Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around October 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Lakeview House Skld Nrsg And Residential Care Fac during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Failure to Notify Provider of Worsening Sacral Pressure Wound: A resident with dementia and severe cognitive impairment developed a sacral pressure wound that progressively worsened, but the chart did not show timely notification of the NP or MD when the decline was first identified. Nursing notes documented the wound was larger and later had not improved, while staff interviews showed the LPN notified the next shift nurse instead of calling the provider, and the DON confirmed there was no documentation that the provider was notified.
Failure to Review and Revise Care Plans After MDS Assessments: The facility did not review and revise the care plans for two residents after their MDS assessments. One resident had severe cognitive impairment and total dependence for ADLs, while another had intact cognition and was mostly independent for ADLs. Record review showed no current care plan for either resident, and the MDS Coordinator stated the care plans had not been reviewed after the last assessment.
Failure to implement optometry recommendations for a resident with dry eyes and blurry, watery eyes. The resident, who had cataracts and DM2 and was cognitively intact, reported eye discomfort and had not used eye drops in the past year. The optometrist recommended artificial tears BID and a follow-up IOP check in 3 to 4 months, but the record did not show the recommendations were reviewed or carried out, and the next eye visit was scheduled much later.
A resident with severely impaired cognition and total dependence for all ADLs was admitted to hospice after a physician order allowed hospice evaluation and hospice determined the resident was appropriate for services. The facility did not complete a significant change MDS within the required 14-day timeframe after the change, and the MDS coordinator acknowledged it should have been done when the resident signed on to hospice.
A resident with dementia and hypertension experienced hematuria, which was noted by nursing staff over two shifts. Despite the presence of blood in the urine, the nurses decided to monitor the situation instead of notifying the physician. The incident was not documented in the nursing progress notes, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the nurses should have contacted the physician.
A resident with a history of stroke and bipolar disorder was placed in a geri-chair without proper assessment or documentation, leading to a deficiency in care. The resident expressed a dislike for the chair and a desire to move independently, but the facility's policy on restraints was inadequate, and staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness and communication regarding the resident's needs.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment was not provided with the correct ground diet as ordered by the physician. The resident received meals including whole bananas, uncut toast, and dry cereal without milk, contrary to the prescribed diet. Facility staff confirmed the oversight, acknowledging that the resident's diet should have been adhered to as documented in the facility's records and diet manual.
Failure to Notify Provider of Worsening Sacral Pressure Wound
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician or nurse practitioner of a significant change in status for a resident with dementia and severe cognitive impairment when a sacral pressure wound worsened. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including dementia, had a BIMS score of 6 out of 15, and was identified as high risk for pressure ulcer development. The resident developed a sacral pressure wound, and the record showed the wound increased from 0.4 cm by 0.3 cm to 1.3 cm by 1 cm, then to 1.8 cm by 1.5 cm over the following weeks. Nursing documentation noted that the sacral open area was larger and later had not improved, but the medical record did not show that the nurse practitioner or physician was notified when the decline was first identified. The record also showed no physician or nurse practitioner notes between the time the wound first worsened and several days later, when an air mattress and multivitamin were ordered for wound management. During interviews, the nurse practitioner and physician stated they expected staff to notify them immediately when a wound worsened, and the nurse said she notified the oncoming nurse rather than calling the provider because it was too early at the end of her shift. The DON and ADON stated that worsening wounds should be reported right away and that provider notification would be documented in the medical record; the DON said that because there was no documentation, the facility could not say the provider was notified.
Failure to Review and Revise Care Plans After MDS Assessments
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to review and revise the care plan by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 2 residents in a sample of 14. For Resident #7, who was admitted in February 2023 with diagnoses including frontotemporal neurocognitive disorder, bipolar disorder, and stroke, the quarterly MDS dated [DATE] showed a BIMS score of 7 out of 15, indicating severely impaired cognition, and the resident was totally dependent on staff for all activities of daily living. Review of the electronic and paper medical record did not show a current care plan, and the existing care plan listed a next review date of 2/16/25 and a target date for the next review of 5/17/25. For Resident #21, who was admitted in May 2019 with diagnoses including dementia, heart disease, and anxiety, the comprehensive MDS dated [DATE] showed a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition, and the resident was mostly independent for activities of daily living. Review of the electronic and paper medical record did not show a current care plan, and the existing care plan listed a next review date of 4/19/25. During interviews on 7/29/2025, the MDS Coordinator stated that both residents' care plans should have been updated after the last MDS assessment and said the care plans were updated that day after it was brought to her attention that they had not been reviewed.
