Jeanne Jugan Residence

964 Main Street, Pawtucket, RI 02860 (401) 723-4314
Non profit - Other 49 Beds LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
90/100
#4 of 72 in RI
Last Inspection: January 2025

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Jeanne Jugan Residence in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, has received an excellent Trust Grade of A, indicating it is highly recommended and performs well compared to other facilities. It ranks #4 out of 72 nursing homes in the state, placing it in the top half, and #3 out of 41 in Providence County, showing that only two local facilities are better. The facility is improving, having reduced its issues from two in 2023 to none in 2025, and has a strong staffing record with a 0% turnover rate, well below the Rhode Island average, which suggests that staff are dedicated and familiar with the residents. Notably, there have been no fines, which is a positive indicator of compliance; however, there were some concerns during inspections, such as food not being stored at the correct temperatures and a lack of adequate supervision for a resident with a history of falls, which could pose risks. Overall, while Jeanne Jugan Residence has many strengths, families should be aware of these specific incidents when considering care options.

Trust Score
A
90/100
In Rhode Island
#4/72
Top 5%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Better
2 → 0 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
Turnover data not reported for this facility.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Rhode Island facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 79 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Rhode Island nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 2 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 2 issues
2025: 0 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average 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

Chain: LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 2 deficiencies on record

Feb 2023 2 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 surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident receives adequate supervision to prevent accidents relati...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident receives adequate supervision to prevent accidents relative to falls for 1 of 2 residents reviewed, Resident ID #25 Findings are as follows: Review of the record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in August of 2018 with diagnoses, including but not limited to, repeated falls, multiple fractures of ribs on the right side, fracture of upper end of left humerus (long bone in the upper arm), fracture of greater trochanter of left femur (upper part of the thigh), dementia and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of a document titled, Order Summary Report, revealed a current order dated 7/6/2022, for supervision on/off unit with rollator (a mobility device similar to a walker with 4 wheels) for all activity and ambulation. Review of the care plan, revised on 9/6/2022, revealed that s/he has interventions, including but not limited to, supervision on/off the unit with rollator for all activity and ambulation relative to potential falls and poor safety awareness. Review of a fall risk assessment, dated 12/29/2022, revealed that s/he is at high risk for falls. Surveyor observation of the resident on 1/30/2023 at 3:01 PM revealed the resident was ambulating in the hallway with his/her rollator without any staff present for supervision. Additional observations of this resident on 2/1/2023 revealed the following: - 10:52 AM: S/he was ambulating down the hallway without staff supervision then entered a room for church services. - Approximately 12:00 PM: S/he was observed ambulating in the hallway after exiting the church service, continued down to another hallway and then into a dining room without staff supervision. During an interview with Nursing Assistant's Staff A and B, on 2/1/2023 at approximately 2:00 PM, they revealed that the resident usually ambulates independently without staff supervision. Review of the January 2023 progress notes, revealed in part: - 1/17/2023 at 5:47 PM: Resident had an unwitnessed fall around 1505 [3:05 PM] .complained of pain to [his/her] left side/shoulder .did not recollect how [s/he] fell. Resident verbalized [s/he] will like to be sent to the hospital . During a surveyor interview with Licensed Practical Nurse Staff C, on 2/1/2023 at 2:22 PM, it was revealed that the unwitnessed fall on 1/17/2023 occurred in the hallway on the unit. She further revealed that her expectation would be that staff would either walk with the resident, or be within a short distance away to visualize him/her, when s/he is ambulating for supervision. During a surveyor interview with the Director of Nursing Services on 2/1/2023 at 4:28 PM, she was unable to provide evidence that the plan of care and the order for supervision were followed.
CONCERN (F)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that food is stored, served, and distributed, in accordance with profession...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on surveyor observation, record review, and staff interview, it has been determined that the facility failed to ensure that food is stored, served, and distributed, in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, relative to the main kitchen. Findings are as follows: The Rhode Island Food Code 2018 Edition 3-501.19 Time as a Public Health Control reveals in part; .the food shall have an initial temperature of 5 degrees Celsius (41 degrees Fahrenheit) or less when removed from cold holding temperature control . Record review of the facility policy titled HOT & COLD FOOD HANDLING POLICY states in part, .It is the policy .to maintain food safety by proper .cold food holding .The food shall have an initial temperature control of 41 degrees or less if removed from cold holding temperature control .The temperature of cold food will be logged in the kitchen when removed from cold holding temperature . Additional record review of the facility policy titled FOOD PURCHASED & STORAGE states in part, .FOOD STORAGE .food is kept covered, labeled, dated and stored at a maximum of 41 degrees F [Fahrenheit] . 1. During the initial tour of the main kitchen in the presence of the Dietary Supervisor on 1/30/2023 at 8:30 AM revealed the following observations: In a reach-in freezer; - a one gallon resealable freezer bag with frozen blueberries covered with a thick layer of frost, not labeled, or dated - a one gallon resealable freezer bag with frozen peeled bananas, not labeled or dated - one unopened container of Cool Whip with an expiration date of 1/11/2023 In a walk-in dairy cooler/refrigerator; - one half block of sliced cheese, opened and not dated During a surveyor interview with the Dietary Supervisor on 1/30/2023 at approximately 8:35 AM she acknowledged the above findings. 2. During a surveyor observation in the main kitchen of the 2nd floor salad bar tray, in the presence of Dietary Staff D, on 01/30/2023 at 11:33 AM, revealed the following observations: - cottage cheese with an initial temperature of 41.9 degrees F when removed from cold holding temperature. - carrot raisin salad made with mayonnaise with an initial temperature of 44 degrees F when removed from cold holding temperature. During a subsequent surveyor observation of the temperatures for the 1st floor salad bar items on 1/30/2023 at 11:48 AM in the presence of Staff D revealed the following observations: - cottage cheese with an initial temperature of 46 degrees F when removed from cold holding temperature. - carrot raisin salad made with mayonnaise with an initial temperature of 47.6 degrees F when removed from cold holding temperature. During a surveyor interview with Staff D immediately following the above-mentioned observations, she acknowledged that the temperatures obtained were the initial temperatures when the food was removed from cold holding temperature. Additionally, she acknowledged that the temperatures were greater than 41 degrees and indicated the food was ready to be sent out and served for the lunch meal. During a surveyor interview with the Dietary Supervisor on 1/30/2023 at approximately 12:00 PM, she acknowledged that the initial temperatures of food should be 41 degrees or less if removed from cold holding temperature. 3. During a surveyor observation of the main kitchen on 1/31/2023 at 10:55 AM in the presence of Dietary [NAME] Staff E, revealed the following observations: - yogurt in an approximately one-quart sized plastic container retrieved from cold holding with a temperature of 46 degrees F obtained with the facility's thermometer and 46.9 degrees F with the surveyor's thermometer. - a small plastic container of yogurt with a temperature of 44.9 degrees F obtained with the facility's thermometer and 45 degrees F with the surveyor's thermometer when removed from cold holding temperature. - a container of carrot raisin salad made with mayonnaise that was stored in the back of the walk-in cooler/refrigerator with a temperature of 46.8 degrees F with the facility thermometer. - a sample of yogurt from a newly opened container with a temperature of 43.8 degrees F with the surveyor's thermometer when removed from cold holding temperature. - carrot raisin salad made with mayonnaise with a temperature of 46 degrees F with the facility's thermometer when removed from cold holding temperature. During a surveyor interview with Staff E at the time of the above-mentioned observations she acknowledged the findings and indicated that the items had not previously been removed from cold holding. During a surveyor interview with the Dietary Supervisor on 1/31/2023 at 11:10 AM, she indicated she would discard the items that did not have an initial temperature of 41 degrees or less when removed from cold holding. 4. During a surveyor observation of the main kitchen on 1/31/2023 at 11:35 AM in the presence of the Dietary Supervisor revealed the following observations: - carrot raisin salad made with mayonnaise that was retrieved from the dairy walk-in cooler with a temperature of 46.9 degrees F with the facility's thermometer and 47.1 degrees F with the surveyor's thermometer. - Oreo cream pie with a temperature of 46.0 degrees F with the facility's thermometer and 46.8 degrees F with the surveyor's thermometer. During a surveyor interview with the Dietary Supervisor immediately following the above-mentioned observations she acknowledged that the temperatures were greater than 41 degrees F when removed from cold holding and indicated she would discard the potentially hazardous food items and replace them with an alternate. During a surveyor observation of the main kitchen on 1/31/2023 at 2:09 PM in the presence of the dietary Supervisor revealed the following observations: - a container of facility prepared turkey salad made with mayonnaise that was retrieved from a walk-in cooler with a temperature of 50.7 degrees F when removed from cold holding. - a container of mayonnaise with a temperature of 44.9 when removed from cold holding. - a pan of cooked macaroni and cheese with a temperature of 42.9 degrees F when removed from cold holding. During a surveyor interview with the dietary supervisor immediately following the above-mentioned observations, she acknowledged the temperatures were above 41 degrees F. Additionally, she was unable to provide evidence that the facility ensured that food is stored, served, and distributed, in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

