Hearth Record

New England Hospice II, LLC

A hospice in Hingham, Massachusetts 02043

190 Old Derby Street Suite 304, Hingham, Massachusetts 02043. (781) 749-2900.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 23, 2026.

The last 24 months 10 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2026. Most serious: Condition-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean4
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.
Condition-level deficiency
For hospices, home health agencies, hospitals and dialysis facilities, CMS writes deficiencies at two levels. Standard is the usual one; condition-level is the more serious, when a problem is serious enough that the provider doesn’t meet a whole condition of taking part in Medicare. Source: CMS, State Operations Manual.

What did inspectors find?

10 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 15 hospices serving ZIP code 02043 had 3.

The last inspection on record was on Jul 27, 2026: a follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission.

3 deficiencies at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

When those deficiencies happened

10 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2026. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

10 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Jun 12, 2026: reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission10 deficiencies
  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(5))

    The inspectors’ words, 165 words

    “Observed in Individual Tracer. In 7 of 14 patient records reviewed, The surveyor noted that (RRHV#4) that there was no evidence in the medical record that the severity of the patient’s diabetes was assessed. The patient was prescribed Metformin and daily insulin and the facility was monitoring the patient’s blood sugar; however, there was no assessment of the diabetes, insulin use or blood glucose results. Also, (RRNHV#5), the patient was diabetic and prescribed routine insulin. There was no assessment of the diabetes, insulin use or blood glucose monitoring. Also, the chaplain’s spiritual assessment indicated that he would complete the assessment with the health care proxy; however, it had not been completed as of four weeks later. In (RRNHV#6), (RRNHV#7), (RRNHV#8) and (RRNHV#9), there was no assessment of the patients’ diabetes, insulin and hypoglycemic use or blood glucose monitoring. In (RRNHV#11) the chaplain had not completed the spiritual assessment as indicated to follow-up with the health care proxy/POA. This was confirmed with the clinical services director.”

    Rule L0529. Condition-level.

  • IDG, care planning, coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56)

    The inspectors’ words, 211 words

    “Observed in Individual Tracer. In 5 of 14 patient records reviewed, The surveyor noted (RRHV#4) that the patient was diabetic and prescribed insulin and Metformin. The facility was monitoring the patient’s blood sugar; however, it was not identified on the plan of care. In (RRNHV#6), the patient was diabetic and prescribed Metformin and Jardiance; however the diabetes management was not identified in the plan of care. In (RRNHV#7), the patient was diabetic and prescribed sliding scale insulin; however, it was not identified on the plan of care. Also, the patient admission assessment indicated that the patient had a vulva lesion that was treated with daily wound care; however, it was not addressed on the plan of care until 2 months after admission and did not include the actual treatment that was ordered. In (RRNHV#8), the patient assessment indicated a diagnosis on Diabetes Type 2 and was prescribed insulin. Also, the patient had a diabetic foot ulcer; however, it was not addressed on the plan of care. In (RRNHV#9), the assessment indicated that the patient was dysphasic, had homonymous hemianopsia and that his primary language was Spanish; however, a communication plan and management of his limitations was not address on the plan of care. This was confirmed with the clinical services director.”

    Rule L0536. Condition-level.

  • Governing body and administrator (42 CFR 418.100(b))

    “Observed in Leadership Session. In 7 of 14 patient records reviewed, There was no evidence that the governing body and leadership had established requirements to support patient care treatment and services as evidenced by CLD 408.53 and 418.56. This was confirmed with the leadership team.”

    Rule L0651. Condition-level.

  • EP Training Program (42 CFR 418.113(d)(1)(v))

    “Observed in HR File Review. In 3 of 13 HR files reviewed, The surveyor noted that there was no documentation in the personnel file to confirm that staff were educated on Emergency Management when hired or annually for (HR#4MD, HR#10LPN and HR#13RT). The policy indicated that training was to be provided during orientation and annually. In discussion with the administrator, it was confirmed that the staff received the training via email annually; however it was not documented.”

