Advanced Health Care Of Hanover

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

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.

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.

63.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 215 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.1% 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 276 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 1.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 99% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 46 beds and averages 42.0 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 4 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 5.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.21 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.24 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 4.98 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.20 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.32 to 0.94 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 3 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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.

21 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-05-08 · tag F0940 — failed to train staff — pattern
  Develop, implement, and/or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members.
  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 a review of employee personnel and education records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement and maintain an effective training program so that each staff member received 12 hours of in-service training annually for five of seven staff members reviewed. (Employees 6, 8, 9, 11, and 12)Findings include:Review of the facility's Facility assessment dated [DATE], reveals that all staff were to be in-serviced and receive mandatory training annually on topics that included resident abuse, neglect and exploitation, trauma informed care, and dementia management. In an interview on May 7, 2026, at 10:40 a.m., the Administrator confirmed that staff are required to complete 12 hours of in-service training a year. Review of Employee 6's (E 6) personnel record revealed that the facility hired them on November 21, 2023. Review of facility training records dated May 7, 2025, to May 7, 2026, revealed that E 6 completed only 7.5 hours of in-service education. Review of Employee 8's (E…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on staff interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure physicians' orders were implemented for two of 12 sampled residents. (Residents 8 and 71)Findings include: In an interview on May 6, 2026, at 12:45 p.m., the Director of Nursing stated if vital signs were ordered by the physician with a medication, that staff were to obtain vital signs prior to medication administration and document it in the vital sign section of the clinical record. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 8 had diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure). On April 17, 2026, the physician ordered staff to administer two blood pressure medicines. One was (amlodipine) once a day and the other was (carvedilol) twice a day. Staff were not to administer both medications if the resident's systolic blood pressure (the first measurement of blood pressure when the heart beats and the pressure is at its highest) was less than 100 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg). Review of Resident 8's April and May 2026 Medication Administration Records revealed that…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-29 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  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 address or implement an order by the orthopedic surgeon to prevent a decline in range of motion for one of four sampled residents. (Resident 1) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included heart failure, osteoarthritis of the right hand, and vision loss. The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident was alert, dependent on staff for activities of daily living, and had a limitation in range of motion to one arm. On June 11, 2025, the orthopedic surgeon ordered a Dynasplint (stretching device to increase joint movement) to the right elbow. Review of the occupational therapy treatment note, dated June 20, 2025, revealed that staff was to ensure the resident had the Dynasplint in place for 30 minutes three times a day after every meal. There was no documented evidence that staff had implemented the recommendations to ensure that the Dynasplint…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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 three of 14 sampled residents. (Residents 12, 20, 44) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included diabetes, lower limb cellulitis, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Care Area Assessment (CAA) summary dated May 25, 2025, noted that the resident's vision, activities of daily living, dental care, and nutrition were to be addressed in the care plan. There was no documented evidence that interventions to address those areas were included on Resident 12's care plan. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included hearing loss, high cholesterol, and a recent total knee replacement. The MDS CAA summary dated June 4,…

  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 · Ecited before2025-06-18 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physicians' orders for four of 14 sampled residents. (Residents 12, 20, 23, 208) Findings include: Review of the policy entitled, Medication Administration, last reviewed January 8, 2025, revealed that staff were to administer medications in accordance with the written orders of the physician and ensure vital signs were performed with appropriate medications. In an interview on June 18, 2025, at 2:30 p.m., with the Director of Nursing stated that any vital signs obtained for parameters per the physicians' orders were to be entered into the Medication Administration Record (MAR) as indicated. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included heart failure and kidney disease. On May 20, 2025, the physician ordered for staff to weigh the resident daily and to notify the physician of weight gain greater than five…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-18 · tag F0628 — isolated
  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

  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 and the resident's representative of the bed hold policy and transfer, including the reasons for the transfer and Ombudsman information, in writing upon transfer from the facility, for two of two sampled residents who were transferred to the hospital. (Residents 2, 41) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 2 was transferred and admitted to the hospital on [DATE], after a change in condition. There was no documentation to support that the resident or the resident's responsible party or legal representative was provided written information regarding the bed hold policy or the transfer to the hospital. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 41 was transferred and admitted to the hospital on [DATE], after a change in condition. There was no documentation to support that the resident or the resident's responsible party or legal representative was provided written…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-18 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, 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 complete and electronically transmit encoded Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) within 14 days for one of 14 sampled residents. (Resident 13) Findings include: Clinical record review on June 17, 2025, revealed that Resident 13 had a Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], that was still in progress and had not yet been completed and transmitted to CMS as per the time requirements. In an interview on June 18, 2025, at 9:50 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that the MDS assessment had not been completed and transmitted to CMS within the required time frame. CFR 483.20(f)(3) Transmittal Requirements Previously cited 7/3/24.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-18 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide 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 clinical record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide services to maintain adequate grooming and hygiene for one of 14 sampled residents who required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). (Resident 23) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 23 had diagnoses that included heart failure and metabolic encephalopathy (a change in brain function). The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 23 was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and bathing. Review of the care plan revealed that the resident required assistance from staff for ADLs, including grooming, personal hygiene and bathing. On June 16, 2025, at 10:30 a.m., the resident was observed in bed. His fingernails were long and dirty. On June 17, at 11:40 a.m., the resident was observed with his nails in the same condition. In an interview at that time, Resident 23 stated he would like his nails to be…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-18 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents were served preferred items on their meal trays for one of 14 sampled residents. (Resident 208) Findings include: Review of the facility dining services menu for June 17, 2025, revealed that the breakfast meal included fruit, pancakes with syrup, hot or cold cereal, sausage, milk, and choice of juice. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 208 had diagnoses that included chronic kidney disease and heart failure. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident had no cognitive impairment. On June 17, 2025, at 9:17 a.m., the resident was observed with her breakfast meal that consisted of eggs on a tortilla, fruit, hot tea, and milk. Review of the resident's menu selections that were submitted to the kitchen revealed that she requested the pancake and sausage for her breakfast meal. The resident was observed having difficulty…

  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 · D2025-06-18 · tag F0810 — isolated
  Provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
  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 ensure that adaptive equipment was provided to one of 14 sampled residents. (Resident 208) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 208 had diagnoses that included a recent upper arm fracture and osteoarthritis to the right dominant hand. Review of a nurse's note dated June 15, 2025, revealed that the resident had vision problems. The care plan indicated that the resident had vision problems and required assistance with activities of daily living, including dietary tasks. Occupational therapy documentation dated June 8 and 9, 2025, indicated the resident required an inner lip plate and built-up utensils for every meal, visual cues when eating, and for staff to cut up her food. Observations on June 16, 2025, from 1:05 p.m. to 1:25 p.m., revealed Resident 208 was eating her lunch in her room. She did not have an inner lip plate on her tray and was observed having difficulty picking up and managing her cheeseburger with her right hand. On June 17, 2005, from 9:00 a.m.…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$3,387 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $3,387 — penalty dated 2024-01-22

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ADVANCED HEALTH CARE — 26 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 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 $61K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

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