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe and clean environment relative to 3 of 3 nursing units observed and the main building.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff and resident interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's right to communication to promote a dignified existence was promoted for 1 of 1 resident reviewed whose primary language is [NAME], Resident ID #86. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure that a resident's right to a dignified existence was promoted for 4 of 4 residents observed with soiled bed linens, Resident ID #s 12, 26, 30, and 37.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and resident and staff interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide the necessary services to a resident who is unable to carry out Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) relative to bathing and personal hygiene for 6 of 6 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 30, 34, 41, 69, 73, and 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and resident and staff interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to assure resident safety and attain the highest practicable, physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care relative to providing care and responding to each resident's basic and individual needs for 1 of 3 nursing units reviewed, the South Unit.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering the number, acuity (the severity of an illness), and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment as required for 4 staff members observed, affecting Resident ID #s 4, 19, 46, and 49.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to implement the facility-wide assessment that is used to determine what resources are necessary to care for its residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies. The facility must also review and update this assessment whenever there is, or the facility plans for, any change that would require a substantial modification to any part of this assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to implement and maintain an effective, comprehensive, data-driven, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program that focuses on indicators of the outcomes of care and quality of life. Additionally, the facility failed to make a good faith attempt to correct the identified concerns of patient care relative to call lights being answered, incontinence care, and morning care being provided.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, surveyor observation, and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to provide care that meets professional standards for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC line, a thin tube inserted into a vein in the upper arm and advanced to a large vein near the heart to deliver long-term intravenous treatments), Resident ID #79 and for 1 of 3 residents observed for wound care, Resident ID #83.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident's medication regimen is free from a medication error rate of 5% or greater. Based on 26 opportunities for errors observed during the medication administration task. Two errors occurred, resulting in an error rate of 7.69%, involving Resident ID #4.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident with a known complicated feeding problem is assisted by a qualified staff member for 1 of 2 residents observed being assisted with feeding, Resident ID #46.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and resident and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to explain the arbitration agreement to the resident and his or her representative in a form and manner that he or she understands, including in a language the resident and his or her representative understands, for 2 of 12 residents reviewed for arbitration agreements, Resident ID #s 20 and 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, surveyor observation, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for contact precautions (use of gown and gloves upon room entry), Resident ID #79, and for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for a suprapubic catheter (a device inserted through the abdomen into the bladder to drain urine), Resident ID #47.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area for 1 of 3 units observed, the [NAME] Unit.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff and resident interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident receives adequate supervision and care to prevent an accident for 2 of 3 residents reviewed who are at risk for falls, Resident ID #s 5 and 6.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers/injury (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying soft tissue, usually over a bony prominence) receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 3 of 3 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 1, 4 and 6.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 a physician's order for obtaining a urology consult for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff, and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who missed 2 of 3 appointments, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff, resident, and resident representative interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident has the right to receive notices orally (meaning spoken) and in writing (including Braille) in a format and a language he or she understands, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who's primary language is Spanish, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, staff, resident, and resident representative interviews, 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 orders for obtaining a urine sample for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #1 and for 1 of 1 resident reviewed relative to obtaining weights, Resident ID #2.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 scabies (an itchy skin rash caused by a tiny burrowing mite that can spread through close contact) management for 2 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 42 and 45, and relative to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP; involves using gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities), Resident ID #s 78 and 192. Additionally, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections relative to 2 of 3 wound care observations, Resident ID #s 5 and 192. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased 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, at a minimum, an antibiotic stewardship program which includes antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use to ensure that residents who require an antibiotic, are prescribed the appropriate antibiotic for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for antibiotic use, Resident ID #s 78 and 194.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, staff and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for the utilization of a Freestyle Libre sensor (a continuous glucose monitoring system that is designed to replace finger sticks and lessen the need for test strips for persons with diabetes), Resident ID #194, following a physicians order for daily dressing changes on a surgical site and daily weights for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #192 and 2 of 2 residents reviewed with non-pressure wounds, Resident ID #s 8 and 194.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 and the comprehensive care plan relative to 3 of 4 residents reviewed for specialist appointments, Resident ID #s 74, 79, and 194.