Sudbury Pines Extended Care
Sudbury, Massachusetts · CCN 225531
19 surveys since 2011, 6 of them producing a finding at harm level or worse.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 100
- Surveys
- 19
- Harm or worse
- 6
- 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
- 92
- Ownership
- For profit - Corporation
- Chain
- Independent
- County
- Middlesex
- Medicare-certified since
- 1991
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 2
- Health inspection
- 2
- Staffing
- 4
- Quality measures
- 2
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Since 2021, this facility recorded somewhat fewer weighted findings than its peer group.
Weighted by harm level, against 49 for-profit facilities of 66–99 beds in Massachusetts.
Last survey on record
Apr 22, 2026
201 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 | 3.97 | 3.58 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 0.48 | — |
| Annual nurse turnover | 34.9% | 39.0% |
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 | D2762.8% | E1227.9% | F12.3% |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B24.7% | C12.3% |
Most frequently cited here
In CMS’s current monthly file.
- F5503×
Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
- F6413×
Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
- F5802×
Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
- F6842×
Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
- F6952×
Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Sudbury Pines Extended Care, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF838Mar 6, 2025
Based on documentation review and staff interview, the Facility staff failed to comprehensively assess the facility resources needed to provide sufficient support and care for the resident population as outlined in the Facility Assessment. Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment, dated 1/9/25, indicated the following: - Religious, ethnic, or cultural factors that affect the delivery of care and services, such as: Facility Answer: -Food and Nutrition requirements: many modified diets for dysphagia, puree or moist ground with thickened liquids. -Activities: no significant factors identified. -Language translation requirements: One resident speaks Creole understands simple English and this resident has expressive aphasia in both English and primary language. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Apr 22, 2026
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to adhere to professional standards of practice for food safety and sanitation to prevent contamination and the spread of foodborne illness to residents.Specifically, the facility failed to discard spoiled food and food that was past the use by date, failed to label and date prepared food and opened food packaging, and also failed to ensure dietary staff were wearing hair restraints in the main kitchen while preparing food.the facility failed to discard food that was past the use by date and failed to maintain the Station 2 nourishment kitchenette in a clean and sanitary manner. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF550Mar 6, 2025
Based on interviews, observations, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff treated residents in a dignified manner. Specifically, 1. On the Station 1 and Station 2 Units, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience. 2. For Resident #60, the facility failed to ensure staff consistently covered his/her catheter drainage bag. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Dignity, dated August 2009, indicated Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect and individuality. Residents shall be treated with dignity and respect at all times. Treated with dignity means the resident will be assisted in maintaining and enhancing his or her self-esteem and self-worth. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF584Mar 6, 2025
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide a homelike environment during dining on two of two nursing units. Specifically, on the Station 1 and Station 2 Units, residents were observed eating meals on meal trays in the dining rooms. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Homelike Environment, dated 3/5/25, indicated To create a more homelike safe environment that offers our residents greater dignity and autonomy, ensuring resident's preferences, needs and values guide decisions and care. On 3/4/25 at 8:09 A.M., the surveyor observed Station 2's dining room, all residents were served their meals on meal trays and staff did not remove the meal trays. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF604Mar 6, 2025
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess the use of an alarmed velcro seat belt as a potential restraint for one Resident (#18) out of a total sample of 26 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Use of Restraints, dated April 2017, indicated 1. Physical Restraints are defined as any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot remove easily, which restricts freedom of movement or restricts normal access to one's body. 2. The definition of a restraint is based on the functional status of the resident and not the device. […]
Read 26 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 26 of 100 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Apr 22, 2026Standard5 findings
- Jun 10, 2025Complaint1 finding
- Mar 6, 2025Standard23 findings
- Mar 15, 2024Standard3 findings
- Sep 13, 2022Standard11 findings
- Jul 12, 2022Infection control1 finding
- Sep 29, 2021Infection control1 finding
- Jun 15, 2020Infection control1 finding
Show the 11 earlier surveys
- Jan 24, 2020Standard6 findings
- Mar 7, 2019Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
- Jan 15, 2019Standard13 findings
- Sep 29, 2017Standard5 findings
- Oct 21, 2016Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
- Jul 6, 2016Standard7 findings
- Mar 13, 2015Standard13 findings
- Feb 27, 2014Complaint2 findings · 2 harm
- Jan 9, 2014—1 finding
- Nov 8, 2012—2 findings
- Mar 22, 2011—3 findings · 2 harm
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