Home / Massachusetts / Ashland
250 West Union Street, Ashland, MA 01721 · Middlesex County · (508) 848-4200
103 certified beds, about 79 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1994
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 225598 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 25, 2026, inspectors cited 13 health deficiencies (the Massachusetts average is 6.8, the national average 9.2).
None of its 37 health citations since August 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.87 hours per resident per day, against 3.86 across Massachusetts and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.68 of those hours.
12.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Massachusetts average 38.2%).
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 37 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to implement professional standards of practice for infection control and prevention for the facility's laundry processing system, ensure hand hygiene was performed before and after a medication administration by one Nurse (#3), and Unit Manager (UM) #3 and Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 while they were distributing breakfast, and Housekeeping staff properly utilized equipment for cleaning of a Transmission Based Precaution (TBP- an infection control standard for residents who may be infected or colonized with certain infectious agents for which additional precautions are needed to prevent infection transmission such as the use of gowns, gloves, eye protection, or masks) room. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and document review, the facility failed to ensure residents had access to grievance forms to formulate grievances anonymously on three (Unit Two, Unit Three and Unit Four) out of three units. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that residents were able to formulate grievances anonymously and had grievance forms easily accessible for the facility residents to complete a grievance without having to rely on the staff to provide them with the form.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was completed to accurately reflect the status of four Residents (#69, #5, #12, and #57) out of a total sample of 21 residents, increasing each Resident's risk for inaccurate assessments, and ineffective care planning and delivery of care. Specifically, 1. For Resident #69, the facility failed to conduct four consecutive Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Assessments on three non-comprehensive MDS Assessments and one comprehensive MDS Assessment using the Resident's preferred language (which was not English), when: -none of the facility staff spoke the Resident's preferred language. -an interpreter was not offered for the Resident to complete the Assessments.2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a dignified experience during a medication request for one Resident (#46) out of a total sample of 21 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that Resident #46 was treated with respect and dignity when Nurse #1 was observed pointing a finger in his/her face and yelling at him/her, resulting in the Resident becoming upset.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to accurately execute Advance Directives for two Residents (#1 and #42) out of a total sample of 21 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to:1. For Resident #1, ensure that the MOLST (Massachusetts Medical Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment) form was valid and reflected the signature of Resident #1's legal guardian (someone granted legal authority to care for another person who cannot make decisions independently due to age, illness, disability, or incapacity).2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that one Resident (#42) out of five applicable residents sampled for unnecessary medications, out of a total sample of 21 residents, was free from unnecessary psychotropic (any drug that affects behavior, mood, thoughts, or perception) medications. Specifically, for Resident #42, the facility failed to ensure that the Physician evaluated the Resident and documented the rationale for the continued use of as needed (PRN) Quetiapine (antipsychotic medication) as recommended by the Pharmacist.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse to the State Agency as required for one Resident (#3) out of a total sample of 21 residents. Specifically, for Resident #3, the facility failed to:1. report an allegation of abuse to the State Agency after allegations of abuse were reported on a Grievance Form dated 12/12/25.2. ensure that an allegation of abuse was reported to the Department of Public Health (DPH) within two hours as required, after the Director of Nursing (DON) was notified by the surveyor on 2/19/26 that the Resident said Nurse #2 was verbally abusive to him/her, and the verbal abuse allegation was not reported to DPH until 2/20/26 (24 hours later).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, for one Resident (#69) out of a total sample of 21 residents, the facility failed to provide treatment and services consistent with the needs of the Resident relative to communication which increased the Resident's risk for diminished activities of daily living (ADL) abilities. Specifically, for Resident #69, the facility failed to use methods such as the Resident's preferred language to communicate with the Resident regarding ADL care when:-the Resident's preferred language was [specific non-English language].-none of the staff at the facility spoke the Resident's preferred language.