Scenery Hills Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center

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.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 32% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 56 beds and averages 50.8 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 5 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 4.03 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.21 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 3.58 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.21 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 24% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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.

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.

23 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-05-29 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on review of policies, observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the freezer of the main kitchen.Findings include: The facility policy regarding food storage, dated February 6, 2026, revealed that any food that has been opened must be labeled, dated and secured in such a way that the food item is not open to air. Observations in the main kitchen's walk-in freezer on May 27, 2026, at 8:34 a.m. revealed that there were a bag of egg patties, a bag of dinner rolls, a bag of chicken patties, and a bag of waffles that were not dated with an opened date and were all open to the air. Interview with the Dietary Manager on May 27, 2026, at 1:00 p.m. confirmed that all food items in the kitchen should be labeled, dated and not open to the air. 28 Pa. Code 211.6(f) Dietary services.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that a complaint/grievance could be filed anonymously by residents that were dependent on wheelchairs for mobility.Findings include: Observations in the facility on May 28, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. revealed there was only one grievance/compliant box in the facility that was attached to the wall near the entrance of the building. The wooden box was at standing height level. Blank grievance/complaint forms were present in front of the box and were to be placed in a slot on top of the box when completed. The grievance/compliant box and forms were too high for residents sitting in a wheelchair to reach. Interview with the Social Worker, who is responsible for investigating grievances/complaints, on May 28, 2026, at 9:27 a.m. revealed that the facility had only one grievance/compliant box and that it was located too high on the wall for residents that were in wheelchairs to reach. Residents would need to ask staff to assist them with getting a form and placing it in the box or on her desk,…

  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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0628 — isolated
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the ombudsman of the transfer to the hospital, for six of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 4, 6, 7, 9, 52). Findings include: A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) assessment for Resident 1, dated May 10, 2026, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact, required assistance from staff for all daily care needs, and had diagnoses that included heart failure. A nursing note for Resident 1, dated May 4, 2026, at 21:57 p.m., revealed that the resident was admitted to the local hospital. There was no documented evidence for Resident 1 that a notification of transfer was provided to the state's ombudsman (an independent, impartial official appointed to investigate and help resolve complaints) for the resident's hospital transfer. A quarterly MDS assessment for Resident 4, dated May 8, 2026, revealed 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on a review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for three of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 5, 45, 47). Findings include:The Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, which gives instructions for completing Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments (required assessments of a resident's abilities and care needs), dated October 2025, revealed that Section K0520B feeding tube (a tube inserted into the stomach for feeding) was to be checked if the resident had a feeding tube on admission, while not a resident, while a resident or at discharge.A quarterly assessment for Resident 5 dated April 28, 2026, revealed that Section K0520B3 was checked indicating that the resident had a tube feed while a resident. A review of the resident's medical record revealed that the resident did not have a tube-feed while a resident at the facility.The RAI User's Manual, dated October 2025, 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 · D2026-05-29 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident and/or the resident's representative were encouraged to attend and participate in the resident's assessment and in the development of the resident's person-centered care plan for one of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 6).Findings include:Review of the facility policy for Resident Participation - Assessment/Care Plans dated February 6, 2026, indicated that the resident and his or her legal representative are encouraged to attend and participate in the resident's assessment and in the development of the resident's person-centered care plan. The care planning process will facilitate the inclusion of the resident and/or representative. Resident assessments are begun on the first day of admission and completed no later than the fourteenth day after admission. A Comprehensive Care Plan is developed within seven days of completing the resident assessment. A seven-day advance notice…

  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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of facility policy and clinical record reviews, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders regarding medication administration were followed for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 42). Findings include: The facility policy for medication administration, dated February 6, 2026, indicated that medications are prescribed as ordered by the physician. A quarterly MDS assessment for Resident 42, dated April 5, 2026, indicated that the resident was cognitively impaired, required assistance for daily care needs, and had diagnosis that included low blood pressure. Physician's orders for Resident 42 dated December 11, 2025, included for the resident to receive 10 milligrams (mg) of midodrine (used to treat low blood pressure) twice a day and to hold the medication if the resident's systolic blood pressure (SBP-top number on a blood pressure reading) was greater than 120 millimeters of mercury (mm/Hg) and diastolic above 80 mm/Hg. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident 42, dated…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · 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

  Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident received proper care for an indwelling urinary catheter for one of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 3).Findings include:The facility's policy regarding urinary catheter (a tube inserted and held in the bladder to drain urine) care, dated February 6, 2026, indicated that the purpose of the policy was to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections. The catheter tubing and drainage bag are to be kept off of the floor. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandatory assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 3, dated March 20, 2026, revealed that the resident was cognitively impaired, had an indwelling urinary catheter and had diagnoses that included obstructive uropathy (condition in which the flow of urine is blocked).Care plan for Resident 3 dated April 1, 2024, indicated that the resident required a urinary catheter because of obstructive uropathy.Observation of Resident 3 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as interviews with residents, family members, and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain professional practices that support infection prevention and control for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 7). Findings include: The facility's policy regarding hand hygiene, dated February 6, 2026, indicated that all team members will be trained and complete hand hygiene competencies at regular in-services. Staff are to use an alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 62 percent alcohol; or, alternatively, soap at times that include before and after handling clean or soiled dressings, gauze pads, etc., after removing gloves, and before and after handling clean or soiled dressings. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 7, dated April 27, 2026, indicated that the resident was cognitively impaired, required assistance for daily care needs, had diagnosis…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0882 — isolated
  Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on a review of facility policy and documentation, as well as staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to designate a qualified individual responsible for implementing and overseeing the infection control program as required.Findings included: Review of the facility's infection preventionist policy, dated February 6, 2026, indicated the infection preventionist is qualified by education, training, experience and/or certification and has sufficient knowledge to perform the role.Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing/Infection Preventionist on May 28, 2026, at 11:22 a.m. revealed that she did not complete the required nursing home infection preventionist training course.Review of the facility provided certification courses for the Assistant Director of Nursing/Infection Preventionist revealed that she did not complete the nursing home infection preventionist training course as required to fulfil her role as the infection preventionist.Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on May 28, 2026, at 2:29 p.m. confirmed the facility failed to designate…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-29 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  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 review of facility policies, observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents' environment remained free of accident hazards, by failing to ensure that safe water temperatures were maintained at the appropriate temperatures for resident safety in three of three resident areas (resident rooms on the North and South Halls and resident rooms in the corridor area), which placed residents in immediate jeopardy of the likelihood of serious bodily injury, harm or death. