VermontGlover

Union House Nursing Home

3086 Glover Street, Glover, VT 05839 · Orleans County · 44 certified beds · avg 43 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1991

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$18,418
Fines, last 3 years
4.67
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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 · Oct 11, 2023 · F-0689

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: Nov 11, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 11, 2023 · F-0699

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.

Why it matters: Care that ignores a resident's trauma or culture can cause distress and damage their trust in caregivers.

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: Nov 11, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (24)

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
May 7, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
May 7, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 19, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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 19, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Feb 19, 2026D · 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 19, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 19, 2026D · 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 19, 2026D · 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.
Nov 26, 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
Dec 18, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Dec 18, 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.
Dec 18, 2024D · 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.
Dec 18, 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.
May 15, 2024C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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. · from a complaint
Feb 28, 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. · from a complaint
Jan 2, 2024D · 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
Oct 11, 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.
Oct 11, 2023▲ G · Actual 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.
Oct 11, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
Oct 11, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Oct 11, 2023E · 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.
Oct 11, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 11, 2023D · 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.
Aug 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202382G ▲
202470E
202510D
202680F

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 $18,418, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

DateTypeAmount / length
Oct 11, 2023Fine$7,901
Oct 11, 2023Fine$10,517
Oct 11, 2023Payment Denial32 days from Jan 11, 2024

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

MeasureThis facilityVermont avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.674.343.95top 42% in Vermont; top 19% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.820.820.69top 42% in Vermont; top 26% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.813.763.50top 48% in Vermont; top 29% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.600.520.48top 36% in Vermont; top 23% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)77.655.445.8bottom 7% in Vermont; bottom 3% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)54.539.942.9bottom 29% in Vermont; bottom 29% 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 4.06, RN 0.71, weekend 3.31. 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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Francis E Cheney Jr EstateOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest50%02/01/2024
Atwood, DaleIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2024
Atwood, DaleIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2024
Bergeron, TravisIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/25/2025
Bergeron, TravisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/25/2025
Bergeron, TravisIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/23/2025
Cummings, HollyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/28/2025
Cummings, HollyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/28/2025
Fatigati, MariaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/24/2022
Fatigati, MariaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/24/2022
Francis E Cheney Jr EstateOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2024
Rice, WarrenIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/28/2025
Rice, WarrenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/28/2025
Russell, PatriciaIndividual5% or Greater Security InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2000
Russell, PatriciaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2000
Russell, PatriciaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2000
Russell, PatriciaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2000
Russell, PatriciaIndividualGeneral Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/1999
Russell, PatriciaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2000
Wells Fargo Bank, N.a.Organization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/10/2007

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
Greensboro Nursing Home6.8 miGreensboro, VT★★★★☆3/5
Maple Lane Nursing Home8.5 miBarton, VT★★★★★5/5
Pines Rehab & Health Center15.0 miLyndonville, VT★★★★☆4/5
St. Johnsbury Health & Rehab18.2 miSaint Johnsbury, VT★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Bel Aire Center19.2 miNewport, VT★★☆☆☆2/5
The Manor, INC.19.9 miMorrisville, VT★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Glover →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 475036.