MassachusettsQuincy

Regalcare at Quincy

211 Franklin Street, Quincy, MA 02169 · Norfolk County · 71 certified beds · avg 56 residents/day · certified since Aug 30, 1990

Part of chain: REGALCARE (9 facilities, chain avg rating 1.7★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$10,773
Fines, last 3 years
3.53
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, one-off · Sep 19, 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: Oct 9, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (29)

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
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups.
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Apr 8, 2025E · 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.
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them.
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Apr 8, 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.
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Apr 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Apr 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 8, 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.
Apr 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems.
Apr 8, 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.
Apr 8, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
May 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 15, 2024D · 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.
May 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or obtain x-rays and other imaging tests when ordered, or did not promptly tell the ordering doctor the results.
Nov 21, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · from a complaint
Nov 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' individual preferences, choices, values, and beliefs in their daily life and care. · from a complaint
Nov 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Sep 19, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Sep 19, 2023D · 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. · from a complaint
Dec 27, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time.
Dec 27, 2022D · 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.
Dec 27, 2022B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 27, 2022B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 17).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202240D
202351G ▲
202430E
2025170E

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 $10,773.

DateTypeAmount / length
Sep 19, 2023Fine$10,773

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)3.533.893.95bottom 35% in Massachusetts; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.720.650.69top 27% in Massachusetts; top 34% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.123.513.50bottom 33% in Massachusetts; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.420.460.48top 45% in Massachusetts; top 44% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)38.338.245.8bottom 48% in Massachusetts; top 32% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)45.542.642.9bottom 42% in Massachusetts; bottom 43% 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 3.73, RN 0.76, weekend 3.30. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Mirlis, EliyahuIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest99%09/01/2022
RC Opco Holdco LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%09/01/2022
Mirlis, EliyahuIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2022
Mirlis, EliyahuIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2022

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
Hancock Park Rehabiliation and Nursing Center0.6 miQuincy, MA★★★☆☆3/5
South Cove Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center1.0 miQuincy, MA★★★★★5/5
John Scott House Nursing & Rehabilitation Center1.4 miBraintree, MA★★★★★4/5
Royal Braintree Nursing and Rehabilitation Center1.9 miBraintree, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Pope Nursing Home2.3 miWeymouth, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Affinity Healthcare2.7 miBraintree, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Alliance Health at Braintree3.1 miBraintree, MA★★★★★5/5
Care One at Weymouth4.2 miWeymouth, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Bostonian Nursing Care & Rehabilitation Center4.2 miDorchester, MA★★★★★5/5
Alliance Health at Marina Bay4.2 miQuincy, MA★★★☆☆3/5
Boston Home, INC (the)4.4 miBoston, MA★★★★★5/5
St Joseph Rehab & Nursing Care Center4.9 miDorchester, MA★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Quincy →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 225522.