Pavilion At St Luke Village, The

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

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

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

40.6% 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 169 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 17.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 52 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 35% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 14% — 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 105.3 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 15 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.99 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 3.02 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.40 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

33 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gdisputed · IDR2026-07-17 · 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 observations, a review of facility policies, clinical records, facility-provided investigative documentation, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and implement effective, individualized interventions to prevent repeated falls for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident 104) resulting in actual harm including a subdural hematoma and sacral fracture, requiring hospitalization.Findings include: A review of the facility's Accidents and Supervision policy, last reviewed by the facility on February 12, 2026, indicated the facility would provide each resident with adequate supervision and appropriate assistive devices to prevent accidents. The policy directed staff to identify and assess accident hazards and risks, implement interventions to reduce identified risks, monitor the effectiveness of those interventions, and modify them as the resident's needs or condition changed. The policy indicated that supervision is an intervention used to reduce accident…

  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 no plan of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-03-26 · 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 comprehensive review of clinical records, facility policies, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement care and services consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent the development of a pressure ulcer for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident CR 1), resulting in actual harm. Findings include: According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality, the pressure ulcer best practice bundle incorporates three critical components in preventing pressure ulcers: Comprehensive skin assessment, Standardized pressure ulcer risk assessment, and care planning and implementation to address the areas of risk. The American College of Physicians (ACP) is a national organization of internists who specialize in the diagnosis, treatment, and care of adults. Clinical Practice Guidelines indicate that the treatment of pressure ulcers should involve multiple tactics aimed at alleviating the conditions…

  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 · F2026-07-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to maintain sanitary food storage and food service practices to prevent contamination and microbial growth (the growth of bacteria, mold, or other microorganisms that can make food unsafe) in the dietary department and failed to ensure that personal resident refrigerators were monitored and maintained at safe storage temperatures to reduce the risk of foodborne illness for two residents of five residents observed on the second-floor nursing unit (Residents 8 and 28).Findings include:Food safety and inspection standards for safe food handling indicate that everything that comes in contact with food must be kept clean and food that is mishandled can lead to foodborne illness. Safe steps in food handling, cooking, and storage are essential in preventing foodborne illness. You cannot always see, smell, or taste harmful bacteria that may cause illness according to the USDA (The United States Department of Agriculture, also known as the Agriculture Department, is the U.S. federal executive department…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-07-17 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespread
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on pest control record review, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement and maintain an effective pest management program to prevent and control pest activity in the dietary department.Findings include:A review of the facility policy titled Pest Control Policy, last reviewed February 12, 2026, indicated the facility would maintain an effective pest control program to eradicate (eliminate) and contain common household pests and rodents. The policy indicated the facility would maintain a reporting system to address pest issues identified between scheduled visits by the contracted pest management company and would implement appropriate indoor and outdoor pest control measures in accordance with state and federal regulations. A review of the facility's contracted pest management agreement, signed May 23, 2005, indicated the contractor would provide bioremediation (the use of naturally occurring microorganisms to break down grease and organic material that can support insect breeding) to reduce drain fly breeding sites, control…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited beforedisputed · IDR2026-07-17 · 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 observations, a review of clinical records, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide care in a manner that promotes and enhances each resident's dignity and quality of life by failing to respond in a timely manner to residents' requests for assistance and providing care in a language that is understood by the resident for 6 out of 23 residents reviewed (Residents 10, 58, 69, 6, 71, and 1) and including experiences reported by 7 out of 9 residents during a resident group interview (Residents 10, 27, 28, 31, 36, 53, 59, 1, and 92). Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Resident Rights, last reviewed by the facility on February 12, 2026, revealed it is the facility policy that residents have the right to be treated with respect and dignity and the facility will ensure all direct care and indirect care staff members are educated on the rights of residents and the responsibility of the facility to properly care for its residents. During an interview on July 14, 2026, at 10:15 AM Resident 10 explained that she often…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited beforedisputed · IDR2026-07-17 · 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 meeting 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 seven of nine residents attending a resident group meeting (Residents 10, 27, 28, 31, 36, 53, 59, 1, and 92). Findings include: A review of the facility's Resident and Family Grievances policy, last reviewed on February 12, 2026, revealed it is the policy of the facility to support each resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination, reprisal, or fear of discrimination. Residents may voice grievances with respect to care and treatment that has been furnished as well as that which has not been furnished, the behavior of staff, and other concerns regarding their long-term care stay. All staff involved in the grievance investigation or resolution should make prompt efforts to resolve the grievance. The grievance official, or designee, will keep the resident…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-07-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
  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 and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to transcribe and implement physician orders for eye care hygiene to reduce the risk of infection for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident 71). Findings include: A clinical record review revealed Resident 71 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include blepharitis (a common, chronic inflammation of the eyelids, typically caused by bacterial overgrowth or clogged oil glands at the base of the eyelashes) and a retinal tear of the left eye (a small rip in the light-sensitive tissue lining to the back of the eye). A care plan indicating Resident 71 has a self-care performance deficit related to activity intolerance and impaired balance was indicated on October 28, 2021. Interventions implemented to improve Resident 71's current level of function with activities of daily life include providing the assistance of one staff member for personal hygiene (the ability to maintain one's own cleanliness,…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-07-17 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, review of clinical records and facility documents, review of select facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide food and beverages consistent with residents' assessed and documented food preferences and intolerances for two residents of 23 residents reviewed (Residents 69 and 58). Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Dining and Food Preferences, last reviewed by the facility on February 12, 2026, revealed individualized dining, food, and beverage preferences are identified for all residents. The Dining Services Director, or designee will interview the resident or resident representative to complete a food preference interview within 72 hours of admission. The purpose of this interview will be to identify individual preferences for dining location, mealtimes, including times outside of the routine schedule, and food and beverage preferences. The food preference interview will be entered into the medical record. Food allergies, food intolerances, food dislikes and food and fluid…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Ddisputed · IDR2026-07-17 · tag F0926 — failed to keep the home smoke-free / fire-safe — isolated
  Have policies on smoking.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and select policy review, it was determined the facility failed to assure that smoking paraphernalia was properly secured for one smoking resident to assure the use of these materials were utilized in a safe manner for one resident who smoked (Resident 28).Findings include:Review of the facility's resident smoking policy, last reviewed February 12, 2026, revealed that it was the policy of the facility to provide a safe and healthy environment and that safety protections apply to smoking and non-smoking residents. The policy indicated that smoking was only allowed in designated smoking areas, which are located only on the outside of the building. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on July 14, 2026, at 10:00 AM revealed the facility had one alert and oriented resident deemed an independent smoker, which allowed this resident to maintain control of his smoking paraphernalia (cigarettes, lighters, matches etc.) if safely maintained and safeguarded from unsafe use. Clinical record review revealed that Resident…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-12 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, resident council meeting minutes, and resident, resident representative, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide care in a manner that promotes each resident's quality of life by failing to respond timely to residents' requests for assistance, including experiences reported by two residents out of the 22 residents sampled (Residents 5 and 17) and experiences reported by seven out of the 11 residents during a resident group interview (Residents 26, 30, 34, 37, 49, 50, and 69). Findings include: A review of Resident Council meeting minutes dated June 2025 through August 2025 revealed residents raised concerns regarding facility staff failing to respond timely to residents' requests for assistance. A review of the Resident Council meeting minutes dated June 25, 2025, revealed that six residents in attendance were continuing to experience long wait times for care. The issue was marked as unresolved, and a grievance was filed on the residents'…

