Concordia Lutheran Health And Human Care
134 Marwood Road, Cabot, PA 16023 · Non profit - Corporation · 142 certified beds · (724) 352-1571 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,021 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-12)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 2 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 held steady at 2 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 | 18.1% | 16.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.1% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.6% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.4% | 10.8% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.8% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 26.4% | 17.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.5% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.8% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.6% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 34.3% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.7% | 17.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.7% | 68.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.2% | 22.5% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.9% | 9.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.88 | 1.62 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.22 | 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.
64.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 334 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 54.3% 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 197 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 0.53 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 84% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 | 64.4%CMS range 59.1–69.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.5%CMS range 9.4–15.6 | 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 | 54.3% | 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 | 57.9% | 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 | 47.2% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | 0.9% | 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 | 8.6%CMS range 5.8–11.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.79 | 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 142 beds and averages 136.3 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.45 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.81 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.83 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.61 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.92 to 0.55 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 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.
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.
33 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-07-12 · 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 review of facility policy, clinical records, facility documents, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain each resident received adequate supervision that resulted in an elopement (resident exits to an unsupervised or unauthorized area without the facility's knowledge) for one resident. This failure created an immediate jeopardy situation for one of eight residents who were identified as at risk for elopement (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Incidents and Accidents dated 1/16/24, indicated an incident is an occurrence or situation that is not consistent with the routine care of a resident or with the routine operation of the organization. Incident and accidents requiring an incident/accident report include an elopement. Review of the facility policy Elopements and wandering Residents dated 1/16/24, indicated the facility ensures that residents who exhibit wandering behavior and/or are at risk for elopement receive adequate supervision…
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 · Fcited before2025-08-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 a review of policy, observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly maintain kitchen equipment in a sanitary condition creating the potential for cross contamination in the main kitchen of the facility.A review of facility policy Food Safety and Sanitation dated 1/3/25, indicated all local, state and federal standards and regulations are followed in order to assure a safe and sanitary food service department. During an observation on 8/4/25, at 10:55 a.m., of the walk-in cooler in the main kitchen, conducted with Dietary Supervisor (DS) Employee E2, revealed that the cold air condenser unit had a build-up of dust, grime, and dark colored debris around the fan covers and the area of the condenser immediately around the fans. DS Employee E2 confirmed observation by surveyor when viewed. During an interview on 8/4/25, at 10:57 a.m., DS Employee E2 confirmed that the facility failed to properly maintain kitchen equipment, walk-in cooler, in a sanitary condition creating the potential for cross contamination in the main kitchen 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 · E2025-08-08 · tag F0628 — patternProvide 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 review of facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that the necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider for four of six residents sampled with facility-initiated transfers (Residents R11, R42, R143, and R201), and failed to notify the resident or resident's representative of the facility bed-hold policy (an agreement for the facility to hold a bed for an agreed upon rate during a hospitalization) for three of six resident hospital transfers (Residents R4, R11, and R143).Findings include: Review of facility policy Transfer and Discharge (including AMA) dated 1/7/25, indicated for a transfer to another provider, for any reason, the following information must be provided to the receiving provider: Contact information of the practitioner who was responsible for care of the resident; Resident representative information, including contact information; Advance directive information; All…
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 before2025-08-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 — 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, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store medications for one of four residents (Resident R171) the pharmacy driver left medications unattended and unsecured during a delivery during one observation. Findings include: Review of the facility Medication Storage in the Facility policy dated 1/7/25, stated medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly following manufactures recommendations or those of the supplier. The medication supply is only accessible to licensed nursing personal, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. Review of Resident R171's admission record indicated she was admitted [DATE], with diagnosis that included pulmonary hypertension, atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat), and polycythemia vera (rare type of blood cancer). During an observation on 8/4/25, at 1:12 p.m. the following was observed on Resident' R171's bedside dresser.-(1)…
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 · D2025-08-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to offer residents the opportunity to vote for the May 2025 election. Findings include: Based on review of facility policy, resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to offer residents the opportunity to vote for the May 2025 election. Findings include: Review of policy Resident Rights dated 1/7/25, indicated: Exercise of rights The resident has the right to exercise his or her as a resident of the facility and as a citizen of the United States. Review of resident council minutes for three months failed to include information of the facility asking residents about voting. During a resident group on 8/6/25, residents indicated they were not offered the opportunity to vote for the May 2025 election. During an interview on 8/8/25, at 10:57 a.m. Director of Activities Employee E10, confirmed that the facility failed to offer resident the opportunity to vote for the May 2025 election. 28 Pa. Code 201.29(a) Resident rights
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-08 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate the call bell needs for one of five residents (Resident R80).Findings include: Review of facility policy Call Lights: Accessibility and Timely Response dated 1/7/25, indicated staff will ensure the call light is within reach of resident and secured, as needed. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R80's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 5/2/25, indicated diagnoses of high blood pressure, reduced mobility, and repeated falls. During an observation on 8/4/25, at 11:05 a.m. Resident R80 was sitting in a recliner in their room. The call bell was placed on Resident R80's bed, out of the resident's reach. During an interview on 8/4/25, at 11:25 a.m. Licensed Practical Nurse Employee E1 confirmed Resident R80's call bell was not accessible and unavailable for use to the resident and 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-08 · tag F0575 — isolatedPost a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to have complete contact information for the State Long Care Ombudsman program posted at the facility.Findings include: During an observation on 8/8/25, from 10:07 a.m. to 10:38 a.m. poster were noted on bulletin boards in three places for the ombudsman but they did not have the name, address and correct email listed. During an interview on 8/8/25, at 11:25 a.m. the NHA was informed that the ombudsman postings failed to have complete contact information State Long Care Ombudsman program. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(3) Management
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-08 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy, clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents medication regime was free from unnecessary psychotropic medication for one of four residents (Resident R10).Review of facility policy Use of Psychotropic Medication(s) date 1/3/25, indicated that residents only receive psychotropic medications when other nonpharmacological interventions are clinically ineffective. Additionally, these medications should only be used to treat the resident's medical symptoms and not used to discipline or staff convenience, which would deem it a chemical restraint. A psychotropic drug is any drug that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behaviors. Psychotropic medications are the be used only when a practioner determines that the medication(s) is appropriate to treat a resident's specific, diagnosed, and documented condition and the medication(s) is beneficial to the resident, as demonstrated by monitoring 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-08 · 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 policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans that included specific and individualized interventions to address the care needs of residents for one of two residents reviewed (Resident R84), relating to visual impairment.Findings include: Review of the facility policy Comprehensive Care Plans dated 1/7/25, indicated that the comprehensive, person-centered care plan included measurable objectives and time frames, to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and all services that are identified to meet the resident's needs. Review of the clinical record revealed that Resident R84 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R84's MDS (Minimum Data Set, periodic assessment of care needs) dated 7/20/25, indicated diagnoses of hip fracture, depression, and migraine. Section B1000. Vision revealed the resident's ability to see in adequate light 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 · Dcited before2025-08-08 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that residents received proper treatment for pressure ulcers for one of five residents (Resident R5). Findings include: Review of facility policy Wound Treatment Management dated 1/7/25, indicated to promote wound healing of various types of wounds, it is the policy of this facility to provide evidence based - treatments in accordance with current standards of practice and physician orders. Treatments will be documented on the Treatment Administration Record (TAR). Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R5's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 7/11/25, indicated diagnoses of high blood pressure, hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body), and hyperlipidemia (high levels of fat in the blood). Review of a physician order dated 7/1/25, indicated to cleanse coccyx (tailbone)…
