Massachusetts ›North Reading

Royal Meadow View Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

134 North Street, North Reading, MA 01864 (opens Google Maps) · Middlesex County · (978) 276-2000· 113 certified beds · avg 97 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 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: ROYAL HEALTH GROUP (12 facilities, chain avg rating 3.1★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 29, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.26
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 35 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The 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

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. F-0604

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The 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

View all 35 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 8, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0684
Jan 29, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Jan 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 31, 2025E · 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
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0550
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0656
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0657
Jan 31, 2025D · 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
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0677
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0690
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · F-0700
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0758
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Mar 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · from a complaint · F-0678
Mar 15, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0726
Feb 29, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725
Feb 29, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Feb 29, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0865
Feb 29, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Feb 29, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Feb 29, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0759
Feb 29, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · F-0909
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0550
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0655
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0656
Feb 29, 2024D · 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
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0677
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal 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
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 1).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024200F
2025130E
202620D

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 →

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

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 facilityMassachusetts averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.26
Massachusetts average: 3.89
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.64
Massachusetts average: 0.65
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.95
Massachusetts average: 3.51
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilityMassachusetts avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.263.893.95bottom 17% in Massachusetts; bottom 25% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.640.650.69top 40% in Massachusetts; top 43% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.953.513.50bottom 18% in Massachusetts; bottom 28% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.570.460.48top 22% in Massachusetts; top 25% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)57.738.245.8bottom 5% in Massachusetts; bottom 20% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)64.042.642.9bottom 15% in Massachusetts; bottom 16% 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 3.45, RN 0.68, weekend 3.12.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.45 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Royal Meadow View Center. 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 →

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Mamary, JamesIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest25%03/12/2017
Mamary, JamesIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/12/2017
Mamary, JamesIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/12/2017
Mamary, JonathanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/12/2017
Mamary, JoshuaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/12/2017

All 5 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 Royal Health Group — 12 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. Showing 8 of the 11 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

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 is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Massachusetts midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 58% 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 110 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Oc Reading Center LLC2.4 miReading, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Andover Forest Post Acute Care Center3.5 miNorth Andover, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Willow Brook Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center3.9 miWilmington, MA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Vantage at Andover LLC4.3 miAndover, MA★★★☆☆3/5
Care One at Wilmington4.4 miWilmington, MA★★★★★5/5
Andover Manor Rehab and Nursing4.7 miAndover, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Bear Hill Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center6.2 miStoneham, MA★★★★★4/5
Regalcare at Wakefield6.3 miWakefield, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Alliance Health at Rosewood6.4 miPeabody, MA★★★☆☆3/5
Hathorne Hill Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center6.8 miDanvers, MA★★★★☆4/5
Blaire House of Tewksbury7.1 miTewksbury, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Continuing Care at Brooksby Village7.2 miPeabody, MA★★★★☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Middlesex, MA — 72 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 North Reading →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 225478.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

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