-the Resident demonstrated frequent refusal of ADL care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that activities of daily living (ADL's) were provided as required for one Resident (#48) out of a total sample of 21 residents. Specifically, for Resident #48, the facility failed to assist with facial hair removal per Resident preference when the Resident required assistance from staff with personal care and grooming.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that one Resident (#46) out of a total sample of 21 residents, was free from potential accidental hazards relative to the accessibility of an opioid medication. Specifically, for Resident #46, the facility failed to ensure:-that a prescribed medication, Ultram (Tramadol: an opioid medication) was kept in a secured medication cart and not in the unlocked drawer of the Resident's bedside table.-that the Tramadol medication was not easily accessible to the Resident, other residents, visitors and staff when the medication was left to be administered without Licensed Staff supervision and the Resident was not assessed to safely self-administer the Tramadol medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations from medication regimen reviews (MRR) were reviewed and addressed timely for two Residents (#8 and #42) out of a total sample of 21 residents. Specifically:1. For Resident #8, the facility failed to ensure that the Pharmacist's recommendation to evaluate the use of Flonase (corticosteroid nasal spray) was addressed in a timely manner by the Physician.2. For Resident #42, the facility failed to ensure that the Pharmacist recommendation for an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessment (rating scale used to measure involuntary movements of the face, mouth, trunk, or limbs known as tardive dyskinesia (TD) in a resident taking antipsychotic medications) was addressed timely by the Physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals were stored in accordance with State and Federal requirements on two nursing units (Unit Four and Unit Three) out of three total nursing units, and that expired medications were removed from use in a shared medication storage room for three (Unit Two, Unit Three and Unit Four) out of three medication storage rooms observed. Specifically, the facility failed to:1. ensure that medication carts on Unit Four and Unit Three were locked when the medication carts were unattended, to prevent unauthorized personnel and residents access to medications on and in the medication carts.2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for one Resident (#69) out of a total sample of 21 residents, relative to Resident behaviors for refusal of care, increasing the Resident's risk for ineffective behavior monitoring, behavior assessment, and the implementation of interventions to address the Resident's behavioral needs. Specifically, facility staff failed to document instances of Resident #69's refusal of care when:-Facility staff identified Resident #69 had frequent refusal of care.-The surveyor observed Resident #69 refuse care from facility staff when care was offered to the Resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and observation, the facility failed to offer each Resident a nourishing snack at bedtime when more than 14 hours elapsed between the substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day. Specifically, the facility failed to offer each Resident items from the basic food groups, either singly or in combination with each other, at bedtime when 15 hours elapsed daily between the scheduled substantial evening meal and breakfast the following day.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to offer COVID-19 vaccines, in accordance with national standards of practice to five Residents (#31, #8, #55, #68, and #64) of five applicable residents reviewed, out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to offer COVID-19 vaccines to the eligible residents when: -The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended an additional dose of updated (2023-2024 formula) of COVID-19 vaccine be administered for older adults,aged [AGE] years and older. -The COVID-19 vaccine was not medically contraindicated and Resident's #31, #8, #55, #68, and #64 had not already been immunized with the recommended additional COVID-19 vaccine dose.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments were coded accurately for four Residents (#74, #9, #49, and #71) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. For Resident #74, ensure the most recent MDS was coded accurately relative to a fall event. 2. For Resident #9, ensure the most recent MDS was coded accurately relative to the use of a restraint. 3. For Resident #49, ensure the MDS assessment was coded accurately relative to a diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD: a chronic lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs that leads to respiratory problems including difficulty breathing, shortness of breath and wheezing) and Oxygen use. 4. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to adhere to professional standards of practice to ensure that significant medication errors did not occur for four Residents (#33, #81, #21, and #22) out of four applicable residents, out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that an appropriate process was in place for identifying Residents during the medication pass procedure for Resident's #33, #81, #21, and #22.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a clean, safe, comfortable, and homelike environment for one Resident (#23) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that Resident #23's wheelchair was maintained in a clean, safe, and homelike condition when the Resident's wheelchair was observed to have a damaged left armrest.
