Alliance Health at Braintree
Braintree, Massachusetts · CCN 225769
9 surveys since 2016. The first finding at harm level was recorded in 2020.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 29
- Surveys
- 9
- Harm or worse
- 2
- Immediate jeopardy
- 0
Findings where a surveyor recorded actual harm to a resident.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 101
- Ownership
- Non profit - Corporation
- Chain
- ALLIANCE HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
- County
- Norfolk
- Medicare-certified since
- 2005
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 5
- Health inspection
- 5
- Staffing
- 4
- Quality measures
- 4
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=7, floor 20).
Last survey on record
Jul 25, 2024
837 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Staffing
| Measure | This facility | Peer median |
|---|---|---|
| Nurse hours per resident day | 4.25 | 3.94 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 0.74 | — |
| Annual nurse turnover | 33.7% | 35.5% |
As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.
Enforcement
No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.
Severity of recent findings
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J— | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D250.0% | E125.0% | F— |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B125.0% | C— |
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Alliance Health at Braintree, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Jul 25, 2024
Based on observations, record review, and interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for food safety and sanitation to prevent the potential spread of foodborne illness to residents who are at high risk. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1. Maintain the ice machine in a clean and sanitary manner in one out of three kitchenettes; and 2. Ensure staff implemented and followed their policy related to safe and sanitary storage, handling, and consumption of foods items stored in the Resident's personal refrigerator/freezer. Findings include: 1. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF656Jul 25, 2024
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that individualized, comprehensive care plans were developed and consistently implemented for one Resident (#38), out of a total sample of 18 residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a resident specific care plan was developed to address the resident's medical, physical, mental and psychosocial needs following the Resident's recent suicide attempt at the facility. Findings include: Resident #38 was admitted to the facility in June 2024 with diagnoses including non-Alzheimer's dementia and had an activated Health Care Proxy (someone designated by the resident when competent who has the authority to consent for health care decisions when a resident has been declared, by a physician, not to be… […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF552May 9, 2023
Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or their representatives were informed and given necessary information to make health care decisions including the risks and benefits of psychotropic medications prior to their use for one Resident (#69), out of a total sample of 19 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Psychotropic Medication Management, last revised on February 12, 2022, indicated but was not limited to: - Notify resident or responsible party of initiation of psychoactive medications, and with any changes to dose, and document in record. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF684Nov 28, 2022
Based on records reviewed and interviews, for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who required total physical assistance from two staff members to meet his/her toileting needs, the Facility failed to ensure that based on his/her comprehensive assessment that his/her toileting care needs were met as needed. On 09/18/22 at the start of the day (7:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M.) shift, Resident #1 informed nursing that he/she had not received incontinence care at all during the overnight shift. Resident #1 was assessed by nursing and his/her adult brief was noted to be saturated in urine and soiled with feces. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF880Mar 2, 2021
Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that staff implemented proper infection control measures to prevent the potential transmission of communicable disease, including COVID-19, within the facility. Specifically, the staff failed to properly don (put on) and doff (remove) personal protective equipment (PPE) for care of residents on transmission based precautions, perform hand hygiene when indicated, and properly clean shared equipment between residents. Findings include: During an interview on 3/2/2021 at 12:30 P.M., the Infection Preventionist (IP) said that the facility had no specific policy for donning and doffing PPE. […]
Read 20 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 20 of 29 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Jul 25, 2024Standard2 findings
- May 9, 2023Standard2 findings
- Nov 28, 2022Complaint1 finding
- Mar 2, 2021Infection control1 finding
- Feb 3, 2021Infection control1 finding
- Dec 21, 2020Complaint2 findings · 2 harm
- Jan 29, 2020Standard11 findings
- Jan 29, 2019Standard8 findings
Show the 1 earlier survey
- Oct 4, 2016Standard1 finding
Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.
Comparable facilities
The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.
Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction