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

Manor At St Luke Village,the

1711 East Broad Street, Hazleton, PA 18201 · For profit - Corporation · 104 certified beds · (570) 453-5122 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (570) 453-5122 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0610) — cited Mar 2025Resident-funds citations (F0565, F0567)Behavioral-health or dementia-care citations — no harm found (F0744, F0758)1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565, F0567)
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1740 E Broad St · (570) 459-2901 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1749 E Broad St · (570) 454-1135 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
137 E Chestnut St · (570) 956-6601 · Call to confirm hours
Park
West Ct · (570) 459-4960 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 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 increased14.0%16.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.2%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.4%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 injury1.0%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.6%17.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.9%20.0%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.8%4.8%4.7%better
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 table18.8%17.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.5%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.8%68.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.1%22.5%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.6%9.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.291.621.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.131.181.80better

§ 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.

41.2% 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 218 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

41.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.32U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.17hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.6% 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 59 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 52% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 SNF41.2%CMS range 34.8–47.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.3%CMS range 6.5–13.110.7%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 discharge57.6%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 discharge40.7%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 discharge52.5%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 identified95.6%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 setting95.6%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 stay2.2%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 worsened0.0%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 hospitalization7.3%CMS range 4.6–11.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
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

0.55
RN hours/ resident / day
1.00
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.06
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.60
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.32
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 104 beds and averages 93.0 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.549 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.06 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.26 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.74 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.64 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

10
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-08)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2025-03-28)

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.

33 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · F2026-01-08 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespread
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of the facility's planned menu, weekly menu cycle, and menu extensions, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure planned menus were sufficiently reviewed and updated to provide adequate variety and to prevent repetitive meal selections in accordance with resident preferences which affected 5 out of 8 residents interviewed, who reported experiencing repetitive meals and limited variation in menu selections that did not reflect their stated food preferences.Findings included: During a Resident Council meeting conducted on January 6, 2026, at 10:00 AM, concerns were raised regarding the lack of variety in the facility's menu. Residents, 34 and 70, indicated that they have a problem with the variety of options on the menu. Residents 34 and 70 explained that the facility continuously serves chicken and pork. Resident 34 indicated that residents have made suggestions during resident group meetings regarding food that they enjoy and would like to see more often, but there has been no action by the facility to address…

    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 before2026-01-08 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of facility policy, Resident Council meetings minutes, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to put forth sufficient efforts to promptly resolve continued resident complaints and grievances expressed during resident group meetings, including those voiced by five of five residents attending a resident group meeting (Residents 8, 11, 16, 34, and 70), and failed to keep the residents apprised of the status of the facility's decisions and efforts toward grievance resolution.Findings include: A review of the facility's Resident and Family Grievances policy, last reviewed on July 24, 2025, revealed grievances may be voiced as a verbal complaint to a staff member, a written complaint to a staff member, or a verbal complaint during resident or family council meetings. The policy indicated the staff member receiving the grievance will record the nature and specifics of the grievance on the designated grievance form or assist the resident to complete the form. The facility will take steps to resolve the grievance and record information…

    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 · E2026-01-08 · 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

    Based on observations, review of manufacturer recommendations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a safe and orderly environment related to the placement of a personal appliance for one of 12 residents sampled who had personal refrigerators (Resident 23). Findings include: An observation conducted in Resident 23's room on January 5, 2026, at approximately 10:00 AM, revealed the resident had a personal refrigerator located on top of a bedside cabinet. The bedside cabinet did not adequately accommodate the full base of the refrigerator. Observations revealed that a portion of the refrigerator base extended beyond the edge of the cabinet, resulting in an unbalanced surface (one in which the weight of an object is not evenly distributed across its supporting base, creating a risk for tipping or falling). The refrigerator was three feet off the ground, further increasing the potential for injury should the appliance fall. A review of the refrigerator manufacturer's instruction manual indicated that the appliance was required to be placed firmly 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 · E2026-01-08 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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, a review of select facility policy, clinical record review, and staff and resident interviews it was determined the facility failed to timely evaluate nutritional requirements to ensure acceptable parameters of nutritional status for two of 26 sampled residents were being maintained (Residents 5 and 29).Findings include: A review of the facility's policy entitled Weight Monitoring, reviewed July 24, 2025, identified that weight can be a useful indicator of nutritional status. Significant unintended changes in weight (loss or gain) or unhealthy weight loss over a period of time may indicate a nutritional problem. The facility will utilize a systematic approach to identify residents at risk, evaluate and analyze the assessment information, implement pertinent approaches, and monitor the effectiveness of these approaches. Further it was indicted a weight monitoring schedule will be developed upon admission for all residents. Newly admitted residents will have weights monitored weekly for four…

