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

Slate Belt Health & Rehabilitation Center

701 Slate Belt Blvd, Rd 3, Bangor, PA 18013 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 119 certified beds · (610) 588-6161 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuse1 actual-harm citation
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 21% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
225 Erdman Ave · (610) 588-2225 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
35 N Main St · (610) 588-9425 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
(610) 588-8387 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Park Rd · (610) 588-4656 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.5%16.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.8%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.9%1.5%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms5.7%10.8%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.7%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.5%17.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.4%20.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.2%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.8%4.8%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.3%25.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table9.3%17.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.8%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine40.2%68.7%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.8%22.5%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.2%9.5%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.361.621.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.141.181.80better

§ 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.

44.9% 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 210 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
44.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.17U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.06hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 44.2% 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 113 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 16% 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 SNF44.9%CMS range 38.9–50.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.4%CMS range 9.0–15.310.7%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 discharge44.2%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 discharge45.1%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 discharge40.7%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 identified53.9%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 discharge98.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.7%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 worsened5.0%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 hospitalization7.4%CMS range 4.6–11.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.021.02Oct 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

0.56
RN hours/ resident / day
0.76
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.67
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.98
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.33
RN hoursweekends
43.3%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 119 beds and averages 113.0 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 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 2.98 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.67 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 2.61 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.13 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.65 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-13)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-27)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2026-05-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, facility policy review, review of facility documentation, standards of nursing practice, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to prevent resident neglect that resulted in actual harm of a serious injury (fractured ribs and right patella - knee) for one of 12 residents reviewed. (Resident 10)Findings include: Review of Mosby's Textbook for Nursing Assistants, 11th edition dated January 2025, (comprehensive text used in nursing assistant training programs) revealed, when turning a person in bed you should turn the person toward you. Review of facility documentation titled, Resident Handling Quiz, revealed staff should roll the resident towards them while performing care in bed and when rolling a patient on a bed, staff should stand on the side of the bed to which the patient would roll. Review of the facility policy entitled, Safe Resident Handling and Body Mechanics Policy, dated November 18, 2024, revealed no specifics related to rolling a resident in bed. Review of Nurse Aide (NA) 1's training record revealed she…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-13 · 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

    Based on clinical record review and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with dining in a manner that promoted and maintained dignity for two residents in one of two dining rooms. (Residents 77, 106)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 77 had diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, dementia, and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated January 4, 2026, revealed that the resident had cognitive impairment and required assistance from staff with eating. Review of Resident 77's care plan revealed that the resident was at increased nutrition and hydration risk with an intervention for staff to encourage oral intake and assist with dining. On January 12, 2026, 12:05 p.m. through 12:18 p.m., Nurse Aide (NA) 2 was observed standing to assist Resident 77 to eat lunch, while the resident was seated in the wheelchair. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 106 had diagnoses that included benign neoplasm of the brain, cortical blindness (partial or total loss 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-13 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, observation, clinical record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess a resident's capability to self-administer medications for two of 23 sampled residents. (Residents 7, 12)Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Self-Administration of Medications, last reviewed January 31, 2025, revealed that the facility was to assess and determine whether self-administration of medications was safe and clinically appropriate based on the resident's functionality and health condition. The policy also stated that the facility was to document in the resident's care plan whether the resident or facility staff was responsible for the storage of resident's medications and if the resident had been assessed as being responsible for the storage of his/her medications. The facility was to provide a secure compartment for storage of such medications in the resident's room. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 7 had diagnoses that included arthritis, fracture of the left femur, and muscle…

    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 · D2026-01-13 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolated
    Ensure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
    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 the physician ordered therapeutic diet for one of 23 sampled residents. (Resident 6)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 6 had diagnoses that included heart disease, Parkinson's disease, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (a chronic digestive disorder where stomach acid frequently flows back into the esophagus). A physician's order dated January 9, 2026, directed staff to provide a clear liquid diet for 48 hours. A dietary progress note dated January 12, 2026, stated that resident was to receive a clear liquid diet for all 3 meals on January 10 and 11, 2026. On January 11, 2026, at 1:00 p.m., the resident was observed eating lunch in his bed. The food items on his tray were mechanical soft vegetables and pureed roast beef. In an interview on January 13, 2026, at 11:10 a.m., the Registered Dietitian confirmed that the resident should have received a clear liquid diet for lunch on Sunday, January 11, 2026. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a)…

