Hearth Record

Milford Regional Medical Center

An acute care hospital in Milford, Massachusetts 01757

14 Prospect Street, Milford, Massachusetts 01757. (508) 473-1190.

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 20, 2026.

The last 24 months 2 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Feb 2025. 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?

The last inspection on record was on Feb 4, 2025: a complaint inspection.

2 deficiencies cited in the last three years, 1 of them at condition level, the most serious.

1 deficiency at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

Source:

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

2 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Feb 2025. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Nov 5, 2026.

2 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 Dec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNov

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 Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Feb 4, 2025: complaint inspection2 deficiencies

  • Patient Rights

    The inspectors’ words, 103 words

    “PATIENT RIGHTS CFR(s): 482.13 A hospital must protect and promote each patient’s rights. This Condition is not met as evidenced by: 43882 The Condition of Participation: Patient Rights was out of compliance. Findings included: Based on record review and interviews, the Hospital failed to ensure one Patient (#3) was cared for in a safe environment out of a total sample of 10 patients. Patient #3 presented to the Emergency Department with a foreign body in the rectum and was able to continue to ingest and/or insert foreign bodies into the rectum requiring surgical intervention. Cross Reference: 482.13(c)(2): Care in a Safe Setting (A0144)”

    Rule A0115. Condition-level. From a complaint.

