How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Copley at Stoughton Nursing Care Center
380 Sumner Street, Stoughton, MA 02072 (opens Google Maps) · Norfolk County · (781) 341-2300· 123 certified beds · avg 95 residents/day · certified since Nov 15, 1994 · 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 →
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 3, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jul 31, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.66
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 31, 2023 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 31, 2023 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
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: Aug 1, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint F-0627
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
The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. F-0605
View all 22 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627 |
| Dec 3, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605 |
| Dec 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Dec 3, 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 |
| Dec 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 3, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Oct 8, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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 |
| Oct 8, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 8, 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 |
| Oct 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · F-0658 |
| Oct 8, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640 |
| Oct 8, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jul 31, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Jul 31, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 31, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Jul 31, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 31, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
| Jul 31, 2023 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 6 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 1 | 0 | D |
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: 4.66
Massachusetts average: 3.89
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.92
Massachusetts average: 0.65
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.28
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) | 4.66 | 3.89 | 3.95 | top 12% in Massachusetts; top 19% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.92 | 0.65 | 0.69 | top 11% in Massachusetts; top 19% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.28 | 3.51 | 3.50 | top 12% in Massachusetts; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.64 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 15% in Massachusetts; top 20% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 20.6 | 38.2 | 45.8 | top 4% in Massachusetts; top 3% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 33.3 | 42.6 | 42.9 | top 31% in Massachusetts; top 33% 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 4.27, RN 0.85, weekend 3.92.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.27 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Copley at Stoughton Nursing Care 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.
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 - Partnership
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goddard Restorative Care Unit in | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 67% | 12/26/2012 |
| Saving Long Term Care Corporation | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 33% | 12/15/1999 |
| Connor, Maria | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Connor, Maria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/31/2025 |
| Goddard Restorative Care Unit in | Organization | General Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/26/2012 |
| Goddard Restorative Care Unit in | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/19/2024 |
| O'Connell Unda, Maria | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2013 |
| O'Connell Unda, Maria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2013 |
| Saving Long Term Care Corporation | Organization | General Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/15/1999 |
| Saving Long Term Care Corporation | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/18/2024 |
| Tyer, Steven | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Tyer, Steven | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/20/2025 |
All 12 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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 is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
- "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 21% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 96 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Center at Blue Hills | 1.0 mi | Stoughton, MA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Alliance Health at West Acres | 2.6 mi | Brockton, MA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Brockton Post Acute Care | 3.0 mi | Brockton, MA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Guardian Center | 3.2 mi | Brockton, MA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Care One at Randolph | 3.5 mi | Randolph, MA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Southeast Rehabilitation & Skilled Care Center | 3.6 mi | North Easton, MA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Hellenic Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 4.6 mi | Canton, MA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| St Joseph Manor Health Care INC | 5.5 mi | Brockton, MA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Champion Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 5.6 mi | Brockton, MA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Foremost at Sharon LLC | 5.9 mi | Sharon, MA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Colony Center for Health and Rehabilitation | 7.2 mi | Abington, MA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Affinity Healthcare | 7.2 mi | Braintree, MA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
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.
- Dwyer Home — Weymouth, MA · overall 5/5
- Elizabeth Seton — Wellesley, MA · overall 4/5
- Ellis Nursing Home (the) — Norwood, MA · overall 5/5
- Hancock Park Rehabiliation and Nursing Center — Quincy, MA · overall 3/5
- John Scott House Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — Braintree, MA · overall 5/5
- Medway Country Manor Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitat — Medway, MA · overall —/5SFF
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 225653.