    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 · E2026-01-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    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 observations, select policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that food storage in personal refrigerators were adequately monitored and maintained within safe temperatures to prevent foodborne illness for one of 12 residents with personal refrigerators (Resident 23).Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled Safe Food Handling for Foods from Visitors last reviewed July 24, 2025, revealed that residents will be assisted in properly storing and safely consuming food brought into the facility for residents by visitors. Staff will request that visitors notify someone from the activities or nursing department when a food item is brought in for immediate consumption or for something to be consumed at a later date. Food intended for later consumption will have labels placed on the item by staff, which will indicate the resident's name and current date. Foods noted to be 7 days or older from when placed into the refrigerator are to be discarded. Further it was indicated refrigerators storing food will be maintained and…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-08 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
    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 policy, review of resident financial records, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to safeguard, manage, or accurately account for the resident's personal funds deposited with the facility for one out of 26 residents sampled (Resident 53).Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Resident Person Funds, last reviewed by the facility on July 24, 2025, revealed if the resident chooses to deposit personal funds with the facility, upon written authorization of a resident, the facility must act as a fiduciary (an organization that is legally and ethically required to act in the best interest of another person) of the resident's funds and hold, safeguard, manage, and account for the personal funds of the resident deposited with the facility. A review of the facility form titled Resident Trust Fund Notification and Authorization, last reviewed by the facility on July 24, 2025, revealed procedures for residents' withdrawals and purchases.…

    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 · D2026-01-08 · tag F0627 — isolated
    Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
    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 resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement a discharge plan that accurately reflected a resident's discharge goal or preferences for two out of 26 residents reviewed (Residents 3 and 40).Findings included: A review of the facility policy entitled Discharge of Resident to Home or Other Center, last reviewed by the facility on July 24, 2025, revealed it was the policy of the facility to develop and implement an effective discharge planning process that focuses on the resident's discharge goals and the preparation of the residents to be active participants in the discharge planning process. The policy indicated the facility will determine the resident's expected goals and outcomes regarding discharge upon admission, during care plan meeting reviews, and as needed. The policy further indicated if discharge to the community was determined to be unsafe and unrealistic goals are identified, the facility…

    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 · D2026-01-08 · tag F0685 — isolated
    Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing 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 a review of clinical records and staff and resident interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that residents received proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain vision and arrange for treatment by a professional specializing in the provision of vision assistive devices as needed for one out of 26 residents sampled (Resident 6).Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Hearing and Vision Services, last reviewed by the facility on July 24, 2025, revealed it is the policy of the facility to ensure that all residents have access to hearing and vision services and receive adaptive equipment as needed. Further review revealed that staff should refer any identified need for hearing or vision services/appliances to the social worker/social service designee. Once vision or hearing services have been identified, the social worker/social service designee will assist the resident by making appointments and arranging for transportation. A clinical record review revealed…

