Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around March 2027
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 Grafton County Nursing Home during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to include personal humidifiers in its Water Management Plan. The Legionella Water Management Program and staff education materials identified humidifiers as a possible source for Legionella exposure, but observations on multiple units found humidifiers in resident rooms and the Water Management Program did not list them or include controls to prevent growth of Legionella and other opportunistic waterborne pathogens. The IP confirmed humidifiers were in use but not included in the plan.
The facility failed to report abuse allegations to the state survey agency. One incident involved two residents with severe cognitive impairment, where an LPN observed one resident exposed while another attempted sexual contact. Another incident involved an LNA witnessing a resident aggressively shake and push another resident’s wheelchair while yelling. Staff confirmed both incidents were not reported to the SSA or law enforcement.
Failure to investigate and report abuse allegations: Staff observed one resident attempting sexual contact with another resident, both with severe cognitive impairment, and another resident aggressively shaking a peer’s wheelchair while yelling. The DON confirmed that neither incident had been investigated, despite staff notification to leadership.
Failure to provide appropriate care to maintain mobility was identified for a resident dependent on an AFO before getting OOB. The resident reported the foot rolled out of the AFO and it caused pain, while the record showed an OT consult order for repair of a broken strap with no evidence the consult was completed or that anyone contacted the AFO provider. The AFO was observed on the bed with the ankle strap missing.
Expired eye drops were found on 2 medication carts, including Timolol for one resident and Latanoprost for another, with staff confirming one should have been discarded. In addition, a medication cart was observed unlocked and unattended, despite facility policy requiring carts to be locked when not in use.
Humidifier equipment was not maintained and cleaned as required for three residents. Staff did not have a reliable tracking system for resident-owned humidifiers, and the DON confirmed the facility was not following manufacturer-specific cleaning instructions. One resident’s humidifier was observed plugged in with an empty tank, another resident did not know how often the unit was cleaned, and staff reported using vinegar for all units instead of the required cleaning methods.
The facility did not routinely offer nourishing bedtime snacks, resulting in over 14 hours between supper and breakfast for residents across four units. Staff confirmed that snacks were only provided upon request, which was problematic for residents with memory issues. This practice was inconsistent with the facility's policy and lacked Resident Council consent.
A facility failed to assess whether a device was a restraint for a resident with moderate cognitive impairment. The resident was observed with a lap tray attached to their wheelchair on two occasions without a pre-restraining assessment, as required by the facility's policy. The policy defines physical restraints as devices that restrict normal access to one's body and cannot be easily removed by the resident.
The facility failed to provide appropriate adaptive equipment for two residents, impacting their ability to perform ADLs. One resident was observed eating from a styrofoam container without the lip plate specified in their care plan, while another resident did not receive the lip plate and weighted utensils outlined in their care plan. This deficiency highlights a failure to adhere to the facility's policy on providing necessary adaptive devices.
A facility failed to provide trauma-informed care for a resident with a history of sexual abuse, resulting in a deficiency. The resident expressed discomfort with male caregivers, but their care plan was not updated promptly to reflect this preference. Interviews revealed that the facility lacked a structured assessment process for identifying past trauma in residents upon admission.
The facility failed to provide necessary dental care for two residents. One resident had ill-fitting dentures causing discomfort and had not seen a dentist since November, while another had urgent dental issues identified in September but had not received follow-up care. Both residents were cognitively intact and had informed staff of their dental needs.
The facility failed to properly document a resident's death and did not verify weight discrepancies for another resident. A resident's death was not documented with the required details, such as the name and title of the pronouncing RN, as per facility policy. Additionally, another resident's weight records showed significant fluctuations without reweighing to verify accuracy, contrary to the facility's policy.
The facility failed to ensure accurate MDS assessments for two residents' dental status. One resident's MDS incorrectly indicated no dentures, while another's failed to report significant dental issues, despite documentation and staff confirmation.
The facility did not conduct annual reviews of its infection prevention and control program policies, potentially affecting 118 residents. The Administrator and Infection Preventionist confirmed the absence of a process for annual policy reviews, with updates occurring only as needed.
