How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Charlwell House Health and Rehabilitation
305 Walpole Street, Norwood, MA 02062 (opens Google Maps) · Norfolk County · (781) 762-7700· 124 certified beds · avg 75 residents/day · certified since Feb 15, 1972 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
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: BEST CARE SERVICES (10 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 30, 2025
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 1, 2022
$0
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)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · how star ratings work →
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0835
The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0835
The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Why it matters: Poor administration often shows up as understaffing, supply shortages, and care problems across the whole facility.
Severity (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 21, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0880
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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0880
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.
Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.
Severity (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 5, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0886
The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0886
The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff.
Why it matters: Without testing, COVID-19 can spread silently through a facility full of high-risk residents.
Severity (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Nov 11, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0686
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 1, 2022 · F-0686
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
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: Dec 8, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 63 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. F-0686
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. F-0761
View all 63 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 30, 2025 | 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 |
| May 30, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| May 30, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| May 30, 2025 | 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 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| May 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · F-0825 |
| Aug 13, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Apr 16, 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 |
| Apr 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| Apr 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Apr 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Apr 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Apr 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · F-0551 |
| Apr 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Apr 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · F-0551 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not report COVID-19 data to residents and their families as required. Facilities must keep residents and families informed about COVID-19 cases. · F-0885 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · F-0557 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough staff with the right skills to meet the mental and behavioral health needs of its residents, such as those living with dementia or depression. · F-0741 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · F-0849 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · F-0577 |
| Sep 1, 2022 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 13).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 41
Serious citations (G–L): 4
2024
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 41 | 4 | L ▲ |
| 2024 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 13 | 0 | E |
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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
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: 0.68
Massachusetts average: 0.65
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.17
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 | 0.68 | 0.65 | 0.69 | top 34% in Massachusetts; top 38% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.17 | 3.51 | 3.50 | bottom 36% in Massachusetts; bottom 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.60 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 19% in Massachusetts; top 23% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 27.0 | 38.2 | 45.8 | top 17% in Massachusetts; top 9% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 35.7 | 42.6 | 42.9 | top 38% in Massachusetts; top 39% 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 3.36, RN 0.66, weekend 3.10.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.36 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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.
Quality measures rating: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Charlwell House Health and Rehabilitation. 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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chapler, Yaakov | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| CKSST Holding Company LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Steinberg, Moshe | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Al-Madi, Sami | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Bonadio & Co LLP | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Bonadio & Co LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/17/2025 |
| Carr, Jamie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2024 |
| Carr, Jamie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2024 |
| Chapler, Yaakov | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Pieleanu, Irina | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Pieleanu, Irina | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Reliant Pro Rehab, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Reliant Pro Rehab, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/06/2025 |
| Steinberg, Moshe | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Twomagnets LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Twomagnets LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/17/2025 |
All 16 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Best Care Services — 10 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.
- Kimwell Nursing and Rehabilitation — Fall River, MA · overall 1/5
- Park Avenue Health Center — Arlington, MA · overall 1/5
- Prescott House — North Andover, MA · overall 2/5
- Sarah S Brayton Center — Fall River, MA · overall 2/5
- Somerset Ridge Center — Somerset, MA · overall 4/5
- The Guardian Center — Brockton, MA · overall 1/5
- Westford Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Westford, MA · overall 4/5
- Lakeland Nursing & Rehab — Haskell, NJ · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 9 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What is your current policy for testing residents and staff when someone shows symptoms or there's an outbreak?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Massachusetts midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 27% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 16 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 121 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victoria Haven Nursing Facility | 0.8 mi | Norwood, MA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Norwood Healthcare | 1.3 mi | Norwood, MA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Premier Healthcare at Harrington House | 1.3 mi | Walpole, MA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ellis Nursing Home (the) | 2.2 mi | Norwood, MA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Foremost at Sharon LLC | 3.0 mi | Sharon, MA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hellenic Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 3.6 mi | Canton, MA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Thomas Upham House | 4.7 mi | Medfield, MA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Newbridge on the Charles Skilled Nursing Facility | 5.8 mi | Dedham, MA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Brush Hill Care Center | 5.9 mi | Milton, MA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Briarwood Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center | 6.5 mi | Needham, MA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Care Village at West Roxbury | 6.5 mi | West Roxbury, MA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| German Center for Extended Care | 6.9 mi | Boston, MA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
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.
- Copley at Stoughton Nursing Care Center — Stoughton, MA · overall 5/5
- Dwyer Home — Weymouth, MA · overall 5/5
- Elizabeth Seton — Wellesley, MA · overall 4/5
- Hancock Park Rehabiliation and Nursing Center — Quincy, MA · overall 3/5
- John Scott House Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — Braintree, MA · overall 5/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 225208.