    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 · D2026-01-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) to prevent the spread of infection for one of 23 sampled residents. (Resident 8)Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, last reviewed January 31, 2025, revealed that enhanced barrier precautions were to be used with any resident with a wound or indwelling device during encounters when contact is expected, including during wound care, the care of feeding and tracheostomy tubes, transferring residents and changing linens. Standard precautions such as hand hygiene always apply and precautions include the use of protective gowns and gloves during the high-risk activities. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 8 had diagnoses that included respiratory failure requiring a tracheostomy, history of a stroke, quadriplegia, dysphagia requiring a feeding tube, and neurogenic bladder requiring an indwelling catheter.…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-06-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on a review of facility policy, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications/biologicals were securely stored in a manner that prevented unauthorized access on one of two nursing units. (Second floor) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications and Biologicals, last reviewed August 1, 2024, revealed that medications and biologicals, including treatment items, were to be securely stored in a locked cabinet/cart or locked medication room that is unaccessible by residents and visitors. Observation on June 2, 2025, at 10:20 a.m., on the second floor nursing unit, revealed that the treatment cart in the hallway was unlocked and unattended and contained several tubes of medicated creams for pain, bottles of saline solution for nose and eyes, and boxes of alcohol pads that were accessible. In an interview on June 2, 2025, at 10:30 a.m., the RN Supervisor confirmed that the treatment cart should have been locked. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-27 · 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 observation and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that meals were served in a manner that maintained each resident's dignity for one of 22 sampled residents. (Resident 79) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 79 had diagnoses that included rheumatoid arthritis, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), and protein-calorie malnutrition. The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident was alert and oriented and had limitations on both sides of his upper extremities. The care plan identified that the resident had a self-care deficit related to muscle weakness and contractures. There was an intervention for staff to provide total assistance with eating. Observation of the lunch meal on the 2nd floor nursing unit on February 26, 2025, at 12:08 p.m., revealed Resident 39 and Resident 79 seated in their room awaiting lunch. At 12:12 p.m., Resident 39 was served and eating their meal. Resident 79 was observed without a meal 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-27 · 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 implement physician's orders for one of 22 sampled residents. (Resident 85) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 85 had diagnoses that included congestive heart failure, pulmonary hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. A physician's order dated January 30, 2025, directed staff to weigh the resident daily. A review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for February 2025, revealed that there was no evidence that staff weighed Resident 85 as ordered on February 9, 11, 15, 16, and 25, 2025. In an interview on February 27, 2025, at 10:58 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that there was no documented evidence that the resident was weighed as ordered. 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 · F2024-02-02 · 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 properly store food and maintain sanitary conditions in the dietary department. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled, Use-By Guide-Quick Reference, last reviewed March 16, 2023, revealed that the use-by date marked on a container should be followed and that time/temperature control for safety directed that foods (milk and meat items) would not be held more than seven days. Review of the facility's policy entitled, Storage of Dry Food Policy, last reviewed March 16, 2023, revealed that containers holding food removed from the original packaging were to be labeled and dated. Observation during the kitchen tour on January 30, 2024, at 9:40 a.m., revealed the following: In the dessert cooler, there was a pitcher of water with lemon slices in it and six small dishes of various salad dressings that were not dated. There was a container of frosting that was dated January 18, 2024. In the cook's cooler, there was an open container of cottage cheese with a…

    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 · D2024-02-02 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident's physician of an incident for two of 23 sampled residents. (Residents 75, 109) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Resident Change in Condition, last reviewed March 16, 2023, revealed that the physician would be notified as soon as the nurse identified a change in condition, accident, or incident. The nurse would record the notification in the resident's health record. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included muscle weakness, senile degeneration of the brain, and repeated falls. Review of a nurse's noted dated November 30, 2023, revealed that Resident 75 had a fall. There was no documented evidence that the resident's physician was notified of the fall. In an interview on February 2, 2024, at 9:42 a.m., the Regional Nurse confirmed that there was no documented evidence…

    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 · D2024-02-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to meet each resident's needs as identified in the comprehensive assessment for one of 23 sampled residents. (Resident 67) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included hallucinations and dementia with mood disturbances, anxiety, and behavior disturbances. The Minimum Data Set assessment Care Area Assessment (CAA) summary dated December 30, 2023, noted that the resident's psychotropic drug use was to be addressed in the care plan. There was no documented evidence that interventions to address Resident 67's psychotropic drug use were included in the care plan. In an interview on February 2, 2024, at 9:40 a.m., the Regional Nurse confirmed that there was no documented evidence that the identified care area (psychotropic drug use) was addressed in Resident 67's current care plan. 28 Pa. Code…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-02 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to attempt non-pharmacological interventions to alleviate pain prior to the administration of pain medication prescribed on an as needed basis for one of 23 sampled residents. (Resident 3) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Pain Management, last reviewed March 16, 2023, revealed that non-pharmacological interventions would be attempted prior to the administration of an as needed pain medication. Interventions for pain would be monitored for effectiveness in the electronic medication record. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 3 had diagnoses that included rheumatoid arthritis and muscle weakness. A physician's order dated January 15, 2024, directed staff to administer the narcotic pain medication, oxycodone, every four hours as needed for pain rated at four through seven of ten. Review of the care plan revealed the resident had chronic pain and interventions included that staff offer relaxation techniques to assist with pain…

    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 · B2026-01-13 · tag F0628 — pattern
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    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 notify the resident and the resident's representative(s) of transfer(s), including the reasons for the moves and Ombudsman information, in writing upon transfer from the facility for three of three sampled residents who were transferred to the hospital. (Residents 7, 8, 45) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 7 was transferred to the hospital on September 23, 2025, after a change in condition. There was no documented evidence that the resident and the resident's representative were provided with a written transfer notice. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 8 was transferred to the hospital on November 13, 2025, after a change in condition. There was no documented evidence that the resident and the resident's representative were provided with a written transfer notice. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 45 was transferred to the hospital on September 30, November 9, and December 23, 2025, after changes in condition. There was no…