Water Management Plan Did Not Include Humidifiers
Penalty
Summary
Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program was deficient because the facility failed to identify personal humidifiers in its Water Management Plan. Review of the facility's Legionella Water Management Program showed that the program was intended to identify areas in the water system where Legionella bacteria can grow and spread and specifically listed humidifiers among the water system components that could encourage the growth and spread of Legionella or other waterborne bacteria. Staff education materials also identified humidifiers as a possible pathway for exposure to Legionella bacteria. However, observations on the Granite, Profile, and Maple Units found humidifiers in use in resident rooms, and review of the Water Management Program showed that it did not identify humidifiers in use in the facility or controls to prevent the growth of Legionella and other opportunistic waterborne pathogens. The Infection Preventionist confirmed that humidifiers were in use in the building but were not included in the Water Management Plan.
Failure to Report Abuse Allegations to State Agency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report allegations of abuse to the state survey agency for two incidents involving residents with severe cognitive impairment. In one event, a nursing note documented that a LPN entered a resident’s room and observed one resident lying back in a recliner with briefs pulled off and pajama pants pulled above the pelvis while another resident was kneeling in front of the recliner attempting to have sex with the resident. The LPN separated the residents, notified the DON and administrator, and placed the resident on 1:1 safety checks. The record showed both residents had BIMS scores indicating severe cognitive impairment, and staff confirmed the incident was not reported to the State Agency. In another event, a nursing note documented that an LNA witnessed one resident coming out of a room and grabbing the back of another resident’s wheelchair and shaking it aggressively. The LNA later confirmed witnessing the resident shake and push the wheelchair while yelling at the other resident. The administrator confirmed this incident was also not reported to the State Survey Agency or other law enforcement. The facility policy required immediate reporting of abuse allegations to the state licensing/certification agency and other officials according to state law.
Failure to Investigate and Report Abuse Allegations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that two allegations of abuse were investigated and reported to the State Agency. One incident involved Resident #82 and Resident #11, both of whom had severe cognitive impairment, with BIMS scores of 02 and 00 respectively. A nursing note documented that a LPN entered Resident #82’s room and observed Resident #11 lying back in a recliner with clothing pulled off and Resident #82 kneeling in front of the recliner attempting to have sex with Resident #11. The LPN separated the residents, notified the DON and Administrator, and placed Resident #82 on 1:1 checks, but the DON later confirmed that no investigation was initiated. A second incident involved Resident #29 and Resident #55. A nursing note stated that an LNA witnessed Resident #29 coming out of a peer’s room and grabbing the back of the peer’s wheelchair and shaking it aggressively. The LNA later confirmed that Resident #29 shook and pushed forward Resident #55’s wheelchair while yelling at them. The DON confirmed that this incident had not been investigated.
Failure to Address Broken AFO for Resident With Limited Mobility
Penalty
Summary
Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve ROM, limited ROM, and/or mobility was not ensured for a resident with limited mobility. Resident #4’s care plan, initiated on 7/9/25, included an intervention stating the resident was dependent on application of an AFO prior to out of bed to the right lower leg. The medical record showed a physician order dated 3/2/26 for an OT consult to have the resident’s right AFO sent for repair because the strap was broken, but there was no indication that an OT consult had been completed or that anyone had been contacted about the AFO needing repair. During interview, the resident stated they had told their provider that their foot rolls out of the AFO and it causes pain when worn, and that no one had come to see them or talk with them about the AFO since they spoke to their provider a few weeks earlier. Observation of the resident’s room showed the AFO lying on the bed with the ankle strap missing.
