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

st anne's retirement community

3952 Columbia Avenue, Columbia, PA 17512 · Non profit - Corporation · 119 certified beds · (717) 285-5443 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (717) 285-5443 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 5 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (25% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
100 Merlini Dr Ste 2A · (717) 684-3663 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3985 Columbia Ave · (717) 283-1184 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3985 Columbia Ave · (717) 285-4380 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Cedar Bluff Park · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased13.9%16.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.7%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.1%1.5%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms4.9%10.8%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.0%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.2%17.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.6%20.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.4%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control29.5%25.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table14.8%17.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.3%68.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.0%22.5%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.5%9.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.511.621.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.661.181.80better

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

45.8% 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 117 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

45.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
45.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.49U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.26hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 45.3% 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 53 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 0.49 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 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF45.8%CMS range 39.0–55.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.2%CMS range 6.1–12.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge45.3%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge47.2%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge43.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.9%CMS range 4.0–11.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.931.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

1.25
RN hours/ resident / day
1.17
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.60
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.02
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.63
RN hoursweekends
25.0%
Total nursing turnover
9.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 119 beds and averages 74.1 residents a day — about 62% occupied, or roughly 45 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 5.02 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.25 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.60 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 4.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.39 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.51 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 25% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-24)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-11-06)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-24 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, review of information submitted by the facility, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for one of 24 residents (Resident 9).Findings include: Review of Resident 9's annual MDS (Minimum Data Set - periodic assessment of resident needs) dated October 22, 2025, section J1900 - Number of Falls since Admission/Entry or Reentry or Prior Assessment revealed that Resident 9 had one major injury. A major injury Includes, but is not limited to, traumatic bone fractures, joint dislocations/ subluxations, internal organ injuries, amputations, spinal cord injuries, head injuries, and crush injuries as per the Resident Assessment Instrument. Review of Resident 9's progress note of October 20, 2025, indicated resident was found on the floor in the bathroom. 911 was called to transport the resident to the hospital. Review of information submitted October 21, 2025, to the Department of Health revealed only observed injury was a 2.5 centimeter laceration to the occiput…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-24 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure pain management was consistent with professional standards and failed to attempt non-pharmacological interventions to alleviate pain prior to the administration of pain medication prescribed on an as needed basis for one of one resident. (Resident 1)Findings include:Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included pneumonia due to pseudomonas (lung infection caused by bacteria), other chronic pain (persistent pain lasting or recurring for an indefinite period) and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (is a long-term condition where lungs cannot adequately exchange gases, leading to persistently low oxygen levels in the blood). Review of Resident 1 physician's orders dated December 15, 2025, revealed an order for 'Oxycodone HCl Oral Tablet 5 MG (Oxycodone HCl) Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for severe pain'. Review of Resident 1's care plan revealed the resident has chronic pain with interventions for staff 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based upon review of facility policy and procedure, observation, and clinical record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions were in place for residents requiring enhanced barrier precautions for one of 12 residents reviewed (Resident 2).Findings include:Review of facility policy, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, reviewed February 27, 2025, indicated that the facility will have the appropriate signage on how to communicate to staff which residents require the use of enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). The following will list EBP criteria: wounds (e.g., chronic wounds such as pressure ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, unhealed surgical wounds, and chronic venous statis ulcers) and/or indwelling medical devices (e.g., central lines, urinary catheters, feeding tubes, tracheostomy/ventilator tubes) even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a multidrug-resistant organism.Observation on December 23, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. revealed Resident 2 with tube feeding running. Observations of Resident 2's room on all days of the survey…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of facility policy and procedure, observation, review of facility documentation and clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure infection control and prevention was implemented during a COVID-19 outbreak on two of two units observed (First and Second Floor Unit). Findings include: Review of facility policy and procedure titled Response to an Outbreak of COVID-19, revised November 20, 2023, revealed Identification of a single new case (resident or staff) 14 days after the last known case would meet the criteria for a new outbreak and prompt the need for an outbreak response. Further review of this policy revealed Managing exposed residents and employees as part of the unit-based or facility-wide response: Employees working in COVID rooms/areas must wear full PPE, including a full-face shield (goggles are not acceptable) gown, gloves and N-95. Further review of this policy revealed For full outbreak, on day 1-10, staff caring for residents in the yellow zone should use full PPE (gloves, gowns, eye protection using 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-07 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the residents code status for one out of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 173). Findings include: Review of the clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Further review revealed that the resident was sent to the hospital on November 25, 2023 for new symptoms of Congested Heart Failure (CHF-Heart does not pump blood effectively). The resident was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 173's clinical record revealed a POLST (Pennsylvania -Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment) was signed on November 3, 2023, stating the resident was a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). Review of the physician orders revealed the DNR was not current. Interview with the Director of Nursing on December 7, 2023 at 9:40 a.m. revealed when the resident went to the hospital all physician orders were discontinued. Further interview revealed upon readmission of resident resident, on November…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
SPICHER, JAMESIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/14/2025
BARD, MICHELEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 06/28/2004
HOLLYWOOD, LISAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/14/2025
TURNBAUGH, MARYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 05/26/2004
BACHMAN, THERESAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2018
GRAB, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2023
HORNICK, JOANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/30/2007
KENDIG, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2019
KIELY, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2018
LOVE, CHERYLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2022
MARTIN, DONALDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2023
PATTERSON, MATTHEWIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2021
RILEY, SHERIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2023
SCHUMER, MARYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/30/2008
SOSA, EILEENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2023
WOODRUFF, MICHELLEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 28 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$17.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-45.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 19%Medicare 5%Other / private 76%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$553per resident / day
operating cost
$16,813per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$380per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Pennsylvania Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Pennsylvania
$11,954/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$13,688/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,480/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 395806. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next