Failure to Implement Optometry Recommendations for Dry Eyes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Resident #8 received proper treatment to maintain vision ability by not reviewing and implementing the optometrist’s recommendations for follow-up care and artificial tears. Resident #8 was admitted with bilateral age-related cataracts and type 2 diabetes mellitus, was cognitively intact, and reported that his/her eyes had become watery and vision blurry, with no eye drops used in the past year. The resident had consented to optometry services and stated he/she was waiting to be seen by the eye doctor after telling staff that the eyes had started bothering him/her about a week earlier. The optometrist’s evaluation documented dry eyes, glaucoma suspect, pseudophakia, opacification, hyperopic astigmatism, and presbyopia, and recommended artificial tears one drop to both eyes twice daily indefinitely with follow-up in 3 to 4 months and monitoring of intraocular pressure. The medical record did not show that these recommendations were reviewed, that artificial tears were started, or that the resident had been seen by an optometrist since that evaluation. The resident was scheduled for the next eye appointment about 10 months after the last optometry visit. The optometrist stated untreated dry eyes can cause blurry vision and watery eyes and that he expected the artificial tears to be implemented and the resident to be seen again within 3 to 4 months.
Failure to Complete Significant Change MDS After Hospice Admission
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a significant change MDS assessment for one resident when the resident signed on to hospice. Resident #7 was admitted in February 2023 with diagnoses including frontotemporal neurocognitive disorder, bipolar disorder, and stroke. The most recent MDS indicated a BIMS score of 7 out of 15, showing severely impaired cognition, and the resident was totally dependent on staff for all ADLs. A physician order dated 6/9/25 allowed the resident to be seen by hospice and admitted if appropriate, and a progress note dated 6/11/25 documented that hospice met with the resident, found the resident appropriate for hospice services, and admitted the resident to hospice. Review of the medical record did not show that a significant change MDS was completed within the required 14-day timeframe after the significant change. During interview, the MDS coordinator stated that the resident should have had a significant change MDS completed when the resident signed on to hospice.
Failure to Notify Physician of Resident's Change in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician of a change in condition for a resident who was admitted with diagnoses including dementia and hypertension. The resident, who was severely cognitively impaired, was on medications including Eliquis and Aspirin. On a specific date, the resident exhibited hematuria, which was noted by the nursing staff during two consecutive shifts. However, the nurses on duty decided to monitor the situation instead of contacting the physician, despite the presence of blood in the resident's urine. The nursing progress notes lacked documentation for the day the hematuria was observed, and the communication log only recorded the presence of blood in the resident's incontinence brief. Interviews with the nurses involved revealed that they were aware of the hematuria but chose not to notify the physician, assuming it was a common symptom of a urinary tract infection. The Director of Nursing later confirmed that the nurses should have documented the incident and contacted the physician immediately.
Failure to Assess Geri-Chair Use as Restraint
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly identify and assess the use of a geri-chair as a restraint for a resident, leading to a deficiency in care. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including stroke, aphasia, and bipolar disorder, was observed multiple times in a geri-chair in a reclined position, which restricted their ability to move independently. Despite the resident expressing a dislike for the geri-chair and a desire to use their own feet, the facility did not have a proper assessment or care plan in place for the use of the geri-chair as a restraint. The facility's policy on the use of restraints was inadequate, lacking details on the frequency of assessment, the need for consent, and a physician's order for restraints. The resident's care plans and nursing summaries did not document the use of the geri-chair, and there was no evidence of an assessment for its use. The resident's behavioral care plan noted poor safety awareness and frequent attempts to ambulate without assistance, but it did not address the use of the geri-chair. Interviews with staff revealed that the resident was placed in the geri-chair to prevent falls, as they were considered a fall risk. However, the resident continued to attempt to get out of the chair, indicating that the geri-chair was being used as a restraint without proper documentation or assessment. The Director of Nursing and other staff members were unaware of the resident's dislike for the geri-chair and believed an assessment had been completed, highlighting a lack of communication and oversight in the resident's care.
Failure to Provide Correct Diet Texture
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a resident with the correct diet texture as ordered by the physician. Resident #10, who has moderate cognitive impairment and is independent with eating, was observed receiving meals that did not comply with the prescribed ground diet. On two separate occasions, the resident was given a breakfast tray that included items not suitable for a ground diet, such as a whole banana, uncut toast, and dry cereal without milk. These observations were made despite the resident's diet being clearly documented as a ground diet in various records, including the physician's orders, nutrition care plan, and facility diet manual. Interviews with facility staff, including the Registered Dietitian, Food Service Director, and nursing staff, confirmed that the resident should not have received toast and should have had the banana cut up and the cereal mixed with milk. The staff acknowledged the oversight and confirmed that the resident's meal tickets, which are written by the RD, clearly indicated a ground diet. The facility's diet manual also specified that residents on a ground diet should avoid dry bread and dry cereal unless softened in milk, and fruits like bananas should be well mashed.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 828 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Haverhill
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aspen Hill Rehabiliation & Healthcare Center | 1.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
| Oxford Rehabilitation & Health Care Center | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 21 | 0 |
| Baker-katz Skilled Nursing And Rehabilitation Ctr | 1.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Penacook Place, Inc | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Haverhill Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center | 3 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Lakeview House Skld Nrsg And Residential Care Fac.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.