Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES (87 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 17, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 18, 2025
$8,788
Fines, last 3 years
3.43
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 18, 2025 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Feb 17, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 10 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. F-0887
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. F-0694
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. F-0842
View all 10 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Jun 17, 2026
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887
Jun 17, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694
Jun 17, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jun 17, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Feb 18, 2025
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658
Jul 26, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Jul 26, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Jul 26, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
Jul 26, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Jul 26, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Inspection trend by year
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2025
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2026
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2024
5
0
E
2025
1
1
G ▲
2026
4
0
F
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Feb 18, 2025
Fine
$8,788
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMassachusetts averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.43
Massachusetts average:
3.89
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.63
Massachusetts average:
0.65
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.05
Massachusetts average:
3.51
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Massachusetts avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.43
3.89
3.95
bottom 29% in Massachusetts; bottom 33% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.63
0.65
0.69
top 43% in Massachusetts; top 44% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.05
3.51
3.50
bottom 25% in Massachusetts; bottom 33% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.42
0.46
0.48
top 44% in Massachusetts; top 44% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
23.2
38.2
45.8
top 8% in Massachusetts; top 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
31.3
42.6
42.9
top 28% in Massachusetts; top 32% in the U.S.
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.99, RN 0.73, weekend 3.54.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.99 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Briarwood Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
06/19/2025
Marquis Limited LLC
Organization
Operational/Managerial Control
NOT APPLICABLE
01/01/2021
Marquis Limited LLC
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
04/09/2025
Showing 20 of 38 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 18 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Marquis Health Services — 87 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
CMS records place this facility in Norfolk, MA — 33 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.