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

Forest City Nursing And Rehab Center

915 Delaware Street, Forest City, PA 18421 · For profit - Corporation · 132 certified beds · (570) 785-3005 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (570) 785-3005 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation$21,405 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $21,405 in federal fines (most recent 2024-03-22)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)

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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
485 Belmont Tpke · (570) 488-7777 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
420 Main St · (570) 785-5400 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
600 Main St · (570) 785-3100 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
741 Delaware St · (570) 785-7854

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 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

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 increased23.0%16.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight9.7%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.5%1.5%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms5.8%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 injury2.1%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened28.9%17.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication23.5%20.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.5%4.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control28.3%25.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table7.1%17.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.3%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.3%68.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.3%22.5%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.6%9.5%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.531.621.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.991.181.80better

§ 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.

40.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 101 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

40.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
26.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.23U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 26.0% 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 50 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 30% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% 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 SNF40.5%CMS range 30.5–48.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.8%CMS range 8.0–17.210.7%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 discharge26.0%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 discharge26.0%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 discharge40.0%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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 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 worsened4.9%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 hospitalization6.4%CMS range 3.9–11.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.041.02Oct 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

0.67
RN hours/ resident / day
0.70
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.85
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.21
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.53
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 132 beds and averages 101.9 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 30 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.21 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.85 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 2.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.34 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.72 to 0.53 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

7
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-02-07)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-03-22)

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2024-03-22 · 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 a review of clinical records and select investigation reports and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement effective fall prevention interventions including timely and necessary staff supervision of resident with a history of falls and known unsafe behaviors that increased the resident's risk for falls, to prevent a fall with serious injury, a fractured wrist, for one resident out of 18 sampled (Resident 49). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include dementia, chronic kidney disease, and history of urinary tract infections. A Quarterly Minimum Data Assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated April 24, 2023, indicated that Resident 49 was severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 0 and required extensive assistance from two staff members for toileting and transfers and limited assistance of one…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create 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

    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 develop and implement a person-centered baseline care plan that incorporated individualized interventions for wound management for one resident out of five sampled (Resident 1). Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include heart failure, diabetes and morbid obesity. A review of an admission Minimum Data Set assessment (Minimum Data Set a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated July 23, 2025 revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 (Brief Interview for Mental Status- a tool within the Cognitive Section of the MDS that is used to assess the resident's attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall new information, a score of 13-15 indicates the resident to be cognitively intact) had a surgical…

    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 · D2025-08-07 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, physician order review, nursing documentation review, wound care consultation notes, diagnostic testing, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure care and treatment was provided in accordance with professional standards of practice and physician orders for one of five sampled residents (Resident 1). Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include heart failure, diabetes and morbid obesity and a recent vascular surgery to the left groin (a surgical procedure performed in the upper thigh where the leg meets the body, involving the large blood vessels that carry blood to and from the leg, done to repair or improve blood flow that may have been narrowed, blocked, or damaged). A review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed the resident to be cognitively intact with a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 15. A score of 13-15 indicates…

    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 · Fcited before2025-02-07 · 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 observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain proper storage and service practices for food in the dietary department and second-floor resident pantry/nourishment room. This failure created the potential for contamination, microbial growth, and an increased risk of foodborne illness. Findings include: Food safety and inspection standards for safe food handling indicate that everything that comes in contact with food must be kept clean and food that is mishandled can lead to foodborne illness. Safe steps in food handling, cooking, and storage are essential in preventing foodborne illness. You cannot always see, smell, or taste harmful bacteria that may cause illness according to the USDA (The United States Department of Agriculture, also known as the Agriculture Department, is the U.S. federal executive department responsible for developing and executing federal laws related to food). A review of a facility policy entitled Storage Areas provided by the facility on November 27, 2024, indicated that sufficient storage facilities are provided to keep food…

    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 · E2025-02-07 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) accurately reflected the status of 3 out of 19 sampled (Residents 7, 42, and 17). Findings included: A review of Resident 7's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included dementia and muscle weakness. A review of Resident 7's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], indicated in Section K0200 - A height was coded as 62 inches, and Section K0200 - B weight was coded as 103 pounds (MDS instructions indicate to enter the weight taken within 30 days of this assessment and if the last recorded weight was taken more than 30 days prior to the assessment reference date (ARD) of the assessment or previous weight is not available, weigh the resident again). Record review revealed the weight used for coding was obtained 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-07 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, select facility review and staff and resident interview, it was determined the failed to reassess a resident's pain status and the repeated daily use of opioid pain medication prescribed on an as-needed (PRN) basis to ensure the development and implementation of an effective, individualized pain management plan for one of 19 residents sampled. (Resident 28). Findings include: A review of the facility's policy for pain assessment and management, last reviewed in January 2025, revealed that the purpose of the pain management procedure is to assist staff in identifying pain in residents and developing interventions that align with the resident's goals and needs while addressing the underlying causes of pain. The policy requires a comprehensive pain assessment upon admission, at quarterly reviews, when there is a significant change in condition, or when there is a new onset or worsening of pain. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 28 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of controlled drug records and select facility policy and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate controlled medication records and failed to ensure medication availability for one of 19 residents sampled (Resident 28). Finding include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis to include dementia and polyneuropathy (a condition where peripheral nerves outside the brain and spinal cord are damaged). A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated January 22, 2025 revealed a BIMS score (brief interview for mental status, a tool to assess the residents attention, orientation and ability to register and recall new information of 9, (a score of 8-12 indicate moderate impairment), required staff assistance for activities of daily living and frequently had severe pain and frequently…

