MassachusettsWorcester

St Francis Rehabilitation & Nursing Center

101 Plantation Street, Worcester, MA 01604 · Worcester County · 137 certified beds · avg 117 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1990

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
4
Serious findings on record
$19,175
Fines, last 3 years
3.46
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 · Apr 25, 2024 · 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: Apr 10, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 12, 2023 · F-0561 · triggered by a complaint

The 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.

Why it matters: Losing everyday choices makes residents feel powerless in their own home.

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: Sep 25, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 12, 2023 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.

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: Sep 25, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 12, 2023 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint

The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.

Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.

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: Sep 25, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (23)

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
Nov 24, 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.
Nov 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Aug 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 6, 2024D · 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.
Aug 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost.
Aug 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Aug 6, 2024D · 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.
Aug 6, 2024D · 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.
Aug 6, 2024D · 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.
Aug 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status.
Apr 25, 2024▲ 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 12, 2023▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint
Sep 12, 2023▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint
Sep 12, 2023▲ G · Actual 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
Sep 12, 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
Apr 11, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Apr 11, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Apr 11, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
Apr 11, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Apr 11, 2023D · 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.
Apr 11, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Apr 11, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Apr 11, 2023D · 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 2).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023123G ▲
202481G ▲
202530E

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 $19,175.

DateTypeAmount / length
Apr 25, 2024Fine$10,527
Sep 12, 2023Fine$8,648

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)3.463.893.95bottom 31% in Massachusetts; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.680.650.69top 35% in Massachusetts; top 39% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.073.513.50bottom 28% in Massachusetts; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.480.460.48top 31% in Massachusetts; top 35% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)41.138.245.8bottom 38% in Massachusetts; top 39% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)26.342.642.9top 19% in Massachusetts; top 23% 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 4.02, RN 0.78, weekend 3.56. 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bentley Health Group LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%09/19/2008
Raso, StevenIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest01/20/2013
Wellington Healthcare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest01/20/2013
Bentley Health Group LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/10/2024
Landmark Health Solutions, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/10/2024
Raso, StevenIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/20/2013
Rossano, BryanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/23/2022
Rossano, BryanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/10/2024
Wellington Healthcare LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/10/2024

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
Vantage at Worcester LLC0.5 miWorcester, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Blaire House of Worcester0.6 miWorcester, MA★★★☆☆3/5
Worcester Rehabilitation & Health Care Center0.8 miWorcester, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Christopher House of Worcester1.2 miWorcester, MA★★★☆☆3/5
Lutheran Rehabilitation and Skilled Care Center1.4 miWorcester, MA★★★★★5/5
West Side House LTC Facility1.5 miWorcester, MA★★★★★5/5
St Mary Health Care Center1.6 miWorcester, MA★★☆☆☆2/5
Notre Dame Long Term Care Center2.4 miWorcester, MA★★★★☆4/5
Care One at Millbury2.6 miMillbury, MA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Holy Trinity Eastern Orthodox N & R Center2.8 miWorcester, MA★★★★★5/5
Regalcare at Worcester2.8 miWorcester, MA★★☆☆☆3/5
Odd Fellows Home of Massachusetts2.9 miWorcester, MA★★☆☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Worcester →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 225438.