Artman Lutheran Home
250 North Bethlehem Pike, Ambler, PA 19002 · Non profit - Church related · 61 certified beds · (215) 643-6333 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
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 | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 14.6% | 16.8% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.3% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 7.4% | 10.8% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.2% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.0% | 17.0% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.9% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 11.3% | 4.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.6% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.9% | 17.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.4% | 68.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.6% | 22.5% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.5% | 9.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.95 | 1.62 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.25 | 1.18 | 1.80 | worse |
§ 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.
53.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 496 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 65.9% 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 223 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 0.63 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 89% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 53.0%CMS range 49.5–56.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.9%CMS range 8.8–13.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 65.9% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 58.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 63.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.2%CMS range 3.2–7.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.82 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 61 beds and averages 53.8 residents a day — about 88% 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 5.39 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.22 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.11 is at or above 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 4.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.62 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.32 to 0.95 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% 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
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
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.
17 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-11 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and the review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a complete and through investigation for resident who sustained a fractured hip (Resident R37) for 1 out of 14 residents reviewed. (Resident R37) Findings include: Review of an incident dated March 14, 2026, submitted to the State Survey Agency reported that the resident's nurse aide found the resident sitting on the toilet in the bathroom located in (his/her) room, with (his/her) companion on the 7:00 a.m. through the 3:00 p.m. nursing shift. The reportable incident stated that the resident's companion reported that the resident fell off the toilet and she (the companion, Employee E8) picked the resident up and put him back on the toilet. The reportable event stated that the resident had severe cognitive impairment, non- ambulatory and needed the maximum assist of 2 people for transfers. According to the reportable event, the resident was assisted onto the toilet around 10:00 a.m. by his nurse aide and the nursing supervisor and was left on the toilet with his…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observations and the review of clinical records it was determined that the facility failed to acknowledge a physician recommendation regarding a resident's positioning during meal times for 1 out of 14 residents reviewed (Resident R37).Findings include: Review of the April 2026 physician orders for Resident R37 included the following diagnoses of dementia (a general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life); arthritis (the swelling and tenderness of one or more joints); macular degeneration (age related eye condition in which individuals cannot see things directly in front of them); difficulty walking; contracture of left hand, and fracture of unspecified part of neck of left femur and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Review of the resident's Comprehensive Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated December 18, 202,5 indicated that the resident was cognitively impaired. During an observation on April 29, 2026, at 12:30 p.m. the resident was…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
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 staff interviews and the review of clinical documentation, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident received supervision during toileting and was transferred by facility staff members after sustaining a fall incident in the bathroom for one of 14 residents reviewed. (Resident R37)Findings include: Review of Companion Services/Private Caregivers policy with a revision date of July 26, 2018, revealed it is the policy of the facility to obtain documentation of services to be provided by a companion or private caregiver from the resident representative or employer. Review of Resident R37's clinical record revealed April 2026 physician orders including the following diagnoses: Dementia (general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life); Arthritis (swelling and tenderness of one or more joints); Macular Degeneration (age related eye condition in which individuals cannot see things directly 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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
Based on the review of clinical records, facility fall investigation, it was determined that the facility failed to implement a care plan intervention for Resident R1 by not providing a properly functioning chair alarm as specified in the resident's individualized care plan for one of five residents reviewed. (Resident R1).Findings Include:Review of Resident R1's care plan dated September 5, 2025, revealed an intervention requiring the use of an electronic chair alarm to alert staff of unassisted rising. Ensure the device is in place every shift.Review of Resident R1's fall investigation dated October 7, 2025, revealed that the resident was found lying on his right side in his room on the floor with his head against the wall and his legs still positioned on his leg rests.Further review of the investigation revealed that current fall preventions included: bed and chair alarm to alert staff of unassisted rising, hourly checks due to poor safety awareness and fall risk, nonskid socks while in bed, and staff to remain with resident at all times while in the bathroom. Continued review of…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-23 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility provided documentation, review of clinical record, and interview with staff, it was determined that facility did not ensure to provide pneumococcal immunization according to professional standards of practice for one of 73 residents reviewed (Resident R165) Findings include: Review of facility provided policy 'Immunization Policy,' unknown date, indicates that All residents will be offered the Pneumococcal vaccine per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations (age/timing of previous vaccine). According to CDC Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, revised on April 22, 2024, indicates that The key to preventing serious adverse reactions after vaccination is effective screening. Every patient should be screened for contraindications and precautions before administering any vaccine dose. Further review of facility's policy 'Immunization Policy,' unknown date, indicates that these vaccines will be administered by any appropriately qualified personnel who are following facility procedures, without the need for an…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews with residents and staff, observations, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility did not ensure the residents' right to file a grievance anonymously was available for the residents for nine of nine residents interviewed (Resident R15, 16, 26, 28, 29, 39, 42, 43, and 159). Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Resident Concerns/Grievances not dated states, The resident or family has the right to file a grievance anonymously by using the locked boxes on the households which are routinely checked by the DON (Director of Nursing). During resident council on May 22, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. with nine alert and oriented residents (Resident R15, 16, 26, 28, 29, 39, 42, 43, and 159) all agreed that they were not aware it was their right to be able to file a grievance anonymously. During an interview and observation with Community Life Leader, Employee E6, on May 22, 2025, at 11:30 a.m., a sign posted in one of the three skilled nursing units titled Notice of Grievance Procedures indicated the residents had the right to file a grievance…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 review of facility policies, clinical record reviews and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that all allegations of abuse and neglect were reported immediately to the Pennsylvania Department of Health for one of 16 residents reviewed. (Resident R28) Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Abused or Neglected Residents revied 2023, states the resident has the right to freedom from neglect and protects residents from real or perceived abuse or neglect from any source. The policy defines neglect as deprivation by an individual, including caretaker, a facility, its employees, or service providers to provide good and services that is necessary to attain or maintain physical mental emotional psychosocial well-being. The same policy states that the investigation will include the witness(es) interview and signed statement will be obtained. Any suspected or alleged abuse will be reported to the Department of Health. Resident R28 was admitted to the facility…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-23 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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, interviews with staff and residents and reviews of policies and procedures, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct complete and thorough investigations into allegations of abuse and neglect for one of 16 residents reviewed. (Resident R28) Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Abused or Neglected Residents revised 2023, states the resident has the right to freedom from neglect and protects residents from real or perceived abuse or neglect from any source. The policy defines neglect as deprivation by an individual, including caretaker, a facility, its employees, or service providers to provide good and services that is necessary to attain or maintain physical mental emotional psychosocial well-being. The same policy states that the investigation will include the witness(es) interview and signed statement will be obtained. Any suspected or alleged abuse will be reported to the Department of Health. Review of Resident R28 was admitted to the facility…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility provided documentation, review of clinical record, and interview with staff, it was determined that facility did not provide Covid-19 immunizations according to professional standards of practice for 35 of 73 residents reviewed (Residents R7, R26, R35, R27, R48, R43, R29, R18, R177, R15, R178, R20, R14, R38, R166, R167, R168, R169, R170, R171, R172, R173, R174, R8, R175, R176, R179, R180, R39, R37, R9, R46, R40, R22, R181) Findings include: Review of facility provided policy 'Immunization Policy,' unknown date, indicates that All residents, staff and volunteers will be offered covid-19 vaccine per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations. According to CDC Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, revised on April 22, 2024, indicates that The key to preventing serious adverse reactions after vaccination is effective screening. Every patient should be screened for contraindications and precautions before administering any vaccine dose. Further review of facility's policy 'Immunization Policy,' unknown date,…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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 interviews review of clinical records and facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to have a scheduled maintenance for residents' bed rails to ensure safety for one of 16 resident records reviewed (Resident R28). Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled Bed Rails states the facility will ensure individual bed rail assessments and evaluations are performed on a regular basis. Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with heart failure, atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat causing increased risk for stroke). Review of Resident R28's nursing note revealed an incident on March 11, 2025, the resident was found on the floor with a hematoma (bruise) to the left side of the head. The nurse noted that the right-side bed rail was broken, right side rail was in up position but would not lock in place. Interview with the Director of Maintenance on May 22, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. stated the bed rails were checked only at the time that a room was prepare for a new…
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.
Show the remaining 7 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-23 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 review of clinical record, review facility policy, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the residents were provided with education regarding the benefits and potential side effects of influenza immunization for two of two residents reviewed (Resident R29 and Resident R14). Findings: Review facility policy on Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccination revealed that under section Policy, it is the policy of [NAME] that each resident is to be protected against the influenza virus. Influenza vaccine will be offered for each resident annually. Under section Purpose to control a potential outbreak and prevent residents, visitors, and employees from being infected by the influenza virus. Under section procedure #1. Up and admission, readmission and annually the residence medical record will be reviewed for a history of influenza pneumococcal vaccination. #3 Each year the influenza vaccination is offered in a high dose for residents over [AGE] years of age and if indicated,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 review of facility policy, review of facility documentation, and review of clinical records it was determined that the facility failed to develop a person-center, comprehensive care plan related to impaired skin integrity for one of 15 residents reviewed (Resident R26). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Care Planning, undated, revealed a care plan shall be developed for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs. The resident's comprehensive care plan is developed within 7 days of submission of the complete MDS (Minimum Data Set - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) assessment. Review of Resident R26's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident had short and long-term memory problems and was at risk of developing pressure ulcers. Review of facility skilled wound report dated August 15, 2024, by Licensed Nurse, Employee E5, revealed Resident R26 had a deep tissue injury…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-23 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, review of facility policy, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to ensure food was served at safe, appetizing temperatures for one of six residents observed in the dining room (Resident R31). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Food Temperatures, undated, revealed microwave re-heating is appropriate and acceptable when a resident requests to have their food reheated. Upon removal of the food from the microwave, the food will be stirred or rotated and then allowed to stand covered for two minutes before served to assure that the temperature will be under 180 degrees Fahrenheit. Review of Resident R31's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and had diagnoses of muscle weakness and dementia (group of symptoms affective memory, thinking abilities, and social abilities). Observations on August 21, 2024, at 12:35 p.m. in the Park dining room revealed dietary aide, E4, heated up a plate of food (hot…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-23 · tag F0807 — failed to offer suitable drinks — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides drinks consistent with resident needs and preferences and sufficient to maintain resident hydration.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations, review of clinical record, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide beverages consistent with resident needs for one of six residents reviewed with altered fluid consistency (Resident R17). Findings Include: Review of Resident R17's clinical record revealed a physician order dated August 18, 2024, that revealed Resident R17 was ordered nectar consistency liquids (beverages that are thicker than water and fall slowly from a spoon). Observations on August 21, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. revealed Resident R17's breakfast tray was sitting on the overbed table in the resident's room. Observations revealed the meal ticket indicated Resident R17 was to be provided nectar thick liquids. Further observations revealed Resident R17 was provided with orange juice that was of thin, regular, consistency. Interview on August 21, 2024, at 10:05 a.m. with Nurse Aide, Employee E3, confirmed Resident R17 was provided with the wrong beverage. 211.10 (c) Resident care policies. 211.12 (d)(5) Nursing services.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-23 · tag F0882 — isolatedDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy/Infection Control Program Overview, interview staff, review of facility record, it was determined that the facility failed to designate one or more individual as the infection preventionist who work at least part time at the facility. Findings include: Review facility Infection Control Program Overview, under section Goals: The goals of the infection control program are to #a Decrease the risk of infection to residents and personnel #b Monitor for occurrence of infection and implement appropriate control measures. #c Identify and correct problems relating to infection control practices #d ensure compliance with the state and federal regulations relating to infection control. Under section Division of Responsibilities for Infection Control Activities: the administrator is ultimately responsible for the infection control program. #A. Infection control practitioner or designee Responsibility is delegated to a staff member acting as the infection control practitioner or to a trained infection control practitioner to carry out the daily functions of the…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
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 observation, review of facility policy, clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate Activity of Daily Living (ADL) for two of 6 residents reviewed who were unable to carryout ADL care independently. (Resident R1 & R3) Findings include: Review of MDS (Minimum Data Set-assessment of resident care need) for Resident R1 dated April 2, 2024, revealed that the resident was dependent on the staff for showers, transfers, and toileting. MDS also revealed that the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental status) score of 8 which indicated that the resident's cognitive status for daily decision making was moderately impaired. Clinical record indicated that Resident R1 was scheduled for showers on Wednesday and Saturday from 7-3 shift. On June 13, 2024, at 2:35 p.m. a review of Shower Task Performance Documentation with the Director of Nursing revealed and confirmed that Resident R1 was not given showers on Wednesdays May 8, 15, 22,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 review of facility policies, clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician orders were followed related to toileting program, tubi-grips, gel cushion to wheelchair, for one resident of six residents reviewed. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of facility policy, Medication Order undated, revealed, it is the policy of [NAME] Lutheran to establish uniform guidelines in the receiving and recording of medication orders. To ensure safe and effective use of medications and that medication information on residents is captured, used and communicated. Review of active physician order for Resident R1 revealed an order dated December 11, 2023 toileting schedule: Take resident to the bathroom/offer toileting resident at around 8:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m., 5:00 pm, 8:00 p.m. check and change as need while asleep. Order dated May 1, 2023 tubi-grips to bilateral lover extremities place on in am and remove at bedtime. On November 3, 2022,…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LIBERTY LUTHERAN SERVICES | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 01/01/2001 |
| BORTZ, BEVERLY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/16/2013 |
| BRECKENRIDGE, LINDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/18/2019 |
| FERNANDEZ-MILLER, ANNABELLE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| HIMLER, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/12/2018 |
| MATTHIAS-LONG, WAYNE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/09/2025 |
| ROTH, FRANK | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/09/2025 |
| STEITZ, PAMELA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/09/2025 |
| STETTLER, DAVE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/06/2015 |
| BARNUM, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/10/2006 |
| FISHER, LUANNE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/02/1977 |
| MYERS, JOAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/09/1987 |
| GALANTE, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/13/2007 |
| GOLDBERG, TODD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2014 |
| HOFFMAN, DANA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/04/2025 |
| ABINGTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2014 |
| BAKER TILLY ADVISORY GROUP LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| BANK OF AMERICA CORP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/16/2006 |
| INTELYCARE INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/21/2022 |
| KREISHER MILLER | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/31/2025 |
| LOYAL ASSISTANT, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| MORGAN STANLEY | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| POWERBACK REHABILITATION LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| RKL LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| TWOMAGNETS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 44 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
11 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.
This home reported $2.3M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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
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.
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 395922. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-11, 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.