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

Riverton Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center

803 North Wahneta St, Allentown, PA 18103 · For profit - Individual · 111 certified beds · (610) 782-8300 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (610) 782-8300 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Resident-funds citation (F0565)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

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
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1202 Hanover Ave · (610) 437-6490 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2174 West Union Blvd · (610) 691-2845 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2174 W Union Blvd · (610) 691-4304 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Place of worship
1933 Hanover Ave · (610) 432-8762

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 improved from 4 to 5 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 rating5★
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 increased14.1%16.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.9%6.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms58.2%10.8%6.5%check this — see note marked dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.1%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened18.2%17.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.9%20.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.3%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.5%4.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.6%25.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table9.6%17.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.6%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine75.5%68.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.4%22.5%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.9%9.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.731.621.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.391.181.80better

This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ 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.

42.4% 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 213 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

42.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
70.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.13U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.04hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 70.5% 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 61 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 0.13 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 9% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 SNF42.4%CMS range 35.2–48.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.1%CMS range 7.3–13.710.7%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 discharge70.5%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 discharge54.1%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 discharge65.6%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 identified99.4%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 setting100.0%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 discharge100.0%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 stay1.3%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 worsened0.6%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 hospitalization7.8%CMS range 4.8–10.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.051.02Oct 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

0.63
RN hours/ resident / day
0.83
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.02
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.48
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.47
RN hoursweekends
26.3%
Total nursing turnover
41.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 111 beds and averages 104.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.480 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.02 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 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.59 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.70 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% is below 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-05)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-19)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-18 · 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, facility policy review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were implemented for one of six sampled residents. (Resident 1) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Administering Medications, dated December 1, 2025, revealed that staff should check the medication label three times to verify the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right time, and the right route before the medication was administered. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure), and atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm). Review of a physician's progress note dated February 28, 2026, revealed that staff had administered a medication used to prevent and treat anxiety disorders and seizures (clonazepam), an antidepressant medication (trazadone), and a medication used to treat high cholesterol…

    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 · Fcited before2025-12-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve foods in a sanitary manner in the food service department to prevent the potential for foodborne illness. Findings include:Observation during the initial kitchen tour on December 3, 2025 at 10:30 a.m., revealed the following:Inside the stand up freezer, there were two plastic bags of French fries and three additional paper bags of French fries that were not labeled or dated. There was one bag of chicken fingers that was not labeled or dated. There were two containers of ice cream in a plastic bag that were not labeled or dated. There was a white plastic bag of a food item in this same freezer that was not labeled or dated. In this stand up freezer, there was an accumulation of crumbs on the bottom of the freezer. The convection ovens were very soiled with grease on the doors and the racks. There was an accumulation of burnt crumbs on the bottoms of both of the ovens. There was an area of a black substance stained on the right side of the back splash of the stove next 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-05 · 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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physicians' orders for two of 21 sampled residents. (Residents 7 and 109)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 7 had diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus. A physician's order dated October 9, 2025, directed staff to weigh the resident every two weeks. A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for October 2025 and November 2025 revealed that there was no evidence that staff weighed Resident 7 as ordered. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 109 had diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure) and chronic systolic (congestive) heart failure. On November 6, 2025, the physician ordered that staff weigh Resident 109 daily for four weeks, ending December 5, 2025, and every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday thereafter, for treatment of congestive heart failure, and notify the physician if the resident gained more than two pounds (lbs.) in 24 hours or five pounds in a week. Review of Resident 109's MAR for November 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
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-05 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement an intervention to promote wound healing for one of two sampled residents with skin impairments. (Resident 120)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 120 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease, anemia, and cirrhosis of the liver. The resident had a stage three pressure ulcer on the right heel. A physician's order dated December 1, 2025, directed staff to apply a heel boot to the right foot every shift. On December 3, 2025, at 10:30 a.m., 11:58 a.m., and 1:00 p.m., the resident was observed in bed; the heel boot was not in place. On December 4, 2025, at 10:45 a.m. and 12:45 p.m., the resident was observed in bed; the heel boot was not in place. In an interview on December 5, 2025, at 10:25 a.m., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated that the heel boot should have been applied as ordered. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-05 · 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

    Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide physician ordered nutritional supplements for three of 21 sampled residents. (Residents 19, 64, 86)Findings include:Clinical record review revealed that Resident 19 had diagnoses that included brain compression, cerebral infarction (ischemic stroke), and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). A physician's order dated November 24, 2025, directed staff to provide a regular diet with nutritional supplementation. Review of the care plan revealed an intervention for staff to provide the resident's diet as ordered which included nutritional supplementation three times per day. On December 3, 2025, at 12:18 p.m., the resident was observed eating lunch in the dining room. The meal ticket indicated that the resident was to receive a Mighty Shake, a nutritional supplement, with his meal. There was no Mighty Shake observed. On December 4, 2025, at 12:27 p.m., the resident was observed eating the lunch meal in the dining room. The meal ticket again indicated that the resident…

