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

Gardens For Memory Care At Easton, The

500 Washington Street, Easton, PA 18042 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 115 certified beds · (610) 253-3573 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (610) 253-3573 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • its facility-reported quality-measure 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
220 Ferry St · (484) 503-8175 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
620 Philadelphia Rd · (610) 559-2630 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
148 W St Joseph St · (610) 707-1783 · Call to confirm hours
Park
641 Walnut Ave · 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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 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 fell from 4 to 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.

Overall rating2★
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 increased35.6%16.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.6%6.2%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.1%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 injury3.3%3.1%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.6%17.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication43.1%20.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.3%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.5%4.8%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.2%25.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table68.9%17.7%17.1%check this — see note marked dagger below the table
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication13.6%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine36.4%68.7%79.4%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.531.621.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.561.181.80worse

This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ 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.

10.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.19U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.3%CMS range 6.3–16.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot 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 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 — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.111.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.57
RN hours/ resident / day
0.81
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.89
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.27
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.49
RN hoursweekends
41.6%
Total nursing turnover
18.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 115 beds and averages 110.9 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.89 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.39 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.60 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-10)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2025-05-01)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · F2026-04-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner in the dietary department and on two of two nursing units. (Second floor and Third floor) Findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled, Dietary Dress Code Policy, dated February 12, 2026, revealed that all staff were to cover all of their hair with a hair restraint when working with or around food. Observations during the kitchen tour on April 7, 2026, at 10:20 a.m., revealed the following: There was a hole in the wall above the floor next to the reach in refrigerator with a black substance. There was one flying insect in the dry storage area and one in the clean pan room next to the dish machine area. There was a bulk container of thickener that was not dated and had white dried food debris covering the length of the outside of the lid. The outside of the lid to the bulk container of flour was covered with white food debris. On the juice refrigerator, there were areas of dried food and liquid splatter along the side. During…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-10 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    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, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe. clean, and sanitary environment on two of two nursing units. (Second floor and Third floor)Findings include: During an environmental tour of the second and third floor nursing units on April 7 and 9, 2026, from 10:10 a.m. until 2:20 p.m., the following was observed: In the second-floor small dining room, the wooden trim on the walls was marred. There were two stained ceiling tiles in the corridor between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], and 208 and 209. In room [ROOM NUMBER], the privacy curtain for bed two had a brown/dark gray stain, and the window curtain above the air-conditioning unit was off the rod and had a brown stain on it. In room [ROOM NUMBER], the towel dispenser was not working and there were dark brown spots on the wall above bed three. In room [ROOM NUMBER], the grab bar in the bathroom was loose. There was a hole in the ceiling tile in front of room [ROOM NUMBER]. In room [ROOM NUMBER], the header of the window above the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-10 · 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 facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer medications in a manner that prevented the spread of infection for two of 22 sampled residents. (Residents 24 and 81) Additionally, the facility failed to properly handle soiled linen and failed to keep clean linen from becoming contaminated to prevent the spread of infection. Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled Administering Oral Medications, last reviewed February 12, 2026, revealed that employees were not to touch the medication with their hands. Review of the facility policy entitled, Departmental (Environmental Services) - Laundry and Linen, last reviewed February 12, 2026, revealed that employees sorting or washing linen were to wear a gown and gloves and clean linen was to remain hygienically clean (free of pathogens in sufficient numbers to cause human illness) through measures designed to protect it from environmental contamination. Observation on April 8, 2026, between 8:25 a.m. and 8:58 a.m., revealed Licensed Practical Nurse…

    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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with dining in a manner that promoted and maintained dignity for one of 22 sampled. (Resident 12)Findings include:Clinical record review revealed that Resident 12 had diagnoses that included dementia, and protein-calorie malnutrition, and had impaired vision. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated March 13, 2026, revealed that the resident had cognitive impairment and required assistance from staff with eating. Review of Resident 12's care plan revealed that the resident had self-care deficits and was at increased risk for nutrition problems related to dementia and included interventions for staff to encourage fluid and food consumption, provide cueing for eating, and reorient as needed. On April 7, 2026, from 12:45 p.m. through 1:25 p.m., Resident 12 was observed in the dining room with other residents and a lunch tray that included a covered drink, a banana, and a ham and cheese sandwich on a plate. The resident was observed having…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physicians' orders for two of 22 sampled residents. (Residents 49 and 76)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 49 had diagnoses that included peripheral vascular disease (a progressive circulation disorder involving damage or blockage in blood vessels often affecting legs and feet). A physician's order dated March 5, 2026, directed staff to apply specialized compression garments designed to improve circulation and reduce blood clot risks (TED stockings) in the morning and to remove them at bedtime. On April 7, 2026, at 1:00 p.m. Resident 49 was observed lying in bed, and the TED stockings were not in place. On April 9, 2026, at 11:05 a.m., 12:30 p.m., and 1:27 p.m., Resident 49 was observed ambulating on the nursing unit, and the TED stocking were not in place. In an interview on April 10, 2026, at 9:40 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed there was no evidence that the physician's order was followed or that the treatment was refused…

    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 before2026-04-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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

    Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the necessary device to prevent an incident or accident for one of 22 sampled residents. (Resident 90)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 90 had diagnoses that included dementia with mood disturbance and had a history of falling. A review of the Minimum Data Set assessment (a periodic evaluation of resident care needs) dated March 23, 2026, revealed the resident had memory impairment. A review of Resident 90's care plan revealed that the resident had behaviors that included being territorial of her space and being combative. A nurse noted on July 11, 2025, that Resident 90 was observed lying on the floor by her bed holding on to the ankle of another resident who had walked into her room. The new intervention following the incident on July 11, 2026, was for staff to hang a stop sign across the doorway of her room to deter wandering residents from entering. Observations on April 8, 2026, between 11:17 a.m. and 3:15 p.m., and on April 9,…

    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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, review of facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent (%) for one of two nursing units observed during medication administration. (Second floor)Findings include: Observations of medication administration on April 8, 2026, from 8:40 a.m. to 8:58 a.m., revealed 29 medication opportunities with three medication errors that resulted in a medication administration error rate of 10.34%. Review of the policy entitled Crushing Medications, last reviewed on February 12, 2026, revealed that medications were to be crushed only when it was appropriate and safe to do so, consistent with physicians' orders and that nursing staff or the consultant pharmacist was to notify any attending physician who gave an order to crush a drug that the manufacturer stated should not be crushed, such as enteric coated medications. Review of the facility list of medications not to be crushed revealed that a Depakote tablet was not to be crushed due to the enteric coated…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-01 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    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, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment on two of two nursing units. (Second floor and Third floor) Findings include: Observations on April 29, 2025, from 9:30 a.m. through 12:50 p.m., and on April 30, 2025, from 8:54 a.m. through 11:58 a.m., revealed the following environmental issues: The assist bars on the toilet in room [ROOM NUMBER] were loose and wobbly. The table in the dining room across from room [ROOM NUMBER] was scuffed and damaged. The assist bars on the toilet in room [ROOM NUMBER] were loose and wobbly. The towel racks were loose. The assist bars on the toilet in room [ROOM NUMBER] were loose and wobbly. There was a dried orange substance on the floor in front of the closets for beds three and four. The bathroom doorway in room [ROOM NUMBER] was soiled with a dried brown stain. The heater was damaged. The window curtain in room [ROOM NUMBER] was soiled. For bed two, the fall mat had dust and several dried, gray spots 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 clinical record review, review of facility documentation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that safety interventions were in place for one of three sampled residents at risk for behavioral symptoms. (Residents 1, 2) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included traumatic brain injury and dementia with behavioral disturbance. Review of the care plan revealed that the resident was to have a stop sign on his door to prevent other residents from entering his room. In addition, staff were to ensure the stop sign was at the door post at all times, deter other residents from entering the room, and replace the stop sign when it was detached. Further review of the care plan revealed that the resident had anxiety and ineffective coping when his belongings were touched. Review of a trauma assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 1 exhibited physical behaviors towards another resident who had intruded on his space. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 clinical record review, facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that assessed safety measures were in place for one of six sampled residents at risk for falls. (Resident 20) In addition, the facility failed to ensure that a resident at risk for elopement did not leave the secured nursing unit without staff knowledge for one of three sampled residents who were at risk for elopement. (Resident 75) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, insomnia, and history of falling. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident had cognitive impairment. On August 23, 2023, the physician ordered for the resident to have bilateral (both sides) fall mats next to her bed. Review of the care plan revealed that Resident 20 was at risk for falls with an intervention for bilateral fall mats.…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2026-04-10 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to dispose of trash and refuse properly.Findings include: Observation of the dumpster area on April 7, 2026, at 11:00 a.m., revealed the area adjacent to the dumpster had multiple pieces of plastic and paper debris, including used face masks, used gloves, plastic spoons, and condiment packets. Further observation on the same date, from 1:25 p.m. to 1:30 p.m., revealed that Dietary Employee 3 was pushing and then pulling a garbage can on wheels full of garbage across the parking lot to the dumpster and opening the dumpster lid. Six pieces of loose, large, plastic were observed blowing out of the can in a direction towards the back of the dumpster. Dietary Employee 3 was observed to pick up one of the six pieces of garbage that had blown from the garbage can, emptied the garbage can into the dumpster, and left the area while the other five pieces of garbage remained on the ground and the dumpster remained open. 28 Pa Code 201.18(b)(3) Management.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRIORITY HEALTHCARE GROUP — 12 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.0≈ chain avg
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.9+1.1 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.0-1.0 vs chain
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
MAYBROOK-P OPCO HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/15/2016
BL CAPITAL GROUP HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST24%since 01/28/2020
FAIR OAKS FAMILY HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST12%since 01/28/2020
SAMARA HOLDINGS COMPANY LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST10%since 01/28/2020
STRAWBERRY HILL HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST10%since 01/28/2020
SEBBAG, GABRIELIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST5%since 08/15/2016
CLINICAL CONSULTING SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
PRIORITY CARE GROUP LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2019
SUMMATION FINANCIAL SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
BAUMAN, LUKEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/06/2025
MEHTA, BHARATIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2025
MAYBROOK-P PRAXIS PROPCO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2016

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

9 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.

$11.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+9.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.2M
Related-party expense12% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 90%Medicare 1%Other / private 8%

About 90% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% 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

$280per resident / day
operating cost
$8,517per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$310per 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 395708. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-10, 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