SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Southridge Rehab & Living Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's quality of care. It ranks #76 out of 77 nursing homes in Maine, placing it in the bottom half of the state, and #9 out of 9 in York County, meaning there are no local options that rank lower. The facility's trend is stable, with the same number of issues reported in 2024 and 2025. Staffing is a strength here, with a rating of 5 out of 5 stars, although the turnover rate is around 51%, which is average for the state. However, the facility has faced serious concerns, including a critical failure to prevent the spread of gastroenteritis among residents and a lack of supervision leading to a resident being found outside in hazardous conditions. Additionally, the facility has incurred $129,763 in fines, which is higher than any other facility in Maine, indicating ongoing compliance issues that families should consider carefully.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Maine
- #76/77
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 51% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $129,763 in fines. Higher than 73% of Maine facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 69 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Maine nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 32 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Maine average (3.0)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near Maine avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 32 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
1 deficiency
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, review of the facility's transport policy and interviews, a facility Transportation Aid failed ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of the complaint report, facility internal investigation, clinical record review, facility General Dose Preparation and Medication Administration Policy and Procedure, and interviews, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
4 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, observations and record reviews, the facility failed to provide supervision to a resident after staff found...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to notify the physician when interventions were ineffective in relieving resident's distress. In addition, the facility failed to notify the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to follow the baseline care plan implemented for Resident #1 in the area of Behaviors for 5 of 5 days that resident was in the facility.
Fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to monitor targeted behaviors to support the use of antipsychotic and antianxiety medications for 1 resident reviewed for unnecessary medicat...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide a call bell to obtain assistance while on the bedside commode for 1 of 3 residents assessed to be a high risk for falls (Resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to adequately maintain maintenance services necessary to maintain in g...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to follow the facility Falls Management Policy for 8 of 8 residents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations and interview, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner for 2 of 2 initial kitchen observations completed on 6/24/24 and 6/25/24. A...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to perform adequate screening and documentation for Pneumococcal and...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0887
(Tag F0887)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to perform adequate screening and documentation for coronavirus (Cov...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
1 deficiency
MINOR
(B)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable environment on 1 of 2 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
12 deficiencies
1 IJ (1 facility-wide)
CRITICAL
(L)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident's exhibiting symptoms of gastroenteri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to include a resident in the development of his/her comprehensive pla...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to show evidence of an attempt of a gradual dose reduction (GDR) and lacked documentation to justify the continued use of antipsychotic medica...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to adequately provide housekeeping and maintenance services necessary ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #35, and #13).
Findings:
1. On 3/9/23, Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure expired medications were removed from the supply available for use in 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed and failed to ensure that med...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility's sink/bucket sanitizer form/policy and procedure and review of the food storage policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensure the k...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to maintain garbage storage areas in a sanitary condition to prevent the harborage and feeding of pests for 2 of 3 dumpsters for 3 of 5 days of...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0838
(Tag F0838)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to review and update the Facility Assessment at least annually (between 2017 -2022).
Finding:
On 3/6/23 at 9:40 a.m. during the entrance co...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews and document reviews the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee lacked documented attendance of the Administrator and the Medical Director. In additi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to implement their Antibiotic Stewardship Program (ASP) related to tracking of infections. This has the potential to affect al...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0885
(Tag F0885)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, interviews, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) Corona Virus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19) Long-Term Care (LTC) Facility guidelines, the facility failed to notif...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to identify, assess, and ensure timely treatment for the cause of a resident's decline related to dental status for 1 of 3 sampled residents. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0772
(Tag F0772)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure it has a process to obtain timely laboratory services to meet the needs of the residents. This has the potential to affect all 49 re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2021
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0865
(Tag F0865)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, review of the plan of correction, and interview, the facility's quality assurance committee failed to ens...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain adequate housekeeping and maintenance services to maintain...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to implement appropriate infection prevention and control practices including hand hygiene and mask wearing during 1 of 2 medication administr...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) Form 10055, which included appeal rights and liability of paym...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the confidentiality of protected health information for 2 of 58 residents during 2 of 4 days of survey (Residents #37 and #39).
Fin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $129,763 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 32 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $129,763 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Maine. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Maine, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr Staffed?
CMS rates SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 51%, compared to the Maine average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr?
State health inspectors documented 32 deficiencies at SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR during 2021 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, 26 with potential for harm, and 3 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr?
SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by NORTH COUNTRY ASSOCIATES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 78 certified beds and approximately 49 residents (about 63% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in BIDDEFORD, Maine.
How Does Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr Compare to Other Maine Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Maine, SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (51%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Maine. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr Stick Around?
SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR has a staff turnover rate of 51%, which is 5 percentage points above the Maine average of 46%. Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr Ever Fined?
SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR has been fined $129,763 across 2 penalty actions. This is 3.8x the Maine average of $34,376. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.
Is Southridge Rehab & Living Ctr on Any Federal Watch List?
SOUTHRIDGE REHAB & LIVING CTR is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.