    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 before2026-01-08 · 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, select facility policy review, investigative documentation provided by the facility, and staff interviews it was determined the facility displayed past non-compliance by failing to ensure the safety and supervision of one resident identified at risk for wandering and elopement from exiting through unsecured doors for one out of 26 residents sampled (Resident 89). Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Elopement/Wandering Risk Guideline, last reviewed by the facility on July 24, 2025, revealed it is the policy of the facility to evaluate and identify residents that are at risk of elopement and develop individualized interventions. A review of the facility policy titled Missing Patient/Resident, last reviewed by the facility on July 24, 2025, revealed it is the policy of the facility that staff will investigate cases of missing residents and possible elopement. Further review revealed that elopement occurs when a resident leaves the premises or a safe area without…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-08 · 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 clinical record review and interviews with facility staff, it was determined the facility failed to evaluate the clinical necessity of an indwelling urinary catheter for one out of 26 residents sampled (Resident 76).Findings included: A review of the facility policy titled Incontinence, last reviewed by the facility on July 24, 2025, revealed it is the facility policy that residents who enter the facility with an indwelling catheter (a flexible tube used for draining urine from the bladder and having an inflatable part at the bladder end that allows the tube to be kept in place for variable time periods), or receive one while in the facility, will be assessed for removal of the catheter as soon as possible, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that catheterization was necessary. A clinical record review revealed Resident 76 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction (brain damage that results from a lack of blood) and diabetes (a chronic…

    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
Show the remaining 23 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-26 · 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 a review of clinical records, select facility policy, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of practice by failing to monitor, obtain physician orders, and develop and implement a person-centered comprehensive care plan in accordance with standards of practice for one resident out of six sampled residents (Resident CR1). Findings include: According to the American Nurses Association Principles for Nursing Documentation, nurses document their work and outcomes and provide an integrated, real-time method of informing the health care team about the resident's status. Timely documentation of the following types of information should be made and maintained in a patient's EHR (electronic health record) to support the ability of the health care team to ensure informed decisions and high-quality care in the continuity of patient care: Assessments Clinical problems Communications with other health care professionals…

    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 · E2025-03-28 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — pattern
    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 residents were free from unnecessary use of psychoactive drugs by failing to ensure the presence of clinical rationale for the continued use of an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication for two of 19 residents reviewed (Residents 75 and Resident 77). Findings include: A review of Resident 75's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include dementia (a condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning, especially with impairment of memory and abstract thinking, and often with personality change, resulting from organic disease of the brain). A review of Resident 75's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated January 7, 2025, directed Lorazepam (anti-anxiety medication) 0.5 mg by mouth every eight hours as needed (PRN) for anxiety, for 167 days. A review of the physician's notes for the months of…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-03-28 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — pattern
    Ensure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of scheduled facility mealtimes, resident committee meeting minutes, grievances filed with the facility, select facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to consistently provide snacks as desired by residents, including experiences reported by seven out of nine residents during a group interview (Residents 1, 6, 9, 20, 25, 33, and 83). Findings include: A review of facility policy titled Snacks, last reviewed by the facility on January 23, 2025, revealed it is the facility policy that snacks and beverages will be provided as identified in residents' individual plans of care. Bedtime (HS- hour of sleep) snacks will be provided for all residents. Additional snacks and beverages will be available upon request for all residents who want to eat at non-traditional times. Nursing services is responsible for delivering the individual snacks to the identified residents and for offering evening snacks to all other residents. A review of the facility's scheduled mealtimes revealed the time between dinner and breakfast the next…