    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 before2025-02-07 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — pattern
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents are free from unnecessary drugs to include duplicate pain medications for one of 19 sampled residents (Resident 28). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis to include dementia and polyneuropathy (a condition where peripheral nerves outside the brain and spinal cord are damaged). A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated January 22, 2025 revealed a BIMS score (brief interview for mental status, a tool to assess the residents attention, orientation and ability to register and recall new information of 9, (a score of 8-12 indicate moderate impairment), required staff assistance for activities of daily living and frequently had severe pain and frequently experienced severe pain and was prescribed both daily…

    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 · D2025-02-07 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice by inaccurately identifying a diagnosis of delusional disorder for one (1) of 19 residents (Resident 44) sampled without documented clinical evidence to support the diagnosis. Findings include: According to the American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), Fifth Edition, Delusional Disorder, Diagnostic Criteria includes, but is not limited to: Delusional Disorder A. Nonbizarre delusions (i.e., involving situations that occur in real life, such as being followed, poisoned, infected, loved at a distance, or deceived by spouse or lover, or having a disease) of at least 1 month's duration. A. The presence of one (or more) delusions with a duration of 1 month or longer. B. Criterion A for schizophrenia has never been met. Note: Tactile and olfactory hallucinations may be present in…

    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 · D2025-02-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 clinical record review, staff interviews, and observations, the facility failed to ensure medications were labeled in accordance with currently acceptable principles of medication storage and administration, including appropriate resident identification, medication information, and expiration/open dates for one of 19 sampled residents (Resident 28). Findings include: According to the FDA (federal drug administration) current as of January 21, 2025, and best practice, Expiration Dating of Multi-dose Vials indicated the date refers to the date after which an unopened multi-dose vial should not be used. The beyond-use-date refers to the date after which an opened multi-dose vial should not be used. The beyond-use-date should never exceed the manufacturer's original expiration date. Medication vials should always be discarded whenever sterility is compromised or cannot be confirmed. For example: If a multi-dose has been opened or accessed (e.g., needle-punctured) the vial should be dated with the last date…

    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 · D2024-03-22 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of select facility policy and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to review the continued appropriateness and revise the resident's plan of care in response to a significant weight loss for one resident out 18 residents (Resident 18). Findings include: Review of the clinical record of Resident 18 revealed admission to the facility on December 12, 2021, with diagnoses to include diabetes. Review of Resident 18's clinical record, conducted during the survey ending March 22, 2024, revealed that the resident had a significant weight loss identified in February 2024 and March 2024, which was addressed in nutritional progress notes with supportive interventions at the time of the identified weight losses. A review of Resident 18's care plan, dated as last revised by the facility on March 19, 2024, revealed the problem that the Resident may be nutritionally at risk related to dx of DM2 and therapeutic diet order. The resident's care plan, as of March 22, 2024, had not been updated to reflect the resident's significant weight loss,…

    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
Show the remaining 8 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-22 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy and investigative reports and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to assess and implement individualized measures to meet the toileting needs of one resident (Resident 70) and failed to evaluate the clinical necessity of an indwelling urinary catheter for of one resident (Resident 49)out of 18 sampled. Findings included: A review of a facility policy entitled Continence Management Bladder and Bowel Continence Policy that was last reviewed by the facility on April 18, 2023, indicated that the facility will make efforts for each resident to maintain their highest practical level of bowel and bladder function. Residents that are continent will remain continent and given the opportunity to improve continence through a retraining program. A Bowel and Bladder diary will be completed for a minimum of three days to evaluate current continence status and a program will be initiated based on established toileting times from the diary.…

    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 before2024-03-22 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from unnecessary psychoactive drugs by failing to assure the presence of the documented prescriber clinical rationale for the use of a psychotropic medication and justification for the use of duplicate drug therapy for dementia with psychosis for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 11). Findings include: Review of Resident 11's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including dementia and psychosis. A review of a a quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated December 3, 2023 revealed a BIMS score (Brief Interview for Mental Status is a mandatory tool used to screen and identify the cognitive condition of residents upon admission into a long-term care facility) of 2, indicating severe cognitive impairment. A physician orders…

