Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around October 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Our Ladys Haven Of Fairhaven Inc during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A nurse in the facility made four medication administration errors out of 30 opportunities, resulting in a 13.33% error rate, impacting two residents. One resident did not receive Repaglinide and Metformin as per the physician's orders, while another resident's Carbidopa-Levodopa and Furosemide were administered outside the prescribed time window. The DON confirmed the expectation for timely medication administration.
The facility failed to meet professional standards of care for two residents. A nurse left a resident's room before confirming medication intake, despite the resident not being documented as able to self-administer. Another resident's pain assessments were inadequate, with vague reasons for administering oxycodone and a lack of documented pain severity assessments. The facility's policy required a numerical pain scale, which was not consistently used.
A facility failed to remove side rails from a resident's bed despite the Health Care Proxy's (HCP) declination of consent. The resident, admitted for a respite stay with dementia, had side rails left from a previous occupant. Observations confirmed the presence of side rails, and the Unit Manager admitted no assessment was conducted, acknowledging the HCP's declined consent.
The facility failed to complete timely AIMS assessments for two residents receiving antipsychotic medications. Both residents, with diagnoses including dementia and bipolar disorder, were on scheduled antipsychotic regimens. Their care plans required AIMS assessments every six months, but the assessments were delayed, missing the scheduled June 2024 assessments. The DON confirmed the assessments should have been conducted in June, not August.
A resident with diabetes experienced a hypoglycemic event and was administered two doses of glucagon, which were not documented on the MAR as required by the facility's policy. Interviews with nursing staff confirmed the oversight, highlighting a failure to maintain complete and accurate medical records.
The facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for two residents, one with an indwelling urinary catheter and another with an unhealed pressure ulcer. Staff did not use gowns and gloves during high-contact care activities, despite EBP signs being posted and gowns available. This indicates a lack of adherence to infection control protocols as expected by the facility's policy and CMS guidance.
Medication Administration Errors Exceeding Acceptable Rate
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate below five percent, as evidenced by one nurse making four errors out of 30 opportunities, resulting in a 13.33% error rate. These errors affected two residents. For one resident, Repaglinide and Metformin, both oral antihyperglycemic medications, were not administered as per the physician's orders. The Repaglinide was not given within the one-hour window of the scheduled time, and the Metformin was not administered before breakfast as required. The nurse involved stated that the resident preferred to take medications together, which contributed to the deviation from the prescribed schedule. For another resident, Carbidopa-Levodopa, used for treating Parkinson's disease symptoms, and Furosemide, a diuretic, were not administered within the one-hour window of their scheduled times. The electronic Medication Administration Record indicated that the morning doses of these medications were charted late, although the nurse entered comments indicating they were administered on time. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the expectation is for medications to be administered within a one-hour window before or after the scheduled time.
Deficiencies in Medication Administration and Pain Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure professional standards of care were met for two residents during medication administration. For one resident, the nurse administered multiple medications but left the room before confirming that the resident had taken all the medications. The resident was not documented as being able to self-administer medications, and the Director of Nursing confirmed that it was expected for the nurse to stay with the resident until all medications were taken. For another resident, the facility failed to perform adequate pain assessments to determine the appropriate dosage of oxycodone to administer, as per the physician's orders. The resident had frequent pain and was receiving pain medication on an as-needed basis. However, the medical records lacked documentation of pain severity assessments when administering oxycodone, and reasons for administering the medication were often vague, such as 'per Resident's request' or 'generalized pain.' Interviews with the Unit Manager and Director of Nursing revealed that the facility's policy was to use a numerical pain scale to assess pain levels, but this was not consistently done. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that the orders did not specify a numerical scale, but nursing staff were expected to use one to determine the appropriate medication dosage.
Failure to Remove Side Rails Despite Declined Consent
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to the declination of consent from the Health Care Proxy (HCP) regarding the use of side rails for a resident admitted for a respite stay with a diagnosis of dementia. Upon admission, the resident's HCP explicitly declined the use of side rails, as documented in the medical record. However, during observations on two separate occasions, the surveyor noted that the resident's bed was equipped with side rails on both the upper left and right sides, despite the resident not being present in the bed at those times. In an interview, Unit Manager #1 acknowledged that the side rails were remnants from the previous occupant of the bed and confirmed that no assessment for the use of side rails had been conducted for the current resident. The Unit Manager also confirmed that the HCP had declined consent for the use of side rails, indicating a failure to remove them upon the resident's admission.
Failure to Timely Complete AIMS Assessments for Residents on Antipsychotic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the drug regimens for two residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications. Specifically, the facility did not complete the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessments in a timely manner for these residents, who were receiving antipsychotic medications. Resident #4, admitted in March 2018, had diagnoses including dementia, paranoid personality disorder, bipolar disorder, personality disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. The resident was on a regimen of aripiprazole and risperidone, with care plans indicating AIMS assessments every six months. However, the assessments were completed on 12/18/23 and 8/5/24, missing the scheduled assessment in June 2024. Similarly, Resident #26, admitted in June 2021 with dementia and bipolar disorder, was also receiving antipsychotic medication, specifically risperidone. The care plan for this resident also required AIMS assessments every six months. The assessments for Resident #26 were completed on the same dates as Resident #4, indicating a similar delay in the June 2024 assessment. During an interview, the Director of Nursing confirmed that the AIMS assessments should have been conducted in June 2024, not August 2024, highlighting the facility's failure to adhere to the scheduled assessment timeline.
Failure to Document Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for a resident who was admitted with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus and peripheral vascular disease. The resident, who was cognitively intact, experienced a hypoglycemic event where they became diaphoretic and unresponsive. In response, facility staff administered two doses of glucagon, an anti-hypoglycemic agent, as per the physician's orders. However, the administration of these doses was not documented on the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR), which is a deviation from the facility's policy requiring documentation of all medication administrations. Interviews with various nursing staff, including the nurse who administered the glucagon, revealed that the medication administration was noted in a progress note but not recorded on the MAR. The Unit Manager and Director of Nurses confirmed that the administration should have been documented on the MAR, as per standard practice. This oversight indicates a failure to adhere to the facility's medication administration policy, which mandates that all administered medications, including as-needed medications, be documented with the date and time of administration.
Failure to Implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by the lack of implementation of Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for two residents. Resident #20, who has an indwelling urinary catheter, was observed being assisted by a CNA for morning hygiene and dressing without the use of gown and gloves, despite an EBP sign being posted at the door. The CNA indicated a misunderstanding of the necessity for precautions, stating that no special precautions were needed for the resident, contrary to the facility's policy and CMS guidance. Similarly, Resident #32, who has an unhealed pressure ulcer, was observed receiving wound care from a Unit Manager who donned gloves but failed to wear a gown, despite the presence of an EBP sign and available gowns. The Unit Manager acknowledged the oversight, recognizing that EBP was required due to the resident's open wound. The Director of Nursing confirmed that it was expected for staff to follow EBP when indicated, highlighting a gap in adherence to infection control protocols.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 246 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Fairhaven
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Of Fairhaven Nursing Center | 0.8 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Brandon Woods Of New Bedford | 1.5 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Alden Court Nursing Care & Rehabilitation Center | 1.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Sacred Heart Nursing Home | 1.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Vantage Health & Rehab Of New Bedford | 2.1 mi | — | 25 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Our Ladys Haven Of Fairhaven Inc.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.