    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 · D2025-03-28 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 facility policy, resident grievance documentation, clinical records, and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a thorough and complete investigation of an allegation of sexual abuse for 1 of 19 sampled residents (Resident 63). Findings included: A review of a facility policy entitled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation & Misappropriation revealed it is the policy of the facility to provide professional care and services in an environment that is free from abuse, neglect, mistreatment, exploitation, and/or misappropriation of property. The facility will follow the federal guidelines dedicated to the prevention of abuse and timely and thorough investigations of allegations. Sexual abuse is defined as the nonconsensual sexual contact of any type with a resident which includes but is not limited to unwanted touching of any kind especially of breast or perineal area. Further review of the facility abuse policy revealed under the area of investigation…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-28 · tag F0660 — isolated
    Plan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
    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 interviews it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized discharge plan for one of 19 residents reviewed (Resident 58) to reflect the resident's discharge goals. Findings Include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include Dysarthria (the muscles used for speech are weak or are hard to control. Dysarthria often causes slurred or slow speech that can be difficult to understand) following a cerebral infraction (stroke). Review of a significant change Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a federally mandated standardized assessment process completed at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated March 2, 2025, indicated the resident had a BIMS (brief interview mental screener that aids in detecting cognitive impairment) score of 15 indicating he was cognitively intact. A review of Resident 58's social service notes revealed no social service notes in regard 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, facility policy, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure oxygen therapy was administered in accordance with professional standards of care for one out of the 19 residents sampled (Resident 1). Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Oxygen Therapy, last reviewed by the facility on January 23, 2025, revealed it is the facility policy and procedure to ensure the physician's order for oxygen therapy shall include all of the following: (1) oxygen administration modality, (2) liter flow, (3) as needed or continuous administration, and (4) as needed orders must include specific guidelines as to when the resident is to use oxygen. A clinical record review revealed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD is a condition caused by damage to the airways or other parts of the lung that blocks airflow and makes it hard to breathe). A review of a…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-01-28 · 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 infection control and prevention policy and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive infection control program to prevent the spread of infectious diseases including upper respiratory infection for 1 of 23 residents reviewed (Resident 1). Findings include: A review of the facility's infection control policy, last revised on January 23, 2025, indicated that the policy was designed to facilitate a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment while preventing and managing the transmission of infectious diseases The objectives of the infection control policies and practices were to: a. Prevent, detect, investigate and control infections in the facility. b. Maintain a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment for personnel, residents, visitors, and the public. c. Establish guidelines for implementing isolation precautions, including Standard and Transmission-Based precautions: d.…

    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 · F2024-05-31 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespread
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    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 nurse staffing, clinical records, grievances lodged with the facility and the minutes from Residents Council meetings and staff, resident and family interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to provide timely and quality of care to residents, and in accordance with each resident's plan of care, to meet individualized needs and promote the resident's health and well-being. Findings included: A review of grievances filed with the facility revealed a grievance dated March 9, 2024, indicating that Resident 199 was not offered a shower because facility staff told her that they were too short {of staff} to give her a shower. Resident Council Meeting minutes dated April 9, 2024, revealed that the Director of Nursing (DON) explained to residents in attendance that they are trying to find workers to hire. Residents in attendance indicated that they had concerns about needing more help in the facility to provide their care. Resident Council Meeting…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-31 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    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 a review of grievances filed with the facility and minutes from resident group meetings, and resident, family, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care in a manner and environment that promotes each resident's quality of life by failing to respond timely to residents' requests for assistance, including experiences reported by two out of the 23 residents sampled (Residents 88 and 298) and three out of 10 residents interviewed during a group interview (Residents 23, 30, and 64). Findings include: A review of grievances filed with the facility revealed a grievance dated March 9, 2024, indicating that Resident 199 was not offered a shower because facility staff told her that they were too short {of staff} to give her a shower. Resident Council Meeting minutes dated April 9, 2024, revealed that the Director of Nursing (DON) explained to residents in attendance that they are trying to find workers to hire. Residents in attendance indicated that they had concerns about needing more help in the facility to provide their care. Resident Council…

    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 · E2024-05-31 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — pattern
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services 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 observations, clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure consistent communication between the facility and dialysis center were completed, including weights and vital signs, and failed to monitor fluid intake for residents prescribed on fluid restrictions for two residents out of 23 residents sampled (Residents 76 and 54). Findings include: A review of a facility policy entitled Coordination of Hemodialysis Services that was last reviewed by the facility on January 25, 2024, indicated that residents requiring an outside End Stage Renal Disease [(ESRD) is a condition where the kidney reaches advanced state of loss of function. This causes changes in urination, fatigue, swelling of feet, high blood pressure, and loss of appetite] facility would have services coordinated by the facility and that there would be communication between the facility and ESRD facility regarding the resident. The Dialysis Communication form would be initiated by the facility…