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

Strengths
  • • Grade A (90/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Rhode Island.
  • • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Rhode Island facilities.
  • • Only 2 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
Concerns
  • • No significant concerns identified. This facility shows no red flags across CMS ratings, staff turnover, or federal penalties.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Jeanne Jugan Residence's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Jeanne Jugan Residence an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Rhode Island, 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 Jeanne Jugan Residence Staffed?

CMS rates Jeanne Jugan Residence's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes.

What Have Inspectors Found at Jeanne Jugan Residence?

State health inspectors documented 2 deficiencies at Jeanne Jugan Residence during 2023. These included: 2 with potential for harm.

Who Owns and Operates Jeanne Jugan Residence?

Jeanne Jugan Residence is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 49 certified beds and approximately 31 residents (about 63% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Pawtucket, Rhode Island.

How Does Jeanne Jugan Residence Compare to Other Rhode Island Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Rhode Island, Jeanne Jugan Residence's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.1 and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Jeanne Jugan Residence?

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 Jeanne Jugan Residence Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Jeanne Jugan Residence 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 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Rhode Island. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Jeanne Jugan Residence Stick Around?

Jeanne Jugan Residence has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.

Was Jeanne Jugan Residence Ever Fined?

Jeanne Jugan Residence 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 Jeanne Jugan Residence on Any Federal Watch List?

Jeanne Jugan Residence 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.