Inspectors wroteBased on record and policy review, and interview, the facility failed to investigate an incident of physical aggression for two Residents (#49 and #54) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to appropriately investigate a resident-to-resident altercation involving Resident #49 and Resident #54 and/or assess any potential impact resulting for both Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was initiated for the care and services of three Residents (#72, #64 and #74), out of a total sample of 18 Residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. For Resident #72, develop a comprehensive care plan addressing the care and services needed relative to the Resident's cognitive loss and Dementia (a group of conditions characterized by impairment of at least two brain functions, such as memory and loss of judgment). 2. For Resident #64, develop comprehensive care plans when the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment triggered for cognitive loss for the Resident. 3. For Resident #74, assess and revise the Resident's Care Plan to include measurable goals for falls prevention after the Resident sustained a fall with injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services according to professional standards of practice relative to indwelling suprapubic catheter (Foley/a flexible tube placed through a surgical incision through the abdominal wall into the bladder to drain urine) for one Resident (#30) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that the correct size suprapubic urinary catheter had been placed for Resident #30 as ordered, placing the Resident at increased risk for bladder irritation, infection and pain.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, policy and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice for one Resident (#49), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, for Resident #49, the facility failed to notify the Physician and administer Oxygen as ordered when the Oxygen liter flow rate (the rate of supplemental Oxygen delivered through an oxygen delivery device) being set for the Resident was not as ordered by the Physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that medications were stored in a secure and safe manner, according to professional standards of practice for one Resident (#30), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to adhere to safe medication storage practices when wound care medications were left in an unlocked drawer in Resident #30's room.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary environment in the facility main kitchen where food items were prepared and stored for resident consumption. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure all staff wore hair restraints while in the facility kitchen and in the vicinity of food preparation areas to prevent contamination and the spread of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to adhere to infection prevention and control program standards for two Residents (#292, and #287) out of a total sample of 18 residents, to help prevent the development and transmission of infections. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Implement Contact Precautions for Resident #292, when the Resident was re-admitted to the facility with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Epidermidis (MRSE: form of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus [MRSA: type of bacteria that is contagious, resistant to several antibiotics, and if left untreated, can cause sepsis or death] drug-resistant form of staph bacteria that may be difficult to treat due to their resistance to methicillin and other common antibiotics) which increased the risk for transmission of MRSE infection in the facility. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to post required nurse staffing information on a daily basis. Specifically, the facility failed to include the resident census information on the daily posting for the facility nurse staffing.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record and policy reviews, the facility failed to implement an infection prevention and control program to provide a sanitary environment and help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases. Specifically, the facility failed to develop policies and procedures and implement a water a management program to minimize the risk of Legionella and other opportunistic waterborne pathogens. Findings Include: Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) QSO-17-30 memo titled, Requirement to Reduce Legionella Risk in Healthcare Facility Water Systems to Prevent Cases and Outbreaks of Legionaire's Disease (LD), last revised 7/6/18 indicated the following: -Legionella Infections: The bacterium Legionella can cause a serious type of pneumonia called LD in persons at risk. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, documentation review and interview, the facility failed to implement resident-centered, meaningful, and engaging activity programming for all residents on one unit and failed to provide one Resident (#45) out of a total sample of 18 residents, an activity program that engaged the Resident and supported their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Specifically, the facility failed: 1. To provide resident-centered, meaningful, and engaging activities to residents on the fourth floor. 2. To ensure facility sponsored group activities were offered to support the psychosocial well-being of the residents, including Resident #45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide education, assess for eligibility, and offer Pneumococcal Vaccinations per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations and facility policy for three Residents (#68, #27, and #86) out of a total sample of five residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that staff offered, assessed, and provided education on the recommended 20-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV20) (an active immunizing agent used to prevent infection caused by certain types of pneumococcal bacteria). Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Pneumococcal Vaccine, revised 2/13/23, indicated the following: -The facility will incorporate guidelines and standards as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control for Pneumococcal Vaccinations. