MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not outstanding. It ranks #105 out of 338 facilities in Massachusetts, placing it in the top half, and #9 out of 25 in Hampden County, suggesting there are only a few better local options. The facility is experiencing a worsening trend, with issues increasing from 4 in 2024 to 7 in 2025. Staffing is a concern, with a turnover rate of 53%, which is higher than the state average, and they have an average RN coverage. There have been some serious incidents, such as a resident being discharged without proper notice, causing emotional distress, and failures in ensuring staff competencies for critical care like hemodialysis, which could impact resident safety. Additionally, there were concerns about timely medication administration for residents, highlighting areas where the facility needs to improve despite some strengths in overall quality and health inspection ratings.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Massachusetts
- #105/338
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 53% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $8,278 in fines. Higher than 72% of Massachusetts facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 48 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Massachusetts. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Massachusetts avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 17 deficiencies on record
Apr 2025
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
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), whose physician's orders included the administration of multiple medications to help manage his/her specific ...
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 F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), whose physician's orders included the a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
5 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and records reviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate notice of discharge for a facility-initiate...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide a written Notice of Intent to Transfer and Discharge to th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0742
(Tag F0742)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure recommendations made by the Behavioral Health Care Team were implemented for one Resident (#53), out of a total sample of 18 reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain appropriate hygiene practices while serving meals in the dining room, on one (3rd Floor Unit) out of three Units obs...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to accurately complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments for two Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments were accurately code...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record and policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide care and services for a suprapubic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide necessary respiratory care and services in ac...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain accurate medical records for one Resident (#26) out of a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2022
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that its staff completed the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessme...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its staff developed and implemented a compr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that its staff adhered to food safety requirements to prevent foodborne illness. Specifically, the facility failed to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff practiced proper infection control standards relative to isolation precautions and urinary catheter care for one Resident (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility's staff failed to assess if one Resident (#28) out of five sampled residents needed a Pneumococcal (pneumonia) vaccination as required.
Review of th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its staff providing direct care and services to residents were assessed for the required competencies. Specifical...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "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.
- • 17 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Massachusetts, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center Staffed?
CMS rates MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 53%, compared to the Massachusetts average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center?
State health inspectors documented 17 deficiencies at MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm, 15 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center?
MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 84 certified beds and approximately 78 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in HOLYOKE, Massachusetts.
How Does Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center Compare to Other Massachusetts Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Massachusetts, MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (53%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Massachusetts. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center Stick Around?
MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 53%, which is 7 percentage points above the Massachusetts 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 Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center Ever Fined?
MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER has been fined $8,278 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Massachusetts average of $33,162. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Mont Marie Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center on Any Federal Watch List?
MONT MARIE REHABILITATION & HEALTHCARE CENTER 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.