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 before2025-08-08 · 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 review of facility policy, review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to identify and assess a resident for smoking safety in a timely manner for one of two residents (Resident R89).Findings include: Review of the facility policy Resident Smoking dated 1/7/25, indicated that all residents will be asked about tobacco use during the admission process, and during each quarterly or comprehensive MDS (Minimum Data Set- periodic assessment of resident care needs) assessment process. Residents who smoke will be further assesses, using a smoking assessment tool designated by the facility, to determine whether or not supervision is required for smoking, or of the resident is safe to smoke at all. Review of Resident R89's clinical record revealed documentation from the hospital dated 2/3/25, that resident is a smoker and smokes one pack of cigarettes per day, and has been smoking for the past 40 years. Review of clinical record…
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 22 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policies and clinical records, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly monitor resident's personal refrigerators to ensure that food is properly stored and maintained for two of two residents (Residents R5 and R143), and failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) were implemented for two of three residents (Resident R10 and R40). Findings include: Review of facility policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions dated 1/3/25, indicated the facility will implement enhanced barrier precautions for the prevention of transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO). Enhanced barrier precautions may be implemented for residents with any of the following: Wounds and/or indwelling medical devices even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO. During an observation on 8/4/25, at 10:50 a.m. Resident R5 had a small personal refrigerator in their room. The temperature log had data recorded for 8/1/25, but 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-08 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop 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 facility policy, clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to complete Influenza vaccination consent and administer the Influenza vaccination in a timely manner for one of five residents (Resident R3).Findings include: Review of facility policy Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 4/28/25, indicated all residents and employees will be offered the influenza vaccine. Between October 1st and March 31st each year, the influenza vaccine shall be offered. The resident or employee will be provided information and education regarding the benefits and potential side effects. Education shall be documented in the residents or employee's medical record. Review of the admission record indicated that Resident R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of R3's Minimum Data Set (MDS-periodic assessment of care needs) dated 1/7/25, included diagnoses of high blood pressure, anemia (too little iron in the body causing fatigue), and atrial fibrillation (disease…
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 · Fcited before2024-08-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy, observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly label food products in the dry storage area and maintain sanitary conditions in the dish room and kitchen which created the potential for cross contamination in the designated main kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility policy Date Marking for Food Safety dated 1/16/24, indicated the facility adheres to date marking system to ensure the safety of ready-to-eat, time/temperature control for food safety. During an observation of the main designated kitchen on 8/25/24 at 10:00 a.m, at the following was observed: - 1 bag of life cereal- no label or date - 2 boxes of pineapple juice- no dates - 1 bag of elbow pasta-no date - 2 boxes of [NAME] Buddy-no date - 1 box of Oatmeal Cream Pie- no date - 1 box of Fudge Rounds-no date Walk in Freezer-(1) bag of meat- no label or date Walk in cooler-(3)crates of drinks, stored on the floor During an observation of the main designated kitchen on 8/25/24, at 10:15…
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 · E2024-08-29 · tag F0554 — patternAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to determine the ability to self-administer medications for three of six residents (Residents R24, R77, and R281). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Resident Self-Administration of Medication dated 1/16/24, indicated it is the policy of the facility to support each resident's right to self-administer medication. A resident may only self-administer medications after the facility's interdisciplinary team has determined which medications may be self-administered safely. The care plan must reflect resident self-administration. Review of the admission record indicated Resident R77 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R77's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 7/18/24, indicated the diagnoses of renal insufficiency (condition where the kidneys lose the ability to remove waste and balance fluids), atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm), and high blood…
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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — patternProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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, clinical record review, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that appropriate treatment and services were provided for five of seven residents with a urinary catheter (a hollow, flexible tube that collects urine from the bladder and leads to a drainage bag) (Resident R38, R63, R78, R93 and R99). Findings include: Review of facility policy Indwelling Catheter Use and Removal dated 1/16/24, indicated if an indwelling catheter is in use, the facility will provide appropriate care for the catheter in accordance with current professional standards and practice of resident care policies and procedures that include but are not limited to: . Keeping the catheter anchored to prevent excessive tension on the catheter. . Securement of the catheter to facilitate flow of urine, prevention of kinks in the tubing and positioning below the level of the bladder. Review of Resident R38's clinical record indicate re-admission to facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to revise/update care plans for two of seven residents to accurately reflect the current status of the resident (Resident R54 and R86). Findings include: A review of the facility policy Care Plan Revision Upon Status Change dated 1/16/24, indicated the comprehensive care plan will be reviewed, and revised as necessary, when a resident experiences a status change. Review of Residents R54's clinical record indicates an admission date of 6/15/23. Review of Resident R54's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 5/28/24, indicated diagnosis of hypertension (high blood pressure), coronary artery disease (common type of heart disease) and diabetes (high sugar in the blood). Review of Resident R54's physician orders dated 7/17/23, indicate tubigrips bilateral lower extremities on in the a.m. off in the p.m. Review of Resident R54's Treatment administered record for August 2024 indicate tubigrips applied as ordered. Review of Resident R54's care…
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 before2024-08-29 · 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 observation, facility procedure review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that residents were provided appropriate treatment and care of a medical device for one of four residents (Resident R283). Findings include: Review of the facility procedure Closed Suction Drain with Bulb: Management dated 1/16/24, indicated to assess the closed suction drain and tube for proper functioning. Ensure patency, airtight connections, and presence of any leaks or kinks in the drainage system. Secure the drain to the patient's clothing with a safety pin. Ensure the suction device is below the level of the wound and does not pull at the insertion site. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R283 admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnoses of rib fractures, atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm), heart failure (heart doesn ' t pump blood as well as it should), s/p cholecystitis with possible perforation (gallbladder…
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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with standards of practice and obtain physician orders regarding the dressing displacement for one of three residents (Resident R100). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT-wound vac- used to draw out fluid and infection from a wound to help it heal) dated 1/16/24, indicated to avoid leaving the NPWT device off for more than two hours. If this occurs, remove the old dressing and initiate an NPWT dressing or apply an alternative absorptive dressing as prescribed by the practitioner. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R100 admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnosis of sepsis (extreme response to an infection), depression, and pressure ulcer of the sacral region (a triangular bone that connects the spine with the hip and pelvic cavity. Review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions of respiratory equipment for two of eight residents reviewed (Residents R38 and R281), and failed to care plan use and management of respiratory equipment for two of three residents (Resident R5 and R6). Findings include: Review of facility policy Oxygen Concentrator dated 1/16/24, indicated that oxygen is administered under orders of the attending physician, except in the case of an emergency. Review of Resident R5's clinical record indicated admission to the facility on 3/14/24, with the diagnoses of heart failure (heart doesn't pump blood as well as it should), Parkinson's Disease (disorder of the nervous system that results in tremors), and diabetes (a long-term condition in which the body has trouble controlling blood sugar and using it for energy). Review of Resident R5's physician orders dated 5/11/24, indicated: -Change CPAP/BIPAP (a continuous positive airway…
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 · D2024-08-29 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain medications were administered as ordered by the physician and failed to notify the physician of missed medications for one of four residents (Residents R335). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Unavailable Medications dated 1/16/24 indicated the facility maintains a contract with a pharmacy provider to supply the facility with routine, as needed (PRN), and emergency medications. A supply of commonly used medications is maintained in house for timely initiation of medications. Medications may be unavailable for a number of reasons. Staff shall take immediate action when it is known that the medication is unavailable, notify physician of inability to obtain medication upon notification or awareness that the medication is unavailable. Obtain alternative treatment orders and/or specific order for monitoring resident while medication is on hold. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R335 was a new admission to the facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store medical supplies and biologicals in one of four medication rooms (Blankenbuehler medication room). Findings include: A review of the facility policy Medication Storage in the Facility last reviewed 1/16/24, indicates medications are to be stored safely, securely, and properly. A review of the facility policy Date Marking for Food Safety last reviewed 1/16/24, indicates the individual opening or preparing a food shall be responsible for date marking the food at the time the food is opened or prepared. During an observation on 8/26/24, at 11:08 a.m. of the Blankenbuehler Medication Room the following was observed under the sink: . One container of Micro-kill bleach wipes . One gallon of distilled water During an observation on 8/26/24, at 11:08 a.m. of the Blankenbuehler Medication Room, the following was observed in the resident pantry refrigerator: . One opened bag of cheddar cheese cubes, not marked with date/time opened. . Two box of AA batteries .…
