Massachusetts ›Haverhill

Oxford Rehabilitation & Health Care Center

689 Main Street, Haverhill, MA 01830 · Essex County · 120 certified beds · avg 111 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1974

Part of chain: ATHENA HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS (22 facilities, chain avg rating 1.5★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$265,351
Fines, last 3 years
2.80
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5

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, repeated · Feb 27, 2025 · F-0600

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.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (H): Multiple residents were actually harmed by the same failure — a pattern of real harm, not an isolated incident.

Corrected: Mar 4, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (41)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Feb 12, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Feb 12, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them.
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 12, 2026B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Feb 27, 2025▲ H · Actual harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 27, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Feb 27, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Feb 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time.
Feb 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Mar 29, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Mar 29, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Mar 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (15 → 13).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024130F
2025151H ▲
2026130F

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)

2 fines totaling $265,351, plus 2 Medicare payment denial periods.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 27, 2025Fine$129,326
Apr 11, 2024Payment Denial15 days from Jul 11, 2024
Mar 29, 2024Fine$136,025
Mar 29, 2024Payment Denial20 days from Jun 29, 2024

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

MeasureThis facilityMassachusetts avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)2.803.893.95bottom 3% in Massachusetts; bottom 8% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.570.650.69bottom 47% in Massachusetts; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.493.513.50bottom 2% in Massachusetts; bottom 9% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.420.460.48top 46% in Massachusetts; top 45% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)36.038.245.8top 46% in Massachusetts; top 26% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)31.642.642.9top 29% in Massachusetts; top 32% 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 3.13, RN 0.64, weekend 2.78. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Athena Health Care Systems Ma III LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%06/01/2014
Chakalos-Santilli, ValerieIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest6%07/01/2015
Curtis, DianeIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/01/2014
Mosier, MichaelIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%11/18/2016
Santilli, LawrenceIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest62%10/04/2019
Senra, PriscillaIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—12/15/2020
Athena Health Care Associates, INC.OrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2014
Mosier, MichaelIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2014
Santilli, LawrenceIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/04/2018

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Aspen Hill Rehabiliation & Healthcare Center0.5 miHaverhill, MA★★★☆☆2/5
Haverhill Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center1.4 miHaverhill, MA★★☆☆☆3/5
Penacook Place, INC1.6 miHaverhill, MA★★★★☆4/5
Lakeview House SKLD Nrsg and Residential Care Fac1.7 miHaverhill, MA★★★★☆4/5
Baker-Katz Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Ctr2.1 miHaverhill, MA★★★★☆4/5
Whittier Bradford Transitional Care Unit2.8 miBradford, MA★★★★★5/5
Cedar View Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center5.9 miMethuen, MA★★★★★5/5
Salemhaven6.4 miSalem, NH★★☆☆☆2/5
Prescott House6.5 miNorth Andover, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Meadows, the6.5 miNorth Andover, MA★★★★★5/5
Nevins Nursing & Rehabilitation Center6.7 miMethuen, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
M I Nursing & Restorative Center6.9 miLawrence, MA★★★☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Haverhill →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 225218.