    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 · D2024-05-31 · tag F0559 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that in preparation for a room change each resident/resident representative received written notice, including the reason for the change before the resident's room was changed for one out of 23 sampled (Resident 89). Findings include: Federal regulatory guidance under §483.10(e)(6) notes that moving to a new room or changing roommates is challenging for residents. A resident's preferences should be taken into account when considering such changes. When a resident is being moved at the request of facility staff, the resident, family, and/or resident representative must receive an explanation in writing of why the move is required. The resident should be provided the opportunity to see the new location, meet the new roommate, and ask questions about the move. A review of Resident 89's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on April 8, 2024, with diagnoses including gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD), diabetes, and heart failure. A review of Resident 89's…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0622 — isolated
    Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider for one resident out of 23 residents sampled with facility-initiated transfers (Residents 21). The findings include: A review of Resident 21's clinical record revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital on December 13, 2023. There was no documented evidence that the facility had communicated specific information to the receiving health care provider for the residents transferred and expected to return, including contact information of the practitioner responsible for the care of the resident, resident representative information including contact information, advance directive information, all special instructions or precautions for ongoing care, as appropriate, and any other documentation, as applicable, to ensure a safe and effective transition of care. A review of Resident 21's clinical record revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital on March 15,…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, the Resident Assessment Instrument, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS, a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) accurately reflected the status of one resident out of the 23 sampled (Resident 21). Findings include: A review of Resident 21's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed in Section I Active Diagnoses that Resident 21 has a Multidrug Resident Organism (MDRO- an organism that is resistant to one or more antimicrobial drugs). However, a clinical record review revealed no evidence that Resident 21 had an acute or colonized MDRO. During an interview on May 30, 2024, at approximately 10:30 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that Resident 21 did not have an acute or colonized MDRO. The DON indicated that the MDS entry was an error.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · 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 clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to revise a comprehensive care plan in response to potential inappropriate behavior displayed by one resident out of 23 reviewed (Resident 13). Findings include: Review of the clinical record of Resident 13 revealed initial admission to the facility on December 15, 2021, with diagnoses to include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and diabetes. A Social Service Progress note dated March 25, 2024, at 1537 hours (3:37 PM), revealed that the social service staff member spoke with Resident 13 along with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), regarding another his roommate's (Resident 49) account that this resident (Resident 13) touched his (Resident 49) leg when he did not want him to. Resident 13, verbalized understanding of appropriate versus inappropriate touch and he denied that he touched anyone in this way. Resident 13 stated he feels safe here and has no concern. Will continue to monitor A review of information dated March 25, 2024, submitted by the facility revealed that…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy, and facility investigation reports, observation, and resident, staff, and resident family member interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents receive care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure sore development for one of 23 residents sampled (Resident 88). Findings include: A review of facility policy titled Skin and Wound, last reviewed by the facility on March 25, 2024, revealed it is the facility's policy to provide a system for identifying risk, and implementing resident centered interventions to promote skin health, prevention and healing of pressure injuries. A clinical record review revealed Resident 88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation (a condition that causes the heart to beat irregularly and sometimes much faster than normal) and acute kidney failure (kidneys are suddenly not able to filter waste products from 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 · D2024-05-31 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    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 resident, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide restorative nursing services planned to maintain mobility and functional abilities of one of four residents sampled (Resident 75). Findings included: A review of the clinical record of Resident 75 revealed admission to the facility on June 30, 2022, with diagnoses to include reduced mobility, muscle wasting, muscle weakness, and unsteadiness on feet. A physician's order dated was March 22, 2024, for the resident to receive RNP ambulation. During interview with the alert and oriented Resident 75, on May 28, 2024, at approximately 12:45 PM, the resident stated staff are not walking her. Resident 75 further stated she kept track and in the past 29 days she was walked once. The resident further stated she had told staff that she is not being ambulated as ordered and nothing was done about it. A review of Resident 75's Physical Therapy Discharge summary dated [DATE], indicated that the resident was…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
    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 develop and/or implement an individualized person-centered plan to address a resident's dementia-related behavioral symptoms to promote resident safety and highest practicable physical and mental well-being for one out of 23 residents reviewed (Resident 42). Findings include: A review of Resident 42's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include dementia (a condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning, especially with impairment of memory and abstract thinking, and often with personality change), overactive bladder, and myasthenia gravis (a disorder that causes weakness of the skeletal muscles). A review of Resident 42's Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated December…