Medication carts left unsecured and expired eye drops kept in use
Penalty
Summary
Medications and biologicals were not properly labeled and stored on multiple medication carts. On the Maple Unit short hall cart, a bottle of Timolol Maleate solution for Resident #55 was observed with handwritten opening and expiration dates showing it had been opened on 2/27 and expired on 3/27, while the manufacturer’s instructions provided by the facility stated the unit dose container should be used within one month after the foil package is opened. Staff A, a LMA, confirmed the finding during the observation. On the Meadow Unit long hall cart, a bottle of Latanoprost Solution 0.005% for Resident #23 was observed with handwritten dates showing it had been opened on 2/9/26 and expired on 3/23/26, and Staff B, an RN, confirmed the medication had been administered and should have been discarded. In addition, the Profile Unit medication cart was observed unlocked with no nursing staff present, and Staff D, an RN, confirmed the cart was unattended and unsecured. Facility policy stated medication carts are to be locked when not in use and opened multi-dose vials are to be dated and discarded within 28 days unless the manufacturer specifies otherwise.
Humidifiers Not Maintained or Cleaned per Policy and Manufacturer Instructions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain safe and clean humidifier equipment for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for environment, identified as residents #41, #63, and #100. The facility’s admission procedures and Resident Information Guide stated that if a humidifier is brought in, nursing staff must be aware of it so it can be placed on the cleaning schedule. However, interview with staff revealed that the Unit Aide Book did not contain information about which residents had humidifiers or any tracking of cleaning dates, and the Director of Nursing confirmed this. The facility’s Humidifier Maintenance policy stated that nursing staff were to unplug the device daily and rinse/refill it with fresh tap water, while housekeeping was to clean humidifiers monthly with a 1:2 acetic acid and water solution. Resident #41 had a Pelonis humidifier plugged into the room, and the resident’s family stated they purchased it and staff were aware of it; later observation showed the humidifier plugged in with an empty water tank. Resident #63 had a Breezome humidifier in the room, and the resident did not know how often it was cleaned. Resident #100 had a Vick’s humidifier in the room, and the manufacturer’s instructions required weekly cleaning with vinegar for scale removal and a bleach solution for disinfecting. Staff stated that all humidifiers were cleaned with vinegar, and the DON confirmed the facility was not following the specific manufacturer instructions for cleaning individual humidifiers.
Failure to Offer Routine Bedtime Snacks
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to offer nourishing snacks at bedtime, resulting in more than 14 hours between the evening meal and breakfast for residents across four units. The scheduled meal times were from 5:00 p.m. for supper to 8:00 a.m. for breakfast, with snacks supposedly offered at bedtime around 7:00 p.m. However, interviews with residents and staff revealed that snacks were not routinely offered to all residents, but only provided upon request. This practice was inconsistent with the facility's policy and did not have the consent of the Resident Council. Interviews with staff across the Meadow, Granite, Maple, and Profile Units confirmed that snacks were not routinely offered to residents. Staff members indicated that snacks were available only if residents asked for them, which posed a problem for residents with memory issues who might not be able to request snacks. The lack of routine snack offerings was a consistent issue across all units reviewed, affecting the residents' nutritional needs and preferences.
Failure to Assess Restraint Use for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to determine if a device was a restraint for a resident who was reviewed for restraints. The resident, identified as having moderate cognitive impairment with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, was observed sitting in a wheelchair with a lap tray attached on two separate occasions. The resident was alone in their room with the lap tray attached to the wheelchair before breakfast was served. A review of the resident's medical record revealed that there was no pre-restraining assessment conducted. The facility's policy on the use of restraints, revised in April 2017, defines physical restraints as any device that the resident cannot remove easily and restricts normal access to one's body, including lap trays. The policy also requires a pre-restraining assessment before placing a resident in restraints, which was not completed in this case.
Failure to Provide Adaptive Equipment for ADLs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate adaptive equipment to maintain the ability of residents to carry out Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). For Resident #5, observations revealed that the resident was eating alone in their room from a styrofoam container, despite their care plan indicating the use of a lip plate per the resident's request. An interview with a Licensed Nursing Assistant confirmed that the resident did not have the lip plate as specified in their care plan. Similarly, Resident #58 was observed eating meals from a styrofoam container, although their care plan included interventions for using a lip plate and weighted utensils to maximize independence with eating. The facility's policy on Assistance with Meals, revised in March 2022, states that adaptive devices should be provided for residents who need or request them, including items like plate guards and specialized utensils. The failure to provide these adaptive devices as per the care plans of the residents constitutes a deficiency in maintaining their ability to perform ADLs.
