BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Center in Natick has a Trust Grade of C+, which means it is slightly above average but not exceptional. It ranks #70 out of 338 facilities in Massachusetts, placing it in the top half, and #17 out of 72 in Middlesex County, indicating that only a few local options are better. The facility is improving, with the number of reported issues decreasing from three in 2024 to two in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength with a turnover rate of 32%, which is better than the state average, although RN coverage is concerning, as it is lower than 96% of facilities in Massachusetts. The facility faced a fine of $20,267, which is average, but there have been serious incidents, including a resident who suffered a fracture due to not receiving the required assistance during care, highlighting important concerns about adherence to care plans.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Massachusetts
- #70/338
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 32% turnover. Near Massachusetts's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $20,267 in fines. Higher than 90% of Massachusetts facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 18 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Massachusetts. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 14 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (32%)
16 points below Massachusetts average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
13pts below Massachusetts avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
The Ugly 14 deficiencies on record
Jan 2025
2 deficiencies
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to accurately complete two Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments for one Resident (#39) out of a total sample of 12 residents.
Specifically, the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
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 post the required nurse staffing information daily as required.
Sp...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on records reviewed and interviews for two of three sampled residents (Resident #1 and Resident #3), the Facility failed to ensure they maintained a complete and accurate medical record includin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2024
2 deficiencies
2 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
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was assessed and care planned to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 records reviewed and interviews for one of three sampled residents (Resident #1), who was assessed to be totally depend...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of the facility's Nurse Staff Schedule and interviews, the facility failed to provide evidence that the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) were used for at least eight consecutive hou...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to post nursing staff data daily, at the start of each shift, relative to licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
3 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff accurately coded Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments, regarding immunizations, for two Residents (#8 and #5) out of eight s...
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, policy review, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff implemented appropriate infection control measures to help prevent transmission of communicab...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure its staff administered the influenza vaccine after obtaining consent for one Resident (#7) and failed to offer the influenza vaccine...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2022
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure staff provided wound care as ordered for one Resident (#35) out of three closed record sampled residents.
Findings include:
Resident...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that staff maintained proper infection control ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. For Resident #6 the facility failed to ensure staff obtained consent or provided education regarding the benefits or side eff...
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 observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that staff maintained safe food storage and clean equipment, in accordance with professional standards for food service safety to help...
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
- • 32% turnover. Below Massachusetts's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 14 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $20,267 in fines. Higher than 94% of Massachusetts facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
About This Facility
What is Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK 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 Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick Staffed?
CMS rates BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 32%, compared to the Massachusetts average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 71%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick?
State health inspectors documented 14 deficiencies at BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK during 2022 to 2025. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm, 10 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick?
BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 53 certified beds and approximately 48 residents (about 91% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in NATICK, Massachusetts.
How Does Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick Compare to Other Massachusetts Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Massachusetts, BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (32%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick?
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 Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK 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 Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick Stick Around?
BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK has a staff turnover rate of 32%, which is about average for Massachusetts nursing homes (state average: 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 Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick Ever Fined?
BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK has been fined $20,267 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Massachusetts average of $33,282. 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 Beaumont Rehab & Skilled Nursing Ctr - Natick on Any Federal Watch List?
BEAUMONT REHAB & SKILLED NURSING CTR - NATICK 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.