  • Patient Rights: Care In Safe Setting

    The inspectors’ words, 1,013 words

    “PATIENT RIGHTS: CARE IN SAFE SETTING CFR(s): 482.13(c)(2) The patient has the right to receive care in a safe setting. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 43882 Based on record review and interviews, the Hospital failed to ensure one Patient (#3) was cared for in a safe environment out of a total sample of 10 patients. Patient #3 presented to the Emergency Department with a foreign body in the rectum and was able to continue to ingest and/or insert foreign bodies into the rectum requiring surgical intervention. Findings include: Review of Hospital Policy titled, “Patient at Risk of Harm to Self or Others” review date, 3/21/22, included the following: 1:1: One Sitter provides uninterrupted direct visualization of one patient, including when in the bathroom. Suicide observation: 1:1 observation of the patient at imminent risk of self-harm. Policy: The licensed provider and the nurse are responsible for implementing interventions to mitigate the risk of suicide or harm to others and maintain patient safety. When items that pose a risk of harm cannot be removed from the room, staff must have heightened awareness to the environmental hazards present and be vigilant in protecting the patient from access to the hazards. A behavioral health clinician will complete a comprehensive mental health evaluation for any patient at risk of harm to self or others, including a suicide risk assessment. Patient #3 was admitted to the Hospital multiple times in November 2024 with diagnoses including rectal foreign body, cannabis use disorder, hemoptysis, opioid use disorder and schizophrenia. Review of Patient #3 ’ s General Surgery Consult Note dated, 11/2/2024, indicated Patient #3 had been taken to the operating room earlier in the day to remove a foreign body that was reportedly placed after an assault. It was unclear if this was truly accurate or not, but the piece of metal enveloped in hard plastic was unable to be removed with a proctoscopic approach and Gastroenterology was able to use flexible sigmoidoscope to remove the foreign bodies. Patient #3 returned back to prison, broke eyeglasses and put those up his/her rectum and was transferred back to the Hospital. Review of Patient #3 ’ s progress notes indicated further measures would need to be taken in order to keep the Patient from continuing to put things into his/her rectum, especially so rapidly after removal of a foreign body. Review of Emergency Department Note dated 11/2/2024 indicated that Patient #3 stated he/she is having auditory and visual hallucinations, telling him/her to insert objects into his/her urethra and rectum. Of note presented on 11/1/2024 with rectal pain and a rectal foreign body noted on CT. Patient went to the Operating Room (OR) on 11/2/2024 for foreign body removal. A repeat Pelvic Xray did not demonstrate any further retained bodies. Review of Patient #3 ’ s History and Physical Report dated 11/2/2024 indicated Patient #3 had a history of schizophrenia, depression and anxiety. Patient #3 ’ s History and Physical further Indicated MCI (Massachusetts Correctional Institute) officers were by the Patient ’ s bedside; there was an indication for one-to-one to prevent further attempts to hurt self. Review of a Physician ’ s progress note dated 11/5/2024 at 6:36 P.M., indicated the following: -Patient had a repeat Xray today concerning for an additional screw in the upper abdomen. -1:1 observation. Review of a Physician Event Note dated 11/6/2024, indicated Patient #3 returned from a sigmoidoscopy pending discharge. Patient #3 notified RN that he/she ingested several metal bits and also inserted a wire into his/her rectum. MCI Officers were close to the patient but may not have witnessed the incident since Patient #3 is going to the bathroom privately. The Physician Event Note further indicated Patient #3 had a one to one in place, as well as MCI officers at the bedside. Patient #3 ’ s discharge was placed on hold. Review of Patient #3 ’ s physician orders indicated an order for continuous observation dated 11/8/2024 at 9:53 P.M. Further review of Patient #3 ’ s medical record failed to indicate any documentation of Hospital staff constant observations prior to 11/8/24 nor any orders to initiate constant observation for Patient #3 prior to 11/8/24 despite a known history of inserting objects into his/her own body and physician assessments and plans for 1:1 observation for Patient #3 on 11/2/24 and 11/5/24. During an interview on 2/4/2025 at 11:48 A.M., the Hospitalist said Patient #3 had multiple admissions for foreign bodies. The Hospitalist said the Hospital has different types of 1:1 ’ s, one for safety including falls and another type for self-harm. The Hospitalist said there was a question if Patient #3 was ingesting or inserting the foreign bodies into the rectum maliciously. The hospitalist said he puts in most of his own orders and recalls there being a Behavioral Health consultation, but behavioral health services did not evaluate Patient #3 the night of admission. During an interview on 2/4/2025 at 1:12 P.M., Registered Nurse (RN) #5 said she recalled Patient #3. Registered Nurse #5 said on 11/5/24 she had reported Patient #3 ’ s imaging results demonstrating foreign bodies in the Patient ’ s rectum. Nurse #3 said the Hospitalist came up to the floor and she didn ’ t recall new physician orders. During an interview on 2/4/2025 at 1:45 P.M., the Director of Risk Management said if a Patient is on a 1:1 or constant observation an order should be in the medical record. The Director of Risk Management said the 1:1 observer is expected to fill out observation sheets every 15 minutes that are then scanned into the medical record. Further review of the Hospital’s Internal Investigation indicated there was no documentation to support the Hospital completed a thorough investigation or review of Patient #3’s multiple ingestion events to include developing and implementing a systemwide corrective action plan to prevent further potential of similar adverse events. The Hospital failed to maintain a safe environment for Patient #3; the Hospital did not implement interventions in order to prevent the Patient from ingesting and inserting foreign objects into his/her body.”

    Rule A0144. Standard-level. From a complaint.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Feb 4, 2025Complaint inspection2 deficiencies cited
Oct 16, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited

How do patients fare?