Failure to Provide Trauma-Informed Care for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to identify and address the trauma-related preferences of a resident, leading to a deficiency in providing trauma-informed care. Resident #38, who had a history of sexual abuse and expressed discomfort with male caregivers, did not have appropriate interventions documented in their care plan until two days after the issue was raised. The resident had disclosed to a Licensed Nursing Assistant that they felt uncomfortable with male caregivers due to past trauma, and this was noted in the progress notes. However, the care plan was not updated to reflect this preference until later, indicating a delay in addressing the resident's needs. Interviews with facility staff revealed gaps in the assessment process for identifying past trauma in residents upon admission. The Administrator confirmed that there was no specific assessment in place to determine if trauma had occurred with residents. Additionally, the Social Service Director mentioned that they do not ask specific questions about past trauma during initial meetings with residents, preferring to develop a relationship first. This lack of a structured approach to identifying trauma-related needs contributed to the oversight in updating the care plan for Resident #38 in a timely manner.
Failure to Provide Routine Dental Care for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that two residents received necessary dental care, leading to a deficiency in providing or obtaining dental services. Resident #25, who is cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15, reported that their dentures were ill-fitting and painful, which prevented them from wearing them. Despite informing the staff, the resident had not been seen by a dentist since the dentures were realigned in November, and there was no documentation of any dental follow-up. Resident #63, also cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 13, had not seen a dentist since a dental hygienist cleaned their teeth in September 2024. The resident's dental notes from September indicated visible decay, a lost filling, recurrent caries, and a missing crown with extensive decay, with urgent recommendations for a dental evaluation. However, the resident had not received any follow-up dental care, as confirmed by the Director of Nursing.
Deficiencies in Death Pronouncement and Weight Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to standards of practice regarding the documentation of a resident's death. In the case of Resident #120, the medical record indicated that the resident passed away at 2:58 a.m. and was pronounced dead by a Registered Nurse at 3:05 a.m. However, the documentation did not include the name and title of the individual who pronounced the death, as required by the facility's policy titled 'Death of a Resident - Implementation and Documentation.' This omission was confirmed during an interview with the Director of Nursing, who stated that the Registered Nurse responsible for pronouncing the death should have documented this information in the resident's record. Additionally, the facility did not follow its policy for verifying weight discrepancies for Resident #42. The resident's weight was recorded as 156.3 pounds on one date and then as 194.7 pounds a week later, with subsequent weights showing significant fluctuations. Despite the facility's policy requiring reweighing for any weight change of 5% or more, there was no documentation of reweighing to verify the accuracy of these weights. An interview with an LPN confirmed that no reweights were documented for the dates in question, which was a deviation from the facility's policy titled 'Weigh Assessment and Intervention.'
Inaccurate MDS Assessments for Dental Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately reflected the dental status of two residents. For one resident, the Annual MDS indicated that no dentures were present, despite confirmation from a registered nurse that the resident did wear dentures at the time of the assessment. For another resident, the MDS inaccurately reported no dental issues, although dental notes documented a lost filling, a cavity, and a missing crown with extensive decay. These discrepancies were confirmed through interviews with facility staff, including a registered nurse and the MDS Coordinator.
Failure to Conduct Annual Review of Infection Control Policies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to conduct annual reviews of its infection prevention and control program policies and procedures, which could potentially affect the facility's census of 118 residents. During a review of the facility's infection prevention and control program policies on January 31, 2025, it was found that not all policies had been reviewed annually. An interview with the Administrator revealed that the facility did not have a process for reviewing policies annually, and updates were only made when deemed necessary. Additionally, the Infection Preventionist confirmed that the facility did not conduct an annual review of its infection prevention and control policies.
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 47 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 3 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 North Haverhill
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glencliff Home For The Elderly | 11.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Lafayette Center | 16.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| St. Johnsbury Health & Rehab | 22.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 11 | 0 |
| Woodridge Nursing Home | 22.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 16 | 0 |
| Barre Gardens Nursing And Rehab, Llc | 24.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 3 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Grafton County Nursing Home.
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.