    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
  • No harm found · C2024-02-02 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — widespread
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, personnel file review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain reference checks prior to the start of employment for five of five newly hired employees. (Employees 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Pennsylvania Resident Abuse, last reviewed March 16, 2023, revealed that the facility prohibited abuse, mistreatment, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for all residents. The facility was to implement an abuse prohibition program by screening potential hires, including obtaining references from two prior employers from an applicant. Review of the personnel files for newly hired employees revealed the following: Employee 1 started on September 25, 2023, Employees 2 and 3 started on October 23, 2023, and Employees 4 and 5 started on November 13, 2023. For all five new hires, there was no documented evidence that reference checks were obtained through the screening process. In an interview on February 2, 2024, at 9:45 a.m., the Regional Nurse stated…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2024-02-02 · tag F0623 — pattern
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident's representative(s) of transfer and the reasons for the move in writing for three of 23 sampled residents. (Residents 3, 57, 72) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 3 was transferred to and admitted to the hospital on [DATE], after a change in condition. There was no documented evidence that the resident's responsible party was provided with written information regarding the resident's transfer to the hospital. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 57 was transferred to the hospital on January 14, 2024, after a change in condition. There was no documented evidence that the resident's responsible party was provided written information regarding the resident's transfer to the hospital. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 72 was transferred to the hospital on January 9, 2024, after a change in condition. There was no documented evidence that 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.

    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 SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 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 2 of 52.9-0.9 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.6-0.6 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.2-0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 54.0-1.0 vs chain
The other 125 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Autumn Care of MarshvilleMarshville, NC 1 of 5Autumn Care of Myrtle GroveWilmington, NC 1 of 5Autumn Care of WaynesvilleWaynesville, NC 1 of 5Brunswick Health & Rehab CenterAsh, NC 1 of 5Bryn Mawr Extended Care CenterBryn Mawr, PA 1 of 5Caring Heights Community Care & Rehab CtrCoraopolis, PA 1 of 5Colonial Health & Rehab Center, LLCVirginia Beach, VA 1 of 5Currituck Health & Rehab CenterBarco, NC 1 of 5Davidson Health & Rehab CenterLexington, NC 1 of 5Edison Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterNew Castle, PA 1 of 5Gastonia Health & Rehab CenterGastonia, NC 1 of 5Greene Health & Rehab CenterGreensburg, PA 1 of 5Grey Stone Health And Rehabilitation CenterFort Wayne, IN 1 of 5Harmar Village Health & Rehab CenterCheswick, PA 1 of 5Highland Pointe Health & Rehab CenterHighland Heights, OH 1 of 5Hilltop Heights Health & Rehab CenterJohnstown, PA 1 of 5Maple Heights Health & Rehab Center, LLCEbensburg, PA 1 of 5Midtown Oaks Health & Rehab CenterAltoona, PA 1 of 5Mountain City Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterHazleton, PA 1 of 5Providence Health & Rehab CenterBeaver Falls, PA 1 of 5River's Bend Health & Rehab CenterHarrisburg, PA 1 of 5Riverside Health & Rehab CenterMcKeesport, PA 1 of 5South Boston Health & Rehab CenterSouth Boston, VA 1 of 5Tallmadge Health & Rehab CenterTallmadge, OH 1 of 5University Manor Health & RehaCleveland, OH 1 of 5Village Care of KingKing, NC 1 of 5Woodhaven Health & Rehab CenterMonroeville, PA 1 of 5Woodlands Health And Rehab CenterRavenna, OH 2 of 5Aurora Manor Special Care CentAurora, OH 2 of 5Autumn Care Of MadisonMadison, VA 2 of 5Autumn Care Of MechanicsvilleMechanicsville, VA 2 of 5Autumn Care Of SuffolkSuffolk, VA 2 of 5Autumn Care of CorneliusCornelius, NC 2 of 5Autumn Care of RaefordRaeford, NC 2 of 5Autumn Care of SaludaSaluda, NC 2 of 5Autumn Care of ShallotteShallotte, NC 2 of 5Azalea Health & Rehab CenterWilmington, NC 2 of 5Bath Manor Special Care CentreAkron, OH 2 of 5Berea Health & Rehab CenterFredericksburg, VA 2 of 5Broad Mountain Health And Rehabilitation CenterFrackville, PA

Showing 40 of 125; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
SHG REZ LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 07/01/2018
SABER PA HOLDINGS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 12/31/2023
WWBV HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/30/2019
VAN WIRT, PAIGEIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/02/2019
BORTREE, TAMARAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 02/12/2023
VOLPE, BENJAMINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2019
WEISBERG, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2019
NICOLUZAKIS, GREGORYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2019
SABER GOVERNANCE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2019
SAKALAS, LORIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/06/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$12.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+3.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.6M
Related-party expense21% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 77%Medicare 10%Other / private 13%

About 77% 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 $2.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$335per resident / day
operating cost
$10,193per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$346per 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 395494. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-13, 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