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident with pressure ulcers receives the necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers, Resident ID #s 5 and 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, resident, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care affecting 2 of 3 units including, 1 of 3 residents observed to be saturated in urine prior to a wound dressing change, Resident ID #5 (on the South Unit), 1 of 1 observation made for timeliness of staff response to a call light triggered for Resident ID #291 (on the [NAME] Unit), and complaints of long response times to call lights and untimely assistance for morning care identified during the Resident Council task affecting residents on the East, West, and South Units on various shifts, including [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident relative to the administration of hypodermoclysis (a method of infusing fluids into the fatty tissue below the skin by means of gravity and a dial flow meter to approximate the infusion rate) for Resident ID #191 for 3 of 3 staff reviewed, Staff A, B, E, and 2 of 3 staff reviewed for wound dressing changes observed for Resident ID #s 5 and 192, Staff A and E.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to address pharmacy recommendations in a timely manner for 3 of 6 residents reviewed, Resident ID #s 15, 58, and 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure each resident's medication regimen is free from a medication error rate of 5% or greater. Based on 25 opportunities for error observed during the medication administration task, there were 14 errors resulting in a medication error rate of 56%, involving Resident ID #s: 74, 83, 191, and 241.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide services to attain and maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for use of an external catheter (a flexible tube that collects urine and leads to a drainage bag), Resident ID #8.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for oxygen use, Resident ID #58.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that pain management was provided to a resident who required such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 3 wound treatments observed, Resident ID #5.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain medical records that are accurately documented in accordance with professional standards and practices for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for vascular wounds, Resident ID #8.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and failed to follow physician's orders relative to daily wound dressing changes for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for falls, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control practices to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for isolation precautions, Resident ID #2.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 orders for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to store medications in accordance with currently accepted professional principles relative to maintaining safe and secure storage of all medications, including limited access and mechanisms to minimize loss or diversion, for 1 of 4 residents reviewed, Resident ID #3.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and resident and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents receive adequate supervision to prevent an elopement for 1 of 1 resident reviewed who successfully eloped from the facility, Resident ID #2.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure 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, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents are free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for wound care and 1 of 1 resident reviewed for antibiotic use Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, 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.
Inspectors wroteBased 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, at a minimum, an antibiotic stewardship program that includes antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use, for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for antibiotic use, Resident ID #s 17, 37, and 51.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure the resident's medical record includes documentation that the resident either received the pneumococcal vaccination or did not receive the vaccination due to medical contraindications or refusal, for 5 of 8 residents reviewed, Residents ID #'s 5, 9, 10, 19 and 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview it has been determined that the facility failed to keep a resident free from physical and verbal abuse for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for staff to resident abuse, Resident ID #71.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to assess the need for a physical restraint, assess for the least restrictive alternative, the amount of time the restraint is needed and re-evaluation of the need for restraints for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for physical restraints, Resident ID #286.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident within 48 hours of a resident's admission, that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care for the resident that meets professional standards of quality care relative to urinary catheter, use of a helmet, use of a right hand restraint and a stage 4 pressure wound, for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for baseline care plans, Resident ID #286.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, resident, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for assistance with meals, Resident ID #51.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident with pressure ulcers receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 2 of 3 residents observed for wound care, Resident ID #s 32 and 286.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 2 of 6 sample residents reviewed, Resident ID#s 46 and 15.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure residents who are fed through a feeding tube receive the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications for 1 of 2 residents reviewed who receive nutrition via a feeding tube, Resident ID #286.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, 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, relative to a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC), for 1 of 2 residents observed for intravenous (IV) antibiotic administration via a PICC line, Resident ID #17.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to store and label drugs and biologicals in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 3 medication carts.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 for 2 of 2 resident's reviewed for Extended spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL, an infection that is resistant to specific types of antibiotics), Resident ID #51 and foley catheter care relative to it leaking on the floor, Resident ID #286.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality relative to physician's orders, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed with a diagnosis of diabetes, and 1 of 1 residents reviewed with an order for a consultation with a specialist, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to provide the necessary services to residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADL) relative to incontinence care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff, and resident interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that services provided meet professional standards of quality for 1 of 2 residents reviewed relative to following a physician's order for medication parameters, Resident ID #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Clinical Consultant Pharmacist identified irregularities during the monthly pharmacist Medication Regimen Review (MMR) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed, Resident ID #1.
