No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Cedar Crest Post Acute

1265 South Cedar Crest Blvd, Allentown, PA 18103 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 166 certified beds · (610) 776-7522 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (610) 776-7522 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0605) — cited Nov 2025
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1251 S Cedar Crest Blvd · (610) 402-3940 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1202 S Cedar Crest Blvd · (610) 402-8444 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3044 Roxford Rd · (484) 904-7752 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2901 Fish Hatchery Rd · (610) 437-7656 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased13.9%16.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight10.6%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms22.3%10.8%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.5%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.8%17.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.7%20.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine86.2%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.8%4.8%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control28.9%25.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table19.9%17.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.0%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine36.7%68.7%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.9%22.5%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.1%9.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.681.621.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.701.181.80typical

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

21.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 244 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

21.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
58.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.10U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.04hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 58.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 179 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.10 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 6% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 33% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF21.3%CMS range 16.7–26.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 7.3–13.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge58.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge51.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge46.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified87.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting74.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge78.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.3%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 4.7–9.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.941.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.60
RN hours/ resident / day
0.87
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.90
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.37
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.40
RN hoursweekends
40.1%
Total nursing turnover
39.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 166 beds and averages 156.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.60 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.90 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.19 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.44 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-26)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-10)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, facility documentation review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician prescribed medications were administered as ordered to one of four sampled residents. (Resident CR 1) Findings include:Resident CR 1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included end stage kidney disease and emphysema. Facility provided documentation revealed that on April 16, 2026, the resident was administered medications to treat hypertension (metoprolol and amlodipine), a medication to treat attention deficit disorder (Ritalin), a medication to prevent blood clots (Eliquis), and a medication to reduce stomach acid (Protonix). Review of the resident's physician orders for April 2026 revealed that the medications were not ordered for Resident CR 1.In an interview on April 30, 2026, at 10:30 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that Resident CR 1 was administered medications not prescribed by the physician. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess a resident's capability to self-administer medications for two of 32 sampled residents. (Residents 65 and 170)Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Administering Medications, last reviewed April 30, 2025, revealed that a resident may only self-administer their own medications if the attending physician, in conjunction with the interdisciplinary care planning team, has determined that they have the decision-making capacity to do so safely. Review of the facility policy entitled, Self-Administration of Medications, last reviewed April 30, 2025, revealed that as part of the evaluation, the interdisciplinary team assessed each resident's cognitive and physical abilities to determine whether self-administering medications was safe and clinically appropriate for the resident, if it was deemed safe and appropriate for a resident to…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
    Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from potential chemical restraints for one of five sampled residents who were ordered psychotropic medications. (Resident 93) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 93 had a diagnoses that included anxiety and psychotic disorder with hallucinations. On August 27, 2025, a physician ordered staff to administer an anti-anxiety medication, (lorazepam), every 24 hours as needed for anxiety and sleep. There was no date in the order that indicated when staff were to stop administering the as needed medication. Review of Resident 93's Medication Administration Record revealed staff had administered the lorazepam two times in October 2025, and three times in November 2025. On October 14, 2025, a physician ordered staff to administer an anti-anxiety medication (lorazepam), every 24 hours as needed for anxiety and agitation, in addition to the August 27, 2025 as needed anti-anxiety medication order. There was no date in the order that…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed to accurately reflect the resident's status for one of 32 sampled residents. (Resident 11)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 11 had diagnoses that included stroke, nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (bleeding inside the brain), unspecified sequelae of other cerebrovascular disease (long-term effects of unknown brain blood vessel problem), coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, occlusion and stenosis of bilateral carotid arteries, atrial fibrillation, type two diabetes mellitus and long-term use of insulin. The MDS assessment dated September, 19, 2025, incorrectly indicated in Section N (Medications) that the resident did not receive insulin injections or an anticoagulant or antiplatelet during the previous seven days. Review of the 2025 Medication Administration Record for September revealed that staff administered an anticoagulant, antiplatelet, and an insulin…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physicians' orders for one of 32 sampled residents. (Resident 151)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 151 had diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure) and chronic systolic (congestive) heart failure. On November 3, 2024, the physician ordered that staff administer blood pressure medication (metoprolol) one time a day. The physician ordered that staff not administer the medication if the resident's systolic blood pressure (SBP, the first measurement of blood pressure when the heart beats and the pressure is at its highest) was less than 110 millimeters of mercury (mm/Hg) or if the resident's pulse was less than 60 beats per minute. Review of Resident 151's Medication Administration Records (MAR) for August, September, October, and November of 2025, revealed that staff failed to record the resident's blood pressure or pulse prior to the administration of the medication 10 times in August, seven times in September, and four…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide sufficient enteral nutrition (delivery of nutrition by a feeding tube) to maintain proper hydration and health in accordance with the physician's order for one of four sampled residents receiving nutrition by a feeding tube. (Resident 100) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Enteral Nutrition, last reviewed on April 30, 2025, revealed that a dietician monitored residents who were receiving enteral nutrition, made appropriate recommendations for interventions to enhance tolerance and nutritional adequacy, that nursing staff and providers monitored the resident for signs and symptoms of altered electrolytes, and that nursing was to confirm the orders for enteral nutrition were complete including instructions for flushing. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 100 had diagnoses that included history of a brain injury, difficulty swallowing,…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent (%) for one of two nursing units observed during medication administration. (Second floor)Findings include: Observation of medication administration on November 25, 2025, from 8:05 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., revealed 38 medication opportunities with two medication errors that resulted in a medication administration error rate of 5.26%. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 152 had diagnoses that included asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and corona virus 2019. A review of the physician's order dated November 20, 2025, revealed that staff was to administer three milliliters (ml) of ipratropium-albuterol inhalation solution 0.5-2.5 (3) milligram (mg)/3ml (a medication used to treat symptoms of COPD) inhaled every 12 hours and to be given prior to administering Advair Diskus Aerosol Powder 500-50 micrograms (a medication used to treat symptoms of COPD). Observation of the medication pass on…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation it was determined that the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner on one of three nursing units. (MedBridge)Findings include:Observation in the MedBridge resident refrigerator on November 25, 2025, at 9:34 a.m., revealed that the top shelf had a thick layer of crumbs and dried liquid debris. On the middle shelf there was an area of a white sticky substance and part of a plastic bag was stuck to the shelf. The area along the length of the bottom of the refrigerator under the drawers had a thick layer of a dark sticky substance. 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(3)(e)(2.1) Management.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow policies and procedures to prevent the spread of infection on one of three nursing units. (MedBridge) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Isolation- Categories of Transmission-Based Precautions, last reviewed April 30, 2025, revealed that transmission based precautions (TBPs) included contact precautions, droplet precautions, airborne precautions and required certain personal protective equipment (PPE). If a resident was identified as having a communicable disease, then TBPs were to be initiated. Staff were to post a sign on the residents' door and chart that alerted all personnel and visitors entering the room of the need for and the type of precaution. If a resident was on contact precautions, staff and visitors were expected to wear gloves and a disposable gown upon entering the room and remove before leaving the room. If a resident was on…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement comprehensive care plan interventions to address individual resident needs as identified in the comprehensive assessment for one of seven sampled residents. (Resident 1)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, osteoarthritis, and osteoporosis. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident was able to communicate her needs clearly and required staff assistance for mobility. Review of the current care plan revealed that Resident 1 was at risk for falls with an intervention for staff to ensure that the resident had a reacher (an assistive tool to help retrieve objects) placed within her reach. In an interview at 1:30 p.m., on September 4, 2025, Resident 1 stated, I haven't had my reacher in a while. I would like to have it. Observation of Resident 1's…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-03 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accomodate the needs and maintain dignity for two of seven sampled residents. (Residents 1 and 3) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included a stroke with hemiplegia on her right dominant side, aphasia (inability to swallow), dysphagia (speech impairment), and depression. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident needed help with self care, had limitations in range of motion on one side of her upper extremities, and required maximum assistance with toileting and dressing. Further review of the MDS assessment revealed that family had relayed to the facility that it was very important for the resident to choose her own activities, clothing, and bed time. A review of the care plan revealed that the resident had a communication deficit and there was an intervention for staff to anticipate and meet her needs. In…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to meet each resident's needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for one of 30 sampled residents. (Resident 194) Clinical record review revealed that Resident 194 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included retention of urine, Parkinson's disease, and dementia. The Minimum Data Set Care Area Assessment summary dated September 3, 2024, noted that the resident's urinary incontinence and cognitive decline/dementia were to be addressed in the care plan. There was no evidence that interventions to address Resident 194's urinary incontinence and cognitive decline/dementia were addressed in the current care plan. In an interview on October 9, 2024, at 2:40 p.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed there was no documented evidence that the identified care areas were addressed in Resident 194's current care plan and they should have been. 28 Pa. Code…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were implemented for two of 30 sampled residents. (Residents 30, 202) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 30 was admitted [DATE], with diagnoses that included diabetes (insufficient production of insulin, causing high blood sugar). A physician's order, dated, May 3, 2023, directed staff to take a finger stick measurement of the resident's blood sugar before each meal at 6:30 a.m., 11:30 a.m., and 4:30 p.m. Review of Resident 30's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed that on August 27, 2023, at 6:30 a.m., October 19, 2023, at 6:30 a.m., and October 25, 2023, at 11:30 a.m., there was a lack of documentation to support that staff took a measurement of the resident's blood sugar. A physician's order, dated July 13, 2023, directed staff to take Resident 30's weight every week on Thursday. Review of the record and the MAR for August, September, and…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES — 87 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.0+1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.6+1.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.3-0.3 vs chain
The other 86 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, per CMS)
1 of 5Avalon Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterHamilton, NJ 1 of 5Bay Harbor Post Acute Healthcare CenterSalisbury, MD 1 of 5Blueberry Hill Rehabilitation And Healthcare CtrBeverly, MA 1 of 5Canterbury Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterRichmond, VA 1 of 5Cape Cod Post Acute CareBrewster, MA 1 of 5Crest Pointe Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterPt Pleasant, NJ 1 of 5Highland Park Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterChelsea, MA 1 of 5Mount Holly Rehabilitation & Healthcare CenterLumberton, NJ 1 of 5Nashua Post Acute CareNashua, NH 2 of 5Arbor Ridge Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterWayne, NJ 2 of 5Atlantic View Post AcuteNewport News, VA 2 of 5Bayview Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterNorth Kingstown, RI 2 of 5Collingswood Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterRockville, MD 2 of 5Elmhurst Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterProvidence, RI 2 of 5Graduate Post AcutePhiladelphia, PA 2 of 5Heritage Hills Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterSmithfield, RI 2 of 5Laurel Brook Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterMount Laurel, NJ 2 of 5Lawrence Rehab & Hcc/The Meadows At LawrenceLawrenceville, NJ 2 of 5Lawrence Rehabilitation HospitalLawrenceville, NJ 2 of 5Lighthouse Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterRevere, MA 2 of 5Lincolnwood Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterNorth Providence, RI 2 of 5North End Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterBoston, MA 2 of 5Orchard Hill Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterTowson, MD 2 of 5Palm Springs Post AcuteChelmsford, MA 2 of 5Riverview Healthcare CommunityCoventry, RI 2 of 5Roosevelt Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterPhiladelphia, PA 2 of 5Southampton Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterRichmond, VA 2 of 5Springfield Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterSpringfield, PA 2 of 5West Chester Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterWest Chester, PA 2 of 5Westgate Hills Rehab & Healthcare CtrBaltimore, MD 2 of 5Willow Brook Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterWilmington, MA 2 of 5YORK Post AcuteYorktown, VA 3 of 5Alexandria Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterAlexandria, VA 3 of 5Aspen Hill Rehabiliation & Healthcare CenterHaverhill, MA 3 of 5Belmont Bay Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterWoodbridge, VA 3 of 5Brighton Post Acute CareBrighton, MA 3 of 5Cambridge Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterMoorestown, NJ 3 of 5Capitol Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterHarrisburg, PA 3 of 5Chelsea Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterGoochland, VA 3 of 5Exton Post AcuteExton, PA