    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 · D2025-12-05 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    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 interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were served preferred food items and items listed on the menu for three of 21 residents. (Residents 19, 79, 86) In addition, based on review of the current menu, it was determined that the facility failed to serve the residents a food item listed on the menu for one meal on two of three nursing units. (Second and Third floor nursing units) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 19 had diagnoses that included brain compression, cerebral infarction (ischemic stroke), and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated October 1, 2025, revealed the resident had no cognitive impairment. A review of Resident 19's care plan revealed he was at risk for malnutrition due to brain compression, cerebral infarction, and dysphagia; and weight changes with an intervention for staff to honor food preferences as able. Review of a nutrition…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-06 · 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 and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were implemented for one of five sampled residents. (Resident 1)Findings include:Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and hypertension. On July 1, 2025, a physician ordered staff to administer a medication to control high cholesterol (simvastatin) daily. Documentation provided by the facility revealed that on July 16, 2025, a nurse administered a cholesterol controlling agent (atorvastatin) to the resident. The medication was not ordered by the physician. In an interview on August 6, 2025, the Assistant Director of Nursing confirmed that the medication administered was not ordered by the physician.28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-30 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    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 staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a call bell was answered in a timely manner for one of ten sampled residents. (Resident 6) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 6 had diagnoses that included heart disease, the presence of a left artificial hip and spinal stenosis. The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident was not cognitively impaired, required assistance from staff with transfers and mobility, and was able to make her needs known. Review of Resident 6's care plan revealed that staff were to provide assistance with transfers and toileting. Observation on December 30, 2024, from 11:20 a.m. through 11:55 a.m. revealed that the resident had her call bell activated and was calling aloud for assistance while in the bathroom. Staff were observed at the nurses' station and in the hallways where the call signal could be clearly seen. Staff were observed…

    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 · Fcited before2024-01-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner in the dietary department and in one of three country kitchens. (Second floor) Findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled, Food Receiving and Storage, last reviewed March 9, 2023, revealed all foods stored in the refrigerator and freezer were to be labeled and dated and items were to be discarded after the use-by date. Observations during the kitchen tour on January 9, 2024, at 8:45 a.m., revealed the following: In the protein cooler, there was a package of opened lunch meat that was not dated. In the freezer, there was an opened box of muffins that was not dated. In the produce cooler, there was a package of opened whipped topping that was not dated. There were four large bins of cut melons, three had a use-by date of January 4, 2024, and one had a use-by date of January 5, 2024. In the dry storage room, the top of the portable air conditioning unit had a layer of white food debris. In the meat cooler in second floor…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-11 · 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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure physicians' orders were implemented for two of 22 sampled residents. (Residents 26 and 83) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 26 had diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure). On June 19, 2023, the physician ordered that staff administer a medication (metoprolol tartrate) two times a day for hypertension. Staff was not to 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 100 millimeters of mercury (mm/Hg). Review of Resident 26's medication administration record (MAR) revealed that staff administered the medication nine times in December 2023, when the resident's SBP was less than 100 mm/Hg. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 83 had diagnoses that included hypertension. On November 14, 2023, the physician ordered that staff administer a medication (amlodipine besylate) one time a day for…

    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
  • No harm found · C2024-01-11 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — widespread
    Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on a review of facility food committee meeting minutes and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to address grievances voiced by the resident group. (Residents 4, 31, 46, 57, and 63) Findings include: In a group interview conducted on January 10, 2023, at 10:37 a.m., Residents 4, 31, 46, 57, and 63 stated that the food was often served cold. Review of food committee meeting minutes dated November 8 and 28, 2023, and December 28, 2023, revealed that multiple residents reported that the food was often served cold. There was a lack of evidence that the facility had addressed the residents' ongoing concerns of cold food. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee.

    Resident Rights 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 5 of 53.0+2.0 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.6+1.4 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.3+0.7 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK OF NEW YORK - IDB BANK OF YORKOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 10/07/2021
HARMAN, DINAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
LONG, TROYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/17/2023
PLANTHOLT, OLIVIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/14/2023
VIROJA, YOGESHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
POSEN, MINDEEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
MARQUIS LIMITED LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/19/2025
NUTRACO LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/28/2025
RELIANT PRO REHAB LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/19/2025
VAN WIRT, PAIGEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2022
NFR 2020 IRRV TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
QUINTO NEXGEN LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
RIVERTON PROPERTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
RSBRMK HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
SK NEXGEN TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
TRYKO NEXGEN HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
UAK 2020 IRRV TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
UKR NEXGEN LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
YK NEXGEN TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021
YR NEXGEN TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/07/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 32 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

14 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.

$16.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$978K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 72%Medicare 14%Other / private 14%

About 72% 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 $978K 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

$431per resident / day
operating cost
$13,094per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$444per 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 395171. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-05, 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