2 fire safety citations on file: 1 on September 18, 2025, 1 on September 13, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| September 16, 2025 | Payment Denial | 3 days from October 15, 2025 |
| May 9, 2024 | Fine | $8,827 |
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 | Rhode Island | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.74 | 3.71 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.56 | 0.77 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.59 | 3.34 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.16 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.02 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 39.8% | 40.6% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 68.8% | 37.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 4.10 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 3.79 on weekdays and 3.59 on weekends, 5% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.74 in April to June 2025 to 3.74 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 | 3.74 | 0.56 | 3.79 | 3.59 | 1.1% | 0 of 90 | 87 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.89 | 0.64 | 4.06 | 3.45 | 1.7% | 0 of 92 | 88 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.77 | 0.60 | 3.95 | 3.32 | 0.8% | 0 of 92 | 84 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.74 | 0.61 | 3.86 | 3.43 | 0.5% | 0 of 91 | 86 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Rhode Island, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.67 | 0.69 | 3.82 | 3.30 | 5.4% | 1% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rhode Island, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.33 | $21.52 to $22.82 | 10,220 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $38.51 | $37.45 to $39.02 | 1,290 |
| Registered nurses | $48.39 | $39.35 to $51.49 | 10,090 |
| 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 | Rhode Island | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.1 | 19.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 2.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 3.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.1 | 2.0 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.1 | 16.8 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 19.3 | 22.5 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.1 | 24.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.0 | 14.6 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Heritage Hills Nursing & Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (62.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
62.2% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Rhode Island: 24 better, 1 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. 117 eligible stays.
10.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Rhode Island: 0 better, 0 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. 141 eligible stays.
5.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Rhode Island: 0 better, 0 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. 58 eligible stays.
77.3% this home
Median of homes: Rhode Island59.1% · 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. 44 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Rhode Island0.0% · 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. 54 residents counted.
2.2% this home
Median of homes: Rhode Island2.6% · 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. 54 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Rhode Island100.0% · 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. 25 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: HERITAGE HILLS 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 | 11/01/2022 | |
| Cibc Bank USA | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Johnson, Eric | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 02/09/2025 | |
| Johnson, Eric | Corporate director | Individual | 02/09/2025 | |
| Norton, Nathan | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Posen, Mindee | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Reliant Pro Rehab LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Johnson, Eric | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/09/2025 | |
| Suhail, Faizul | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Flagler, Osher | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/13/2025 | |
| Kahanow, Aviva | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/13/2025 | |
| Levovitz, Tzvi | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/13/2025 | |
| Rokeach, Fraide | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/16/2025 | |
| Rokowsky, Yitzchok | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/13/2025 | |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/10/2025 | |
| Nfr 2020 Irrv Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Quinto Nexgen LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Reliant Pro Rehab LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/18/2025 | |
| Rsbrmk Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Sk Nexgen Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Tryko Nexgen Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Uak 2020 Irrv Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Ukr Nexgen LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Yk Nexgen Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Yr Nexgen Tr | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2022 | |
| Johnson, Eric | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/19/2025 | |
| Posen, Mindee | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2022 | |
| Suhail, Faizul | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2022 |
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.
These are the official offices in Rhode Island. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.