Rhode Island ›Cumberland

Mount St Rita Health Centre

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

15 Sumner Brown Road, Cumberland, RI 02864 (opens Google Maps) · Providence County · (401) 333-6352· 98 certified beds · avg 90 residents/day · certified since Feb 15, 1990 · 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: COVENANT HEALTH (8 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 4, 2025
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 25, 2026
$71,871
Fines, last 3 years
4.49
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Aug 9, 2023 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Sep 5, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 25, 2026 · F-0700 · triggered by a complaint

The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly.

Why it matters: Improperly used bed rails can trap or injure residents — in the worst cases, causing serious harm.

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 15, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 30, 2025 · 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): 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: Jan 15, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 25, 2023 · F-0699

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.

Why it matters: Care that ignores a resident's trauma or culture can cause distress and damage their trust in caregivers.

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: Nov 24, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 30 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. G · Actual harm, isolated

    The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · from a complaint F-0700

  2. 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

  3. 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. · from a complaint F-0610

View all 30 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 25, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · from a complaint · F-0700
Jun 25, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 25, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0610
Feb 17, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921
Dec 30, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Dec 4, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Dec 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Dec 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 26, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 26, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881
May 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Oct 25, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Oct 25, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Oct 25, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 25, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide its staff with required training on behavioral health — caring for residents with conditions like dementia, depression, or other mental health needs. · F-0949
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Sep 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint · F-0573
Sep 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 6, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0686
Aug 9, 2023▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 5).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2024
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023152K ▲
202450E
202561G ▲
202641G ▲

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

4 fines totaling $71,871, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Dec 4, 2025Fine$45,920
Nov 13, 2023Fine$3,176
Oct 25, 2023Fine$15,366
Oct 25, 2023Payment Denial2 days from Nov 22, 2023
Oct 23, 2023Fine$7,409

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityRhode Island averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.49
Rhode Island average: 3.88
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.68
Rhode Island average: 0.80
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.12
Rhode Island average: 3.48
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityRhode Island avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.493.883.95top 20% in Rhode Island; top 23% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.680.800.69bottom 35% in Rhode Island; top 38% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.123.483.50top 19% in Rhode Island; top 20% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.400.550.48bottom 30% in Rhode Island; top 47% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)39.040.645.8top 48% in Rhode Island; top 34% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)40.037.942.9bottom 39% in Rhode Island; top 46% 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 3.99, RN 0.61, weekend 3.66.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.99 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Mount St Rita Health Centre. 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 →

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Covenant HealthOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest100%01/23/2015
Castillo, NicoleIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE05/21/2018
Fleming, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE07/18/2016

All 3 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 Covenant Health — 8 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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you learn about each resident's background and history, and how does that shape their care?"
  • "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?"
  • "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"

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 39% 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 83 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Woonsocket Health Center4.2 miWoonsocket, RI★★★★☆4/5
Madonna Manor Nursing Home4.3 miNorth Attleboro, MA★★★★☆3/5
Adviniacare Oakland Grove LLC4.5 miWoonsocket, RI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
The Gardens at Cedarwood4.8 miFranklin, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Alliance Health at Maples5.2 miWrentham, MA★★★☆☆3/5
Holiday Operator, LLC DBA Holiday Rehabilitation a5.3 miManville, RI★★☆☆☆2/5
Cedar Haven Operations Holding LLC Valley View Hea5.3 miWoonsocket, RI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
The Friendly Home6.6 miWoonsocket, RI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Serenity Hill Nursing Center6.9 miWrentham, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
St Antoine Residence6.9 miNorth Smithfield, RI★★★★☆3/5
Grandview Center7.5 miCumberland, RI★★★★★4/5
Garden Place Healthcare8.1 miAttleboro, MA★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Providence, RI — 41 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.

All facilities in Cumberland →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 415085.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details