93 Main Street, Franconia, NH 03580 (opens Google Maps) · Grafton County · (603) 823-5502· 72 certified beds · avg 61 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1996 · 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 →
SFF Candidate
What Special Focus status means →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 27, 2025 · 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: Jul 8, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 29 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 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 honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. F-0565
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 27, 2025 | ▲ 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 |
| May 27, 2025 | 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 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| May 27, 2025 | 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 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| May 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help residents arrange transportation to and from x-ray and imaging services. · F-0778 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0699 |
| Aug 16, 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 |
| May 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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 |
| May 15, 2024 | 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 |
| May 15, 2024 | 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 |
| May 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| May 15, 2024 | 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 |
| May 15, 2024 | B · Potential for 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 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost. · F-0572 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 7).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 7 | 1 | G ▲ |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $50,164.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2025 | Fine | $50,164 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 3.30 | 4.11 | 3.95 | bottom 31% in New Hampshire; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.64 | 0.82 | 0.69 | bottom 28% in New Hampshire; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.99 | 3.67 | 3.50 | bottom 36% in New Hampshire; bottom 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.71 | 0.55 | 0.48 | top 18% in New Hampshire; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 54.8 | 44.1 | 45.8 | bottom 16% in New Hampshire; bottom 25% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 50.0 | 40.9 | 42.9 | bottom 29% in New Hampshire; bottom 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 3.58, RN 0.69, weekend 3.25.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.58 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 3/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lafayette Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| An Magnolia Opco, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 11% | 01/21/2022 |
| Eichler, Abraham | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 40% | 01/21/2022 |
| Eisen, Menashe | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 14% | 01/21/2022 |
| Klein, Yehudis | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 8% | 01/21/2022 |
| Perigrove 1014 LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 17% | 01/21/2022 |
| Perlstein, Barry | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 8% | 01/21/2022 |
| Berry Dunn McNeil & Parker LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Djalayer, Kasra | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/05/2021 |
| Djalayer, Kasra | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/25/2025 |
| Eichler, Abraham | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Eichler, Abraham | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Magnolia Care Centers, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| McCracken, Kathleen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/05/2025 |
| McCracken, Kathleen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/25/2025 |
All 14 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morrison Nursing Home | 12.1 mi | Whitefield, NH | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Grafton County Nursing Home | 16.2 mi | North Haverhill, NH | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Glencliff Home for the Elderly | 17.1 mi | Glencliff, NH | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| St. Johnsbury Health & Rehab | 19.5 mi | Saint Johnsbury, VT | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
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.
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 305077.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details