    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 · D2024-05-31 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolated
    Provide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of clinical records, and resident and staff interviews, it was revealed that the facility failed to provide therapeutic social services to promote the mental and psychosocial well-being of one resident out of 23 sampled (Resident 89). Findings include: According to regulatory guidance under §483.40(d) Medically-related social services means services provided by the facility's staff to assist residents in attaining or maintaining their mental and psychosocial health, which include providing or arranging for needed mental and psychosocial counseling services and identifying and promoting individualized, non-pharmacological approaches to care that meet the mental and psychosocial needs of each resident. A review of Resident 89's clinical record indicated admission to the facility on April 8, 2024, with diagnosis including gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD), diabetes, and heart failure. During interview with alert and oriented Resident 89 on May 30, 2024, at approximately 9:05 AM, the resident stated that some time ago, he had an incident that occurred while he was…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of clinical records, the facility's plan of correction from the survey ending May 31, 2024, interviews with residents and staff, and the outcome of the activities of the facility's quality assurance committee, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a quality assurance plan that was able to identify and correct ongoing quality deficiencies related to providing a safe, clean, orderly, and homelike environment for residents. Findings included: During the survey ending on May 31, 2024, deficient facility practice was identified related to the facility's failure to provide sufficient nursing staff to provide timely and quality care to residents and, in accordance with each resident's plan of care, to meet individual needs and promote residents' health and well-being. In response to these identified quality deficiencies, the facility developed plans of correction, which included quality assurance monitoring plans to ensure that solutions were sustained. In response to the deficiency cited related to the facility's failure to provide…

    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
  • Potential for harm · E2023-11-16 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — pattern
    Provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of scheduled meal delivery times and resident and staff interviews it was revealed that the facility failed to ensure sufficient staffing to support the operations of the food and nutrition service department and timely meal service to residents. Findings include: During an interview on November 16, 2023, at 9:15 AM, Resident A2 stated that meal delivery times vary and are not consistent with the established schedule. Resident A2 stated that breakfast arrived on time today, but other times the meals are delivered over 30 minutes late. Resident A2 did not know why the meals were sometimes delivered late. During an interview on November 16, 2023, at 9:20 AM Resident A3 stated that meal delivery times have been from 45 minutes to an hour late recently. Resident A3 stated that the facility is understaffed and there are not enough workers to pass out the meals on time. Review of the facility's meal delivery schedule to residents revealed that established meal delivery times were in place for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Interview with the food service director (FSD) 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-16 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on a review of select facility policy, the minutes from Residents' Council meetings and grievances lodged with the facility and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to demonstrate their response to resident complaints/grievances raised at Resident Council meetings, including four of the four grievances raised at the October 2023 Resident Council meeting. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Complaint/Grievances, last reviewed by the facility on January 1, 2023, revealed that the facility will make prompt efforts to resolve grievances and inform residents of progress towards resolution. The policy also indicates that the facility's Grievance Officer or designee shall act on the grievance and begin follow-up on the concern or submit it to the appropriate director for follow-up. Furthermore, the policy states that the grievance follow-up should be completed in a reasonable time frame; this should not exceed 14 days. A review of Resident Council Meeting minutes dated October 10, 2023, indicated that residents in attendance voiced…

    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 before2023-11-16 · 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 observation, review of clinical records and select facility policies, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure adequate staff supervision and effective safety measures were implemented to supervise wandering behavior resulting in an attempted/actual elopement and failed to evaluate the circumstances of an attempted elopement and the effectiveness of safety measures to prevent future elopement for one resident (Resident A1) with exit seeking behaviors out of three sampled residents. Findings include: Review of the facility Elopement/Wandering Risk Guideline Policy last reviewed by the facility January 2023, indicated staff are to evaluate and identify residents that are at risk for elopement and develop individualized interventions. Residents are to be evaluated on admission, re-admission, 7 days post admission, quarterly, with a significant change in condition, and elopement event using the risk tool. If a resident is identified as being at risk complete an Elopement…

