Brookview Health Care Center
1000 Northfield Drive, Chambersburg, PA 17201 · Non profit - Corporation · 56 certified beds · (717) 263-8545 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0607) — most recent Mar 2026
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- the CMS record shows $16,801 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-16)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 16.9% | 16.8% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.6% | 6.2% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.7% | 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 | 6.4% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 34.2% | 17.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.0% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.9% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 36.4% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.5% | 17.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.2% | 68.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.7% | 22.5% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.4% | 9.5% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.94 | 1.62 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.84 | 1.18 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
45.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 119 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 59.1% 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 93 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 0.47 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 79% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 45.1%CMS range 36.5–54.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.1%CMS range 5.8–13.6 | 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 | 59.1% | 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 | 47.3% | 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 | 60.2% | 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 | 98.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.9% | 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 | 4.6% | 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 | 6.7%CMS range 3.6–11.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.83 | 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 56 beds and averages 52.3 residents a day — about 93% 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 5.26 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.43 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.13 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 4.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.49 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.57 to 1.08 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2024-02-16 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of policies, clinical records, and investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that staff reported physical abuse in a timely manner, which allowed the staff member to return to the resident to be mentally abused for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 2) putting all of the residents in danger of being abused, resulting in Immediate Jeopardy to their physical and mental safety. This deficiency was cited as past non-compliance. Findings include: The facility's abuse policy, dated April 13, 2023, revealed that it is the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare, and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property. Training topics will include prohibiting and preventing all forms of abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation. Identifying what constitutes abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-16 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policies, clinical records, and investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from physical and mental abuse for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 2), resulting in Immediate Jeopardy to the resident's physical, mental health, and safety. This deficiency was cited as past non-compliance. Findings include: The facility's abuse policy, dated April 13, 2023, revealed that it is the policy of the facility to provide protections for the health, welfare, and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandatory assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 2, dated November 16, 2023, revealed that the resident was understood, could understand, and had diagnoses that included Parkinson's…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-16 · tag F0743 — isolatedEnsure that a resident does not develop patterns of decreased social interaction and/or increased withdrawn, angry, or depressive behaviors, unless unavoidable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of policies, clinical records, and personnel files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly address a resident's behavior of repeatedly taking her feet off the wheelchair footrests and placing them on the ground for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 2), resulting in Immediate Jeopardy when the nurse aide continued to grab hold of the resident's ankles, causing her to yell out and place her feet back on the ground, which resulted in the resident hitting the nurse aide while the nurse aide was bent over to once again grab the resident's ankles to place the her feet back on the wheelchair footrests. In response, the nurse aide slapped the resident's hand and called the resident an asshole. Findings include: The facility's policy regarding behaviors, dated April 13, 2023, revealed that facility staff will attempt to implement person-centered care approaches designed to meet the individual goals and needs of each resident, which includes non-pharmacological interventions, to help meet behavioral health needs and may…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-27 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on a review of facility policies and employee personnel files, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a licensure check was completed before hire for one of five employee files reviewed (Registered Nurse 1).Findings include:The facility's policy for abuse, dated February 27, 2026, indicated that potential employees would be screened for a history of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation of resident property. Background, reference, and credential checks would be conducted on potential employees, contracted temporary staff, students affiliated with academic institutions, volunteers, and consultants.Review of the employee file for Registered Nurse 1 indicated that she was hired on December 29, 2025. There was no documented evidence that her professional license was checked to ensure it was current and that she had no disciplinary action filed.Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on March 27, 2026, at 10:43 a.m. confirmed that they could not find any documented evidence that the licensure check was obtained prior to hire. 28 Pa. Code…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policies and clinical record reviews, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice by failing to follow physician's orders for three of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 17, 32, 56). Findings include: The facility's policy regarding medication administration, dated April 11, 2024, revealed that medications are administered by licensed nurses, or other staff who are legally authorized to do so in this state, as ordered by the physician and in accordance with professional standards of practice, in a manner to prevent contamination or infection. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a federally-mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 17, dated February 5, 2025, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact, required assistance from staff for daily care needs, and had diagnosis that included dementia. Physician's orders for 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 · E2025-02-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that ice was made and stored in sanitary ice machines for one of two ice machines ([NAME] House). Findings include: Observations of the ice machine in the [NAME] House pantry on February 24, 2025, at 8:16 a.m. and February 25, 2025, at 9:16 a.m. revealed that the drain pipe coming from the ice machine extended down to the floor and ran horizontally to the floor drain, resulting in no air gap between the end of the ice machine's drain pipe and the floor drain. Interview with Maintenance Worker 1 on February 25, 2025, at 9:27 a.m. confirmed that the ice machine in the [NAME] House Kitchen did not have an air gap between the drain pipe and the floor drain for back-flow prevention. 28 Pa. Code 211.6(f) Dietary Services.