    Rule E0037. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 207 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 4 of 14 patient records reviewed, The surveyor noted (RRNHV#5) that the plan of care was incomplete and did not include the patient’s medications. until 12 days after the admission. In (RRNHV#9) the plan of care did not include the wound care treatment that was ordered: cleanse wound with normal saline, pat dry, apply collagen to wound bed and cover with DSD daily. The care plan was a care coordination plan with the skilled nursing facility and only stated that the facility nurse was to perform daily wound care. In (RRNHV#12) the hospice/SNF plan of care did not include oxygen orders and the written physician order: Oxygen 4LPM NC ( on file in the hospice EMR) did not indicate the frequency for oxygen use (patient on 4lpm NC continuous). Also, the care plan for wound care did not include the treatment that was ordered for the coccyx and heel wounds , and simply indicated that facility staff to perform wound care as ordered. In (RRNHV#13), the plan of care did not include the oxygen orders and the physician order in the hospice EMR did not indicate a frequency of use (Oxygen 2lpm NC). This was confirmed with the director of clinical services.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

  • Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 176 words

    “Observed in Individual Tracer. In 3 of 14 patient records reviewed, The surveyor noted that (RRHV#2) the plan of care was not updated when volunteer services was provided. A volunteer was not available for a period of four months (July-October) ;however, the plan of care included orders for volunteer 2-3 x a month, for that time period. In (RRHV#4) the plan of care was not revised when the patient was treated for a leg wound in May, one week after the patient was admitted. The care was being provided by the skilled nursing facility and not included on the coordinated care plan. Also, in (RRNHV#9), the wound care plan was not updated to include new wound care orders for April and again in May. The care was provided by the skilled nursing facility and not updated in the coordinated care plan. The care plan only indicated that the daily wound care was to be performed by the facility staff and evaluated every 14 days by the hospice nurse. This was confirmed with the clinical services director.”

    Rule L0553. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(2))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, The surveyor noted (RRHV#3) that the hospice plan of care included orders for volunteer visits 3 x monthly; however the services were never provided. This was confirmed with the director of clinical services.”

    Rule L0555. Standard-level.

  • Training (42 CFR 418.100(g)(2))

    “Observed in HR File Review. In 2 of 13 HR files reviewed, The surveyor noted that there was no documentation to confirm that orientation was completed for (HR#5AMD) and (HR#10LPN) when hired in 2025, or since. This was confirmed with the HR manager.”

    Rule L0662. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(2)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 2 patient records reviewed, The surveyor noted in (RRCR#15) that the patient/caregiver revoked the hospice benefit and was discharged; however, there was no evidence in the record that the discharge summary was sent to the physician. It was required by organizational policy within 72 hours. Also, in (RRCR#16), the patient was discharge because he no longer met criteria; however, a discharge summary was never sent to the physician. This was confirmed with the clinical services director.”

    Rule L0683. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(3)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 2 patient records reviewed, The surveyor noted in (RRCR#15) and (RRCR#16) that a discharge summary was not completed that included a summary of the patient stay including treatments, symptom management and the reason for discharge, a copy of the current plan of care, medications and latest physician orders, as required by the organizations discharge from hospice policy 2-071.1. This was confirmed with the clinical services director.”

    Rule L0684. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Jul 27, 2026Follow-up inspection by The Joint CommissionNo deficiencies cited
Jun 12, 2026Reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission10 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Apr 26, 2005.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules.
Source:

CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • 0 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who does the caring?

  • From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 12.6 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 7.6% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 95.1% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 1% at home, 14% in assisted living, 85% in a skilled nursing facility.
Source:

CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day12.6 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends7.6%
Visits near death95.1% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Pgm Healthcare LLC owns 100% directly since Jan 10, 2007.
  • 8 owners or officers are people: Kevin Michael Webb (corporate officer, 55%); Michael Estey (owns 5% or more through other companies, 22.5%); Michael Estey (managing employee (on the payroll), 22.5%); Gregg Estey (owns 5% or more through other companies, 22.5%); Gregg Estey (corporate director, 22.5%); Gregg Estey (managing employee (on the payroll), 22.5%); Philip J Tavano (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Christopher Lackner (corporate officer, 0%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Pgm Healthcare LLCOwns 5% or more directly100%Jan 10, 2007

What do families say?

  • Family caregivers rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s survey (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 79% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 84% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 9 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 97.67% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 75.5% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 53 of 5
Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold9 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 15 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 02043, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 3; this one had 10.
Source:

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
  • Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 27, 2026.

From the hospice

The public record above comes first. Anything the hospice adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the hospice”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 8, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.