    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 · Fcited before2023-04-28 · 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 observation, a review of select facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain acceptable practices for the storage and service of food to prevent the potential for contamination and microbial growth in food, which increased the risk of food-borne illness in the food and nutrition services department and two of three resident pantries. Findings include: Food safety and inspection standards for safe food handling indicate that everything that comes in contact with food must be kept clean and food that is mishandled can lead to foodborne illness. Safe steps in food handling, cooking, and storage are essential in preventing foodborne illness. You cannot always see, smell, or taste harmful bacteria that may cause illness according to the USDA (The United States Department of Agriculture, also known as the Agriculture Department, is the U.S. federal executive department responsible for developing and executing federal laws related to food). Review of a facility policy titled Dating of Food Policy indicated that that all foods are…

    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 · F2023-04-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of the facility's infection control tracking logs and policy and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a comprehensive program to monitor the development and spread of infections within the facility and plan preventative measures accordingly, failed to store resident care equipment in a manner to deter the spread of infection and failed to appropriately dispose of PPE after use. Findings include: A review of the current facility policy Infection Control Program Overview, dated as reviewed by the facility April 21, 2023, revealed that the purpose of the facility Infection Control Program is to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment, to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable infections and to improve antibiotic use. The facility adheres to the mission and goals set forth in the infection control program. The infection prevention and control plan is a comprehensive process that addresses preventing, identifying,…

    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 · E2023-04-28 · tag F0644 — pattern
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) level II determination and the PASRR evaluation report into a resident's assessment, care planning, and transitions of care for two of 18 residents reviewed (Resident 2 and 45). Findings include: Review of clinical record of Resident 2 revealed admission to the facility on March 13, 2017, with diagnoses to include Cerebral Palsy (congenital disorder of movement, muscle tone, or posture due to abnormal brain development often before birth). Further review of Resident 2's clinical record revealed a PASARR Level I (federally required assessment to help ensure that all individuals with serious mental disorders and/or intellectual disabilities are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) dated October 28, 2016, with the following outcome: Individual has a positive screen for Serious Mental Illness,…

    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 · Dcited before2023-04-28 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of clinical records and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary antibiotic drugs for one out of 18 residents sampled (Resident 2). Findings included: A review of Resident 2's clinical record revealed that the resident was seen by wound care consultant on February 20, 2023, for treatment of chronic nonhealing venous stasis type ulcerations of both lower legs. According to the consult progress note, a culture of the resident's wound and a culture of the bone and pathology of the bone specimen was removed. The physician ordered a course of Keflex (Cefalexin, an antibiotic) 500 mg every 8 hours for 10 days. At time of clinical record review on April 26, 2023, the facility did not have the results of the wound culture, bone culture or the bone pathology results from specimens obtained on February 20, 2023. present in the resident's clinical record. Interview with the Director of Nursing on April 26, 2023, at approximately 11:30 AM confirmed that the culture results were not available…

    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 · Dcited before2023-04-28 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary drugs by failing to clinically justify the use of an antihistamine medication for treatment of anxiety that is contraindicated in the elderly due to anticholinergic adverse side effects for one resident out of 18 sampled residents (Resident 5). Findings include: Review of Resident 5's clinical record revealed that she was [AGE] years old and initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to have included dementia [is the loss of cognitive functioning - thinking, remembering, and reasoning - to such an extent that it interferes with a person's daily life and activities], anxiety, and Parkinson's disease [a chronic and progressive movement disorder that initially causes tremor in one hand, stiffness or slowing of movement]. Resident 5's quarterly Minimum Data Set [(MDS) is a federally mandated standardized assessment process completed periodically 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-28 · tag F0775 — isolated
    Keep complete, dated laboratory records in the resident's record.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of clinical records and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that results of laboratory studies were present on the resident's clinical record for one resident out of 18 sampled (Resident 2) Findings included: A review of Resident 2's clinical record revealed that the resident was seen wound care consultant on February 20, 2023, for treatment of chronic non-healing venous stasis type ulcerations of both lower legs. According to the consultant's progress note, a culture of the resident's wound and a culture of the bone and pathology of the bone specimen was removed. The physician ordered a course of Keflex (Cefalexin, an antibiotic) 500 mg every 8 hours for 10 days. At time of clinical record review on April 26, 2023, the results of the wound culture, bone culture and bone pathology results from specimens obtained on February 20, 2023, were not present on the resident's clinical record. Review of a wound care consultant progress note dated March 13, 2023, revealed that the wound culture obtained on February 20, 2023, returned with 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.

    Administration 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

$21,405 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $21,405 — penalty dated 2024-03-22

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LME FAMILY HOLDINGS — 15 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 1 of 52.1-1.1 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.2+0.8 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.3-1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 1 of 52.9-1.9 vs chain
The other 14 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, 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
STRAWBERRY HILL HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST33%since 01/28/2020
CLINICAL CONSULTING SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/05/2025
PRIORITY CARE GROUP LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2019
SUMMATION FINANCIAL SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/06/2025
HILDEBRAND-PALKOV, KARYNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/20/2025
TOMAZIC, DAVIDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/06/2025
915 FC PROPERTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$8.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.4M
Related-party expense16% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 57%Medicare 6%Other / private 37%

This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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

$241per resident / day
operating cost
$7,327per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$247per 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 395554. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-02-07, 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