    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 · B2024-05-31 · tag F0623 — pattern
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of clinical records and transfer notices, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notices of facility-initiated transfers to the resident and the resident's representative as soon as practicable for one out of the 23 residents reviewed (Residents 21). Findings include: A review of the clinical record of Resident 21 revealed the resident was transferred to a community hospital on December 11, 2023. A clinical record review revealed no documented evidence that a notice of transfer or discharge letter was provided to Resident 21 or her resident representative regarding her transfer to the hospital on December 11, 2023. A review of the clinical record of Resident 21 revealed the resident was transferred to the hospital on March 15, 2024. A clinical record review revealed no documented evidence that a notice of transfer or discharge letter was provided to Resident 21 or her resident representative regarding her transfer to the hospital on March 15, 2024. During an interview on May 31, 2024, at approximately 11:30 AM, the Nursing…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-08-31 for 23 days

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 AVARDIS HEALTH — 38 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 2 of 52.0≈ chain avg
Health inspection 2 of 51.9+0.1 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.2+0.8 vs chain
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
1 of 5Ashland Nursing And RehabilitationAshland, VA 1 of 5Augusta Nursing and RehabilitationFishersville, VA 1 of 5Biltmore Haven Nursing and RehabilitationArden, NC 1 of 5Courtyard Health And RehabilitationMcComb, MS 1 of 5Emerald Ridge Health and RehabilitationAsheville, NC 1 of 5Ghent Health and RehabilitationNorfolk, VA 1 of 5Grand Trace Health And RehabilitationNatchez, MS 1 of 5Hibriten Mountain Nursing and RehabilitationLenoir, NC 1 of 5Highfield Nursing and RehabilitationCary, NC 1 of 5Kings Daughters Community Health & RehabStaunton, VA 1 of 5Middleton Oaks Health And RehabilitationWinona, MS 1 of 5Newport News Nursing & RehabNewport News, VA 1 of 5Pennknoll VillageEverett, PA 1 of 5The Oaks Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterMeridian, MS 1 of 5Wellington Rehabilitation and HealthcareKnightdale, NC 1 of 5Westwood Health and RehabilitationArchdale, NC 1 of 5Woodstock Valley Health and RehabilitationWoodstock, VA 2 of 5Clay County Health and RehabilitationHayesville, NC 2 of 5Crown Haven Health and RehabilitationCharlotte, NC 2 of 5Kannapolis Health and RehabilitationKannapolis, NC 2 of 5Manor At Penn Village, TheSelinsgrove, PA 2 of 5Pavilion At St Luke Village, TheHazleton, PA 2 of 5Pheasant Ridge Nursing and RehabilitationRoanoke, VA 2 of 5Valley View Care and RehabilitationAndrews, NC 2 of 5Walnut Cove Health and RehabilitationWalnut Cove, NC 2 of 5Wilora Lake HealthcareCharlotte, NC 2 of 5Windsor Grove Health and RehabilitationWindsor, VA 3 of 5Forrest Oakes HealthcareAlbemarle, NC 3 of 5Hilltop Manor Health And Rehabilitation CenterUnion, MS 3 of 5Locust Grove Retirement VillageMifflin, PA 3 of 5Skyline Nursing & RehabilitationFloyd, VA 4 of 5Jamestown Health and RehabilitationWilliamsburg, VA 4 of 5Oak Grove HealthcareRutherfordton, NC 4 of 5Willowbrook Rehabilitation and CareYadkinville, NC 5 of 5Cardinal Healthcare and RehabilitationLincolnton, NC 5 of 5Grayson Health and RehabilitationIndependence, VANot rated (Special Focus)Starkville Manor Health Care And Rehabilitation CeStarkville, MS

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
HAZLETON PARENTCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 05/01/2025
LUZERNE HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/01/2025
PAOP HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/01/2025
HAZLETON RE OWNER, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2025
HOBACK, TIFFANYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2025
MORGAN, DANIELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2025
SNF MGR LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/21/2025
JONES, TEQUILLAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2025
LOBITZ, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2025
MAGANZINI, STEPHENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 10 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.

$10.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-9.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$527K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 77%Medicare 16%Other / private 7%

About 77% 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 $527K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$341per resident / day
operating cost
$10,380per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$312per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in PA

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 395636. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-08, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next