  • CMS’s overall for it is 4 of 5.
  • Of the measures behind its , CMS counts against the national value: mortality, 0 better and 0 worse of 7; safety of care, 1 better and 0 worse of 7; readmission, 0 better and 4 worse of 7.
  • Patients rate it 4 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (593 surveys completed, Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): 76% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 77% would definitely recommend it.
  • Infections, compared by CMS with the national benchmark (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): central line bloodstream infections (CLABSI), no different than national benchmark; catheter urinary tract infections (CAUTI), no different than national benchmark; surgical site infections after colon surgery, no different than national benchmark; MRSA bloodstream infections, no different than national benchmark; C. diff infections, better than the national benchmark.
  • CMS’s patient safety composite for serious complications, PSI 90, Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2024: no different than the national value.
  • Deaths within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 12.8%, heart failure 8.9%, pneumonia 15%, COPD 6.4%, stroke 11.8%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • Readmissions within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2023 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 14.2%, heart failure 22%, pneumonia 18.4%, COPD 19.7%, hip or knee replacement 5.6%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • After outpatient care, compared by CMS: unplanned hospital visits after a colonoscopy, no different than the national rate; unplanned hospital visits after outpatient surgery, no different than expected.
  • Emergency department patients spent a median of 274 minutes there before leaving (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025), and 3% left before being seen.
  • 44% of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock got the care CMS measures, SEP-1 (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025).
  • Medicare’s spending per patient here is 0.97 times the national median (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, Hospital General Information, Patient survey (HCAHPS) - Hospital, Healthcare Associated Infections - Hospital, Timely and Effective Care - Hospital and Medicare Spending Per Beneficiary - Hospital. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Complications and Deaths - Hospital and Unplanned Hospital Visits - Hospital. Released Sep 30, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Overall ratingCMS’s overall hospital quality star rating, 1 to 54 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the hospital’s patients (HCAHPS), 1 to 54 of 5

Is it certified, and in good standing?

  • Medicare-certified acute care hospital since Jul 1, 1966.
  • Ownership: voluntary non-profit - other.
  • It is accredited by The Joint Commission, whose surveys stand in for the state’s routine inspections.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules for hospitals.
  • Voluntary non-profit - Other.
Source:

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has it been penalized?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals.
  • Not among the hospitals whose Medicare payments CMS cut under the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program for fiscal year 2026.
  • 2 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated yearly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

What do patients say about their care?

  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In CMS’s patient survey, patients rate how well its nurses communicated 5 of 5.
  • 94% of its health care workers got a flu shot (Oct 1, 2024 to Mar 31, 2025).
Source:

CMS, Patient survey (HCAHPS) - Hospital and Timely and Effective Care - Hospital. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Umass Memorial Community Hospitals owns 100% directly since Oct 1, 2024.
  • 6 owners or officers are people: Brian J Huggins (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Debra M Wooldridge (managing employee (on the payroll)); Steven M Mccue (corporate director); Julie Domino (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Edward Kelly (corporate officer); Marilyn C Amaya (managing employee (on the payroll)).
  • CMS’s Provider of Services file records no change of ownership.
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospital All Owners and Hospital Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated monthly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Umass Memorial Community HospitalsOwns 5% or more directly100%Oct 1, 2024
Umass Memorial Health Care, Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Oct 1, 2024

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 12 hospitals CMS lists in Worcester County, 7 have an overall star rating from CMS: 1 rated 4 of 5, 3 rated 3 of 5, 3 rated 2 of 5.
  • CMS rates this one 4 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

11 compared
PlaceOverall star rating
Umass Memorial Healthalliance Hospitals3
Umass Memorial Health - Harrington Hospital3
Adcare Hospital of Worcester Inc.Not given
Heywood Hospital -2
Umass Memorial Medical Center/University Campus3
St Vincent Hospital2
Athol Memorial Hospital2
Worcester Recovery Center and HospitalNot given
Taravista Behavioral Health CenterNot given
Westborough Behavioral Healthcare Hospital LLCNot given
Hospital for Behavioral MedicineNot given

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals, so none are shown. The one payment cut CMS publishes for each hospital, under its Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program, is shown where it applies.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • Most hospitals are accredited by a private organisation (The Joint Commission, DNV and others) whose routine inspections stand in for the state’s; those reports aren’t public, and QCOR holds only the state’s surveys: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.
  • QCOR says its hospital inspection data are complete only through September 17, 2026, while it moves to a new system.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In its September 2026 release CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for death and readmission rates, though it gives the rates.

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 Nov 5, 2026.

From the hospital

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

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospital 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 hospital”, 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 28, 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.