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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) documents, clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions for one of two residents with an enteral feeding (Resident R96), and failed to prevent the potential for cross contamination during a dressing change for one of three residents (Resident R93). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) dated 1/16/24, indicated EBP - conditions to address with precautions includes wounds, indwelling medical devices (central lines, dialysis catheters feeding tubes, and tracheostomy/ventilator tubes), even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a multi drug resistant organism (MDRO). Gowns and gloves are to be worn during high contact activities such as device care or use: central lines, urinary catheters, feeding tubes, tracheostomy/ventilator tubes. Review of the CDC's Frequently asked Questions about Enhanced…
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 · D2024-07-12 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolatedAdminister the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of job descriptions, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing did not effectively manage the facility to make certain that necessary care and services were provided to residents requiring adequate supervision to prevent elopement. Findings include: Review of CFR 483.70 Administration. A facility must be administered in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. Based on the findings in this report that identified that the facility failed to maintain necessary supervision to prevent elopement which resulted in one resident being found at the bottom of ten stairs in a wheelchair after elopement and placed seven other residents in an Immediate Jeopardy. Facility failed to provide fundamental principal that applies to treatment and care provided to facility residents. The facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with…
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 · Fcited before2023-10-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on facility policy, observations and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions in the dish room which created the potential for cross contamination. (Main Kitchen) Findings include: Review of facility policy Sanitation Inspection dated 1/6/23, indicated all food service areas shall be kept clean, sanitary, free from litter, rubbish and protected from rodents, roaches, flies and other insects. During an observation of dish room on 10/18/23, at 1:15 p.m. it was revealed area above clean side of dish machine area had a build up of a black substance, dirt and grime in the main kitchen. During an interview on 10/18/23, at 1:30 p.m. the Corporate Food Service Employee E7 confirmed the brown substance in dish room and it has not been confirming the potential for cross contamination and food borne illness. 28 Pa Code: 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-20 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two of two residents reviewed (Residents R134 and R136). Findings include: Review of Resident R134's Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, a form completed at specific intervals to determine care needs) dated 9/25/23, indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. It was indicated the resident was discharged on 9/25/23, to the hospital. Review of Resident R134's progress note dated 9/25/23, indicated the resident was discharged to a personal care home. Review of Resident R136's MDS dated [DATE], indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. It was indicated the resident was discharged on 8/7/23, to the community. Review of Resident R136's progress note dated 8/7/23, indicated the resident sent to the emergency room. It was stated it was unclear if he will be discharged home from there our back to the facility. 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 · Dcited before2023-10-20 · 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, resident observations, clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a plan of care to include a focus and interventions to for a resident's tube feed in order to maintain a resident's highest practicable physical well-being as required for one of six residents reviewed. (Resident R114) Findings include: Review of Resident R114's Minimum Data Set (MDS-periodic assessment of care needs) dated 9/26/23 indicated Resident R144 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of malnutrition, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), and high blood pressure. Review of Resident R114's physician order dated 9/15/23, indicated to check tube placement prior to medication, feedings, and flushes and document the amount of formula and water provided every eight hours. Review of Resident R114's physician order dated 10/5/23, indicated to administer Osmolite 1.2 (a type of tube feeding supplement) via jejunostomy tube (J-tube is a soft,…
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 before2023-10-20 · 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 policy, clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow a order as prescribed by the physician for one of four residents (Resident R66). Findings include: A review of the facility policy, Consulting Physician/Practitioner Orders dated 10/17/22, last reviewed 1/6/23, indicated for consulting physician/practitioner orders received in writing or via fax, the nurse in a timely manner will call the attending physician to verify the order, document the verification order by entering the order and the time, date, and signature in the electronic health record, and follow facility procedures for verbal or telephone orders including, nothing the order, submitting to pharmacy, and transcribing medication or treatment admiration record. A review of the clinical record indicated Resident R66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infraction, muscle weakness and dysphagia. A review…
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 before2023-10-20 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 and the clinical record and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and treatment as ordered for two of four residents with foley catheters reviewed (Resident R66, R106). Findings include: A review of the facility policy, Consulting Physician/Practitioner Orders dated 10/17/22, last reviewed 1/6/23, indicated for consulting physician/practitioner orders received in writing or via fax, the nurse in a timely manner will call the attending physician to verify the order, document the verification order by entering the order and the time, date, and signature in the electronic health record, and follow facility procedures for verbal or telephone orders including, nothing the order, submitting to pharmacy, and transcribing medication or treatment admiration record. A review of the facility policy, Indwelling Catheter Use and Removal dated 10/17/22, last reviewed 1/6/23, indicated it is the policy of the facility to ensure that indwelling…