  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 · Ecited before2025-09-12 · 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, the minutes from facility Resident Council meetings, and grievances filed with the facility, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to put forth sufficient efforts to resolve continued resident complaints and grievances expressed during Resident Council meetings, including those voiced by seven of 11 residents attending a resident group meeting (Residents 26, 30, 34, 37, 49, 50, and 69), 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 policy titled Complaint/Grievance, last reviewed on May 28, 2025, indicated the facility will support each resident's right to voice a complaint/grievance without fear of discrimination or reprisal. The facility will make prompt efforts to resolve the complaint/grievance and inform the resident of progress towards resolution. The resident should have reasonable expectations of care and services, and the center should address those expectations in a timely,…

  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 · E2025-09-12 · tag F0641 — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records and the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS) accurately reflected the status of three residents out of 22 sampled (Residents 1, 4, and 96).Findings include: The Long-Term Care Facility RAI User's Manual (a standardized tool used in long-term care facilities to evaluate residents' strengths and needs),which provides instructions and guidelines for completing the Minimum data Set (MDS-a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated October 2024, requires the assessment to accurately reflect the resident's status; a registered nurse conducts or coordinates each assessment with the appropriate participation of health professionals; and the assessment process includes direct observation, as well as communication with the resident and direct care staff on all shifts. A review of the clinical record 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

“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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Fines & penalties

$90,662 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

• $25,184 — penalty dated 2025-03-26
• $55,419 — penalty dated 2024-07-19
• $10,059 — penalty dated 2023-10-27

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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.

About 76% 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 $548K 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

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