How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
New Hampshire ›North Haverhill
Grafton County Nursing Home
3855 Dartmouth College Highway, North Haverhill, NH 03774 (opens Google Maps) · Grafton County · (603) 787-6971· 135 certified beds · avg 120 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1995 · 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 →
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 2, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.73
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: 2/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 20 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. F-0609
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. F-0610
View all 20 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Jan 31, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times. · F-0809 |
| Jan 31, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Jan 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| Jan 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791 |
| Jan 31, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 31, 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 |
| Jan 31, 2025 | B · Potential for 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or obtain laboratory tests when a doctor ordered them, or did not promptly report the results back to the doctor who ordered them. · F-0773 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 6).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 6
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 | 6 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 6 | 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 facilityNew Hampshire averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.73
New Hampshire average: 4.11
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.82
New Hampshire average: 0.82
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.45
New Hampshire average: 3.67
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | New Hampshire avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.73 | 4.11 | 3.95 | top 14% in New Hampshire; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.82 | 0.82 | 0.69 | top 42% in New Hampshire; top 26% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.45 | 3.67 | 3.50 | top 6% in New Hampshire; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.52 | 0.55 | 0.48 | top 50% in New Hampshire; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 44.1 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 40.9 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.67, RN 0.67, weekend 4.45.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.67 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.
Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Grafton County Nursing Home. 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 →
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| County of Grafton | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1966 |
| County of Grafton | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1966 |
| Doane, Peter | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2025 |
| Doane, Peter | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2025 |
| Fadden, Harvest | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2007 |
| Fadden, Harvest | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2007 |
| Gilding, Jennifer | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Gilding, Jennifer | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Jurentkuff, Dawn | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/04/2013 |
| Jurentkuff, Dawn | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/03/2013 |
| Labore, Craig | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Labore, Craig | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| McKean, Troy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/29/1986 |
| McKean, Troy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/29/1986 |
| Palmer, Michael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Palmer, Michael | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Porter, Merry | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Porter, Merry | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Robbins, Tammy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/29/2000 |
| Robbins, Tammy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/29/2000 |
All 20 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.
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
- "What happens if a resident is hungry between meals or misses a mealtime — what food options are available?"
- "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
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?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 20 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 (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glencliff Home for the Elderly | 11.2 mi | Glencliff, NH | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lafayette Center | 16.2 mi | Franconia, NH | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
Compare this facility with the 2 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Grafton, NH — 5 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Hanover Terrace Health and Rehabilitation — Hanover, NH · overall 4/5
- Lebanon Center, Genesis Healthcare — Lebanon, NH · overall 1/5SFF
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 305053.