Showing 40 of 86; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CEDAR CREST OPERATOR HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 02/10/2023
LINEAGE HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/10/2023
QUINTO LINEAGE LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 02/10/2023
SKILLED VENTURE LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 02/10/2023
ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK OF NEW YORK - IDB BANK OF YORKOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 02/10/2023
LONG, TROYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/17/2023
SCHUPPER, LESLIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/14/2023
VIROJA, YOGESHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
POSEN, MINDEEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
LIVE WELL PLUS LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/04/2025
MARQUIS LIMITED LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
RELIANT PRO REHAB LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
FOX, DEBORAHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
FLAGLER, OSHERIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/10/2025
KAHANOW, AVIVAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/10/2025
LEVOVITZ, TZVIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/10/2025
ROKEACH, FRAIDEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/10/2025
ROKOWSKY, YITZCHOKIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/10/2025
NFR 2020 IRRV TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
RSBRMK HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
SK NEXGEN TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
TRYKO NEXGEN HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
UAK 2020 IRRV TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
UKR NEXGEN LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
YK NEXGEN TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023
YR NEXGEN TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 39 rows in the source record cover these 26 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

16 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$16.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-3.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.1M
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 73%Medicare 15%Other / private 13%

About 73% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$350per resident / day
operating cost
$10,637per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$339per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in PA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Pennsylvania Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Pennsylvania
$11,954/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$13,688/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,480/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 395760. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-26, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next