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to review and revise care plans for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 11). Findings include: The facility's policy regarding care plans, dated April 11, 2024, revealed that the comprehensive care plan will be reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each comprehensive and quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs). A quarterly MDS assessment for Resident 11, dated January 24, 2025, revealed that the resident was understood, could usually understand others, and had a diagnosis which included Alzheimer's disease and dementia. A care plan for the resident, dated May 5, 2023, revealed that the resident was at risk for malnutrition related to his impaired mobility and dementia diagnosis. Staff was to place a non-adherent material under his plates and bowls at all meals. Observations of Resident 11 during 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 · D2025-02-26 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were assessed and received trauma-informed care to eliminate or mitigate triggers for residents with the diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD - a mental and behavioral disorder that develops related to a terrifying event) for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 52). Findings include: The facility's policy regarding Trauma Informed Care, dated April 11, 2024, revealed that it is the policy of the facility to provide care and services which, in addition to meeting professional standards, are delivered using approaches which are culturally competent, account for experiences and preferences, and address the needs of trauma survivors by minimizing triggers and/or re-traumatization. The facility will use a multi-pronged approach to identifying a resident's history of trauma, as well as his or her cultural preferences. This will include asking the resident about triggers that may be stressors or may prompt recall of a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-26 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate accounting of controlled medications (medications with the potential to be abused) for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 32). Findings include: A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a federally-mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 32, dated January 24, 2025, indicated that the resident was cognitively impaired, required assistance from staff for daily care needs, had diagnosis that included dementia, and was receiving hospice services. Physician's orders for Resident 32, dated November 4, 2024, included for the resident to receive 0.25 milliliters (ml) of Morphine Sulfate Oral Solution (controlled pain medication) 20 milligrams per five milliliters (20mg/5ml) every hour as needed for breakthrough pain. Review of Resident 32's medication accountability sheet (tracks each dose of a controlled medication), dated October 19, 2024, indicated that 0.25 ml of Morphine Sulfate Oral Solution…
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 · D2024-03-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a separately-locked, permanently-affixed compartment in the refrigerator for the storage of controlled drugs in the medication room at [NAME] House. Findings include: Observations in the facility's medication room refrigerator at [NAME] House on March 13, 2024, at 8:40 a.m. revealed two multi-dose bottles of Ativan (a medication used to treat anxiety that is tightly controlled because it may be abused or cause addiction) on the top shelf in the refrigerator. The refrigerator did not contain a locked compartment that was affixed to the inside of the refrigerator to secure the Ativan. Interview with Registered Nurse 1 on March 13, 2024, at 8:43 a.m. revealed that she was not aware that there was supposed to be a locked compartment affixed to the inside of refrigerator. Interview with the Director of Nursing on March 13, 2024, at 12:05 p.m. confirmed that the refrigerator should have contained a locked compartment…
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 · E2024-02-16 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — patternAdminister 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 and the deficiencies cited during the current survey, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) failed to assume responsibility for effective management of the facility to ensure that the residents' environment remained free from abuse, for ensuring that staff reported abuse and protected the resident from further abuse, and for ensuring that staff properly address a resident's behavior. Findings include: The job description for the NHA, dated January 17, 2023, indicated that the primary function of this position was to provide general oversight and direction to all services provided by the Brookview Health Care Center. Maintains compliance with the Department of Health, Welfare, Medicare, and Educational regulatory requirements. Supervision and coordination of services to include overseeing budget and corporate policies and procedures related to the care of all residents. The job description for the DON, dated October 15, 2020, indicated that the primary function of this position was 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-16 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a baseline care plan included instructions regarding behaviors and the use of psychotropic medications for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 5) who was admitted after February 9, 2024. Findings include: A nursing note, dated February 9, 2024, at 11:14 a.m., revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on this date. Physician's orders, dated February 9, 2024, included orders for 12.5 mg of Seroquel in the morning and 25 mg of Seroquel(antipsychotic) at bedtime for dementia with behaviors, 0.25 milliliters (mL) of lorazepam (anti-anxiety) three times a day for anxiety, and 10 mg of escitalopram (anti-depressant) in the morning for major depression. A Certified Registered Nurse Practitioner (CRNP, a registered nurse who has advanced education and clinical training in a health care specialty area) note, dated February 9, 2024, revealed that the resident was agitated and anxious, refused to have her dressing changed, refused to have a skin evaluation, 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 · D2024-02-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans that included specific and individualized interventions to address resident care needs for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 2). Findings include: The facility's policy regarding behaviors, dated April 13, 2023, revealed that facility staff will attempt to implement person-centered care approaches designed to meet the individual goals and needs of each resident, which includes non-pharmacological interventions. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandatory assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 2, dated November 16, 2023, revealed that the resident was understood, understands, and had a diagnosis which included Parkinson's disease, anxiety, and depression. A nursing note for Resident 2, dated January 18, 2024, revealed that the nurse and the nurse aide attempted to get the resident into the bath multiple times. The resident refused and became combative and kept stating she will…
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 · B2025-02-26 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a written notice was provided to the resident's responsible party regarding the reason for transfer to the hospital for two of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 2, 13). Findings include: An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandatory assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 2, dated January 24, 2025, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact and required assistance from staff for her daily care needs. Nursing note for Resident 2, dated January 17, 2025, revealed that the resident was vomiting, nauseous, and had a low blood sugar. The physician was notified and an order was received to transfer the resident to the emergency room, and her son was present and agreed with the transfer. There was no documented evidence that a written notice of Resident 2's transfer to the hospital was provided to the resident's responsible party regarding the reason for transfer to the hospital on January 17, 2025. A quarterly MDS assessment for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$16,801 in federal fines across 3 penalties.
- $4,632 — penalty dated 2024-02-16
- $4,633 — penalty dated 2024-02-16
- $7,536 — penalty dated 2024-02-16
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| MANUFACTURERS AND TRADES TRUST COMPANY | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 12/01/2018 |
| GEORGE, CAROLYN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2022 |
| GINGRICH, CHARLENE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2019 |
| GIPE, RONALD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2016 |
| MACBRIDE, LYNN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2019 |
| O'DONNELL, PATRICK | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2021 |
| PETERSON, TODD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2024 |
| SCIAMANNA, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2025 |
| TRINH, SUZANNE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2021 |
| WARNER, PAULA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2022 |
| WILLIAMS, ANTHONY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2024 |
| YEAGER, WAYNE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2025 |
| BEINS, ROGER | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/01/2015 |
| FRITZ, RYAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/01/2023 |
| MARTIN, TIFFANY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 12/01/2023 |
| NELSON, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/03/2006 |
| BURKE, ROSALYN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/16/2018 |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner 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.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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
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 395012. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-27, 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.