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 · D2023-10-20 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — isolatedEnsure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of personnel files and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure nurse aides who failed to become certified within four months were not working in the facility for one of five Employees reviewed (Nurse Aide, Employee E5). Findings Include: Review of Nurse Aide (NA), Employee E5 personnel file indicated he was hired on 5/15/23, as a non-certified nursing assistant. Review of NA, Employee E5's personnel file indicated he completed the Nurse Aide Training program on 6/8/23. A further review indicated NA, Employee E5 failed the Nurse Aide Written exam on 10/5/23. Review of the facility Deployment Sheets dated 10/7/23, indicated NA, Employee E5 worked 2:00 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. Review of the facility Deployment Sheets dated 10/10/23, indicated NA, Employee E5 worked 10:00 p.m. until 6:30 a.m. Review of the facility Deployment Sheets dated 10/11/23, indicated NA, Employee E5 worked 10:00 p.m. until 2:00 a.m. During an interview on 10/20/23, at 9:01 a.m., the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated NA, Employee E5 had until 10/6/23, 120 days from…
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 · D2023-10-20 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, personnel files and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to complete annual performance evaluations for two out of five personnel files (Nurse Aide Employee E2 and E3). Findings include: Review of Nurse aide, Employee E2's personnel record indicated she was hired on 1/1/16. Review of Nurse aide, Employee E2's personnel record indicated an annual performance evaluation for the year 2022, was completed on 5/2/22. A further review of Nurse aide, Employee E2's personnel record indicated the facility failed to complete a performance evaluation within 12 months. Nurse aide, Employee E2 performance evaluation for the year 2023, was completed on 9/1/23. Review of Nurse aide Employee E3 personnel record indicated she was hired on 10/24/94. Review of Nurse aide, Employee E3's personnel record indicated an annual performance evaluation for the year 2022, was completed on 6/5/22. A further review of Nurse aide, Employee E3's personnel record indicated the facility failed to complete a performance evaluation within 12 months. 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 · D2023-10-20 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, personnel files and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the minimum 12 hours of nurse aide training per year and annual training on dementia management for one out of five nurse aide personnel files were completed (Nurse aide, Employee E4). Findings include: The facility Nurse Aide job description last reviewed 1/6/23, indicated that the nurse aide provides each assigned resident with routine individualized nursing care in accordance with state and federal regulations, and accreditation standards. Review of Nurse Aide, Employee E4's personnel record indicated he was hired on 8/15/11. Review of Nurse Aide, Employee E4's personnel record did not include an annual in-service training on dementia and abuse prevention training. A further reviewed of Nurse Aide, Employee E4's personnel record failed to include a minimum of 12 hours of nurse aide training per year as required under §483.95(g)(1). During an interview on 10/20/23, at 11:51 a.m. the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) confirmed that the facility failed to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2024-09-12 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — widespreadEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services according to accepted standards of clinical practice in the identification of a resident's transfer destination prior to disposition of a body for two of three residents (Resident CRR1 and CRR2). Findings include: A review of the facility policy Postmortem Care last reviewed [DATE], indicated it is the procedure of this facility to perform postmortem care for a resident who has deceased in the facility to include but not inclusive to: . The family will be contacted and follow up and/or confirmation of the disposition of the body will be determined. . Notify the designated disposition location of a resident's death and fill out any postmortem paperwork as per facility policy. Review of Resident CRR1's clinical record indicate admission date of [DATE], with diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of the lung (lung cancer), hypertension (high blood pressure) and chronic obstructive pulmonary…
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
$8,021 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,021 — penalty dated 2024-07-12
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 CONCORDIA LUTHERAN MINISTRIES — 8 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 3.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CONCORDIA CARE NETWORK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/01/2022 |
| CONCORDIA LUTHERAN MINISTRIES | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 03/22/2013 |
| BEILSTEIN, KAREN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/15/2021 |
| FALBO, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2019 |
| FRNDAK, KEITH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2013 |
| FRNDAK-SUDER, KAY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 03/01/2013 |
| HEINTZ, FREDERICK | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2016 |
| HOFFMAN, PAUL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2020 |
| HORTERT, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2016 |
| INGRAM, MISTY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2020 |
| YOUNG, TAMMY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/06/2015 |
| OSTER, MARC | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 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 $6.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% 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 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 395684. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-08, 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.