GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Golden View Health Care Center in Meredith, New Hampshire, has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not without its concerns. It ranks #36 out of 73 facilities in the state, placing it in the top half, and #3 out of 4 in Belknap County, meaning only one local option is rated higher. The facility is improving, with the number of issues decreasing from 7 in 2023 to 6 in 2024. Staffing is a key strength here, with a perfect 5-star rating and a turnover rate of 49%, which is slightly below the state average, suggesting staff are stable and familiar with residents. However, there have been some troubling incidents, including failures to maintain proper food safety protocols and not notifying physicians about medications that were not administered to three residents, which could pose potential risks to their health. Overall, while there are notable strengths, families should weigh these against the documented concerns.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In New Hampshire
- #36/73
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 49% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most New Hampshire facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 62 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of New Hampshire nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 15 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
Near New Hampshire average (3.0)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near New Hampshire avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record
Nov 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0554
(Tag F0554)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to follow procedures in place for self-administration of medications for 2 residents out of 4 residents r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that licensed staff had infection control competencies in skills and techniques necessary to care for residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate less than 5 percent for 3 of 29 medications observed during medication ...
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, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure sanitization of dishware and failed to label and store food in accordance with professional sta...
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
Resident # 12
Observation on 11/4/24 at 10:40 a.m. of Resident #12's room revealed that an indwelling catheter bag hanging from Resident #12's wheelchair. There was no sign indicating that Resident #1...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Resident #3
Review on 11/5/24 of Resident #3's Significant Change in Status MDS with an ARD of 10/24/24 revealed under section N0415 Medications: High-Risk Drug Classes: Use and Indication E. Anticoag...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0552
(Tag F0552)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, record review, policy review, and manufacturer's instructions, it was determined that the facility failed to inform the resident or resident's representative of the risks and benef...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0661
(Tag F0661)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a discharge summary that contains all the necessary elements for 1 out of 1 residents reviewed for discharg...
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, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a stop date for an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary med...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0773
(Tag F0773)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to promptly notify the ordering practitioner of abnormal laboratory (lab) results according to the facility's policies ...
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 and interview, the facility failed to use facial hair restraints when serving food from the steam table for 2 of 3 units observed for meal service (Units Observed: The Pines Unit ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the physician of medications not administered to the resident for 3 residents in a final sample ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to send a copy of a written notice of transfer/...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents' formulated advance di...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure professional standards for catheters for 2 out of 3 residents reviewed for catheter / urinary tr...
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
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most New Hampshire facilities.
- • 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Golden View Health's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within New Hampshire, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Golden View Health Staffed?
CMS rates GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 49%, compared to the New Hampshire average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Golden View Health?
State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER during 2022 to 2024. These included: 13 with potential for harm and 2 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Golden View Health?
GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 131 certified beds and approximately 70 residents (about 53% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in MEREDITH, New Hampshire.
How Does Golden View Health Compare to Other New Hampshire Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New Hampshire, GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (49%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Golden View Health?
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 Golden View Health Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE 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 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in New Hampshire. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Golden View Health Stick Around?
GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 49%, which is about average for New Hampshire 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 Golden View Health Ever Fined?
GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE CENTER has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Golden View Health on Any Federal Watch List?
GOLDEN VIEW HEALTH CARE 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.