SALEMHAVEN
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Salemhaven has a Trust Grade of C, meaning it is average and sits in the middle of nursing home options. It ranks #58 out of 73 facilities in New Hampshire, placing it in the bottom half, and is #11 out of 12 in Rockingham County, indicating that only one local facility performs better. The facility is currently worsening, with the number of issues rising from 5 in 2024 to 7 in 2025. Staffing is a strong point, rated 4 out of 5 stars with a turnover rate of 34%, which is better than the state average. While there are no fines on record, which is positive, recent inspections revealed concerns such as staff failing to follow food safety standards, improper infection control practices during medication administration, and expired medications not being removed from use. Overall, families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses when considering Salemhaven for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- C
- In New Hampshire
- #58/73
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 34% turnover. Near New Hampshire's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most New Hampshire facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 39 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for New Hampshire. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 14 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (34%)
14 points below New Hampshire average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below New Hampshire average (3.0)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
11pts below New Hampshire avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
The Ugly 14 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
7 deficiencies
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 interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for choices in a final sample of 19 resid...
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
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents received the appropriate care and services for catheter care for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to properly label a vial of multidose injectable medication when opened for 2 out of 3 medication refrigerator...
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, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct an annual review of its infection prevention and control program and implement policies and pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0887
(Tag F0887)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to implement policies and procedures on COVID-19 immunization for 1 of 1 staff reviewed for COVID-19 immunizations. (St...
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 policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to store and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety to prevent foodborne il...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to demonstrate their response and rationale to resident council grievances for May and June 2025 and maintain evidence ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Resident #20
Allegation of neglect 7/22/24 for a complaint of Staff R (LNA) refusing to answer Resident #20's call bell, causing incontinence, then when the LNA did come after multiple calls, told the...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to follow accepted guidelines to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to send a copy of the notice of Transfer/Discharge to a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombuds...
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** Resident #90
Review on 8/8/24 of Resident #90's Discharge Return Not Anticipated MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a performance review at least once every 12 months for 2 of 4 Licensed Nurse Assistants (LNA) reviewed.
Fin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
2 deficiencies
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 observation, interview, record review, and policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that expired medications were removed from use for 2 of 2 medication rooms obser...
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 that food was prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 ...
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.
- • 34% turnover. Below New Hampshire's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 14 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade C (55/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Salemhaven's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SALEMHAVEN an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within New Hampshire, 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 Salemhaven Staffed?
CMS rates SALEMHAVEN's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 34%, compared to the New Hampshire average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Salemhaven?
State health inspectors documented 14 deficiencies at SALEMHAVEN during 2023 to 2025. These included: 10 with potential for harm and 4 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Salemhaven?
SALEMHAVEN 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 110 certified beds and approximately 86 residents (about 78% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SALEM, New Hampshire.
How Does Salemhaven Compare to Other New Hampshire Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in New Hampshire, SALEMHAVEN's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (34%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Salemhaven?
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 Salemhaven Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SALEMHAVEN 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 2-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 Salemhaven Stick Around?
SALEMHAVEN has a staff turnover rate of 34%, 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 Salemhaven Ever Fined?
SALEMHAVEN 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 Salemhaven on Any Federal Watch List?
SALEMHAVEN 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.