Royal Braintree Nursing and Rehabilitation Center

Name: Royal Braintree Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Address: 95 COMMERCIAL STREET, Braintree, MA, 02184, US
Telephone: 7816646818

95 Commercial Street, Braintree, MA 02184 · Norfolk County · 204 certified beds · avg 182 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967

Part of chain: ROYAL HEALTH GROUP (12 facilities, chain avg rating 3.1★)

2/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

3.69

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (33)

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
Feb 11, 2026	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Feb 11, 2026	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
Feb 11, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Feb 11, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Feb 11, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Feb 11, 2026	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.
Feb 11, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Feb 11, 2026	D · Potential for 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.
Feb 11, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Dec 2, 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. · from a complaint
Dec 2, 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. · from a complaint
Nov 15, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Nov 15, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Nov 15, 2024	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.
Nov 15, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Nov 15, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 15, 2024	B · Minimal risk, repeated	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Nov 20, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint
Nov 20, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide or obtain laboratory tests when a doctor ordered them, or did not promptly report the results back to the doctor who ordered them. · from a complaint
Nov 20, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · from a complaint
Aug 3, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Aug 3, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Aug 3, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Aug 3, 2023	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.
Aug 3, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Aug 3, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Aug 3, 2023	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.
Aug 3, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Aug 3, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Aug 3, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Aug 3, 2023	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.
Aug 3, 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.
Aug 3, 2023	B · Minimal risk, repeated	The 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 9).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2023	16	E
2024	6	E
2025	2	D
2026	9	F

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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

Measure	This facility	Massachusetts avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.69	3.89	3.95	bottom 45% in Massachusetts; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.67	0.65	0.69	top 37% in Massachusetts; top 40% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.34	3.51	3.50	bottom 46% in Massachusetts; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.52	0.46	0.48	top 26% in Massachusetts; top 30% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	29.9	38.2	45.8	top 24% in Massachusetts; top 14% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	28.6	42.6	42.9	top 24% in Massachusetts; top 26% 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 3.59, RN 0.65, weekend 3.25. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Mamary, James	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	08/01/2008
Reid, Paula	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2013

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
"How does your quality committee work, and can you share an example of a problem it identified and fixed?"
"Does your facility have an active resident council, and how does management respond to its concerns?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
"Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"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
Pope Nursing Home	0.5 mi	Weymouth, MA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
John Scott House Nursing & Rehabilitation Center	1.0 mi	Braintree, MA	★★★★★	4/5
Regalcare at Quincy	1.9 mi	Quincy, MA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Alliance Health at Braintree	2.2 mi	Braintree, MA	★★★★★	5/5
South Cove Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center	2.2 mi	Quincy, MA	★★★★★	5/5
Care One at Weymouth	2.3 mi	Weymouth, MA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Hancock Park Rehabiliation and Nursing Center	2.3 mi	Quincy, MA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Affinity Healthcare	2.4 mi	Braintree, MA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Linden Ponds	3.6 mi	Hingham, MA	★★★★☆	3/5
Harbor House Nursing & Rehabilitation Center	4.0 mi	Hingham, MA	★★★★☆	4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Braintree →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 225058.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Royal Braintree Nursing and Rehabilitation Center

95 Commercial Street, Braintree, MA 02184 · 7816646818

Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 2/5· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
☐ "How does your quality committee work, and can you share an example of a problem it identified and fixed?"
☐ "Does your facility have an active resident council, and how does management respond to its concerns?"
☐ "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
☐ "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "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?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 225058 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)