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that its staff honored the rights of one Resident (#40) to formulate advanced directives (an individual's wishes regarding medical treatment), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility staff executed a Medical Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST - a medical order form that converts an individual's wishes regarding life-sustaining treatment into medical orders) form with the Resident's Representative when the Resident continued to be capable of making their own health care decisions.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to implement the plan of care for one Resident (#86) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that its staff implemented a comprehensive plan of care relative to routine behavior monitoring for Resident #86.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice for two Residents (#4 and #33) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, 1. For Resident #4, the facility staff failed to ensure that its staff scheduled a Gastroenterologist (GI) appointment as ordered, for evaluation and management. 2. For Resident #33, the facility failed to monitor regular bowel patterns and implement a bowel regimen (a plan to prevent or treat constipation by following certain habits and using medications if needed) based on those patterns.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide an adequate level of assistance to prevent an accident for one Resident (#21) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to ensure that Resident #21's breakfast meal was reheated in a safe manner and the food temperature was checked before providing the meal to the Resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide individualized care plan interventions to meet the behavioral health needs of one Resident (#45) out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, for Resident #45 the facility staff failed to implement non-pharmacological interventions and provide care plan interventions when the resident was having increased behavioral needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to monitor for side effects and adverse reactions of a medication for one Resident (#27), out of a total sample of 18 Residents. Specifically, the facility staff failed to monitor for side effects and adverse events related to the use of an anti-platelet medication (used to thin blood to prevent a stroke or heart attack).
Inspectors wroteBased on documentation review and interview, the facility failed to maintain appropriate standards for safe and sanitary food storage, and sanitary hand hygiene during meal service.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain the daily posting of nursing staffing data with current information in a prominent and accessible place for residents and visitors. Findings Include: During an observation on 8/10/23 at 3:30 P.M., the surveyor could not locate staffing data posted in the facility. During an interview on 8/10/23 at 3:33 P.M., the facility Receptionist said that she had a daily staffing schedule which was kept in a binder behind the reception desk and not posted for residents or visitors. The Receptionist said that she was not aware of any other staffing document to be posted. During an observation on 8/11/23 at 7:04 A.M., the surveyor observed a staffing posting dated 8/10/23 at front desk in clear plastic stand but it was not readily accessible for Residents or visitors. [...]
32 fire safety citations on file: 2 on February 25, 2026, 28 on October 29, 2024, 2 on August 14, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.87 | 3.86 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.68 | 0.65 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.46 | 3.48 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.46 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.73 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 12.5% | 38.2% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 16.7% | 42.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.25 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 4.04 on weekdays and 3.46 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.82 in April to June 2025 to 3.87 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 | 3.87 | 0.68 | 4.04 | 3.46 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 79 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.89 | 0.63 | 4.11 | 3.36 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 79 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.74 | 0.58 | 3.92 | 3.28 | 0.0% | 1 of 92 | 81 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.82 | 0.53 | 3.98 | 3.41 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 80 |
| 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 | 7.7 | 16.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.7 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.2 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.3 | 15.4 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 41.5 | 21.4 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.5 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.1 | 11.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.2 | 1.9 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Waterview Lodge LLC, Rehabilitation & Healthcare's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (48.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
48.8% this home
No different from 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. 61 eligible stays.
11.0% 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. 95 eligible stays.
8.8% 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. 70 eligible stays.
57.1% 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. 49 residents counted.
4.6% 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. 65 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. 65 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 4 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: WATERVIEW LODGE LLC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Waterview Lodge LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 12/15/2015 | |
| Desai, Indira | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 12/15/2015 | |
| Desai, Indira | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 12/15/2015 | |
| Desai, Indira | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/15/2015 | |
| Desai, Indira | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/15/2015 |
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.