Madigan Estates
93 Military Street, Houlton, ME 04730 · Aroostook County · 99 certified beds · avg 97 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1993
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5
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 self-reported quality measures.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 14, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Nov 3, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)
All citations in the current public record (25)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| Jan 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 21, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Mar 21, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 21, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 21, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Mar 21, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. |
| Mar 21, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 14, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Nov 14, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint |
| May 24, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| May 24, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 24, 2023 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 12).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 6 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 13 | 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)
1 fine totaling $11,450.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 14, 2023 | Fine | $11,450 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Maine avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.16 | 4.60 | 3.95 | bottom 28% in Maine; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.90 | 1.11 | 0.69 | bottom 35% in Maine; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.83 | 4.16 | 3.50 | bottom 30% in Maine; top 28% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.35 | 0.73 | 0.48 | bottom 9% in Maine; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 42.6 | 46.7 | 45.8 | top 36% in Maine; top 43% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 23.8 | 40.2 | 42.9 | top 19% in Maine; top 20% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.95, RN 0.85, weekend 3.64. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brown, James | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 12/31/2021 |
| Brown, James | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2021 |
| Abouleish, Hassan | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Abouleish, Hassan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Brown, Dana | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2024 |
| Brown, Dana | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2024 |
| Brown, James | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/1996 |
| Brown, James | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/1996 |
| Brown, James | Individual | Trustee of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2021 |
| Brown, James | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2021 |
| Russell, Ashley | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Russell, Ashley | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
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?"
- "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
- "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?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aroostook Health Center | 27.2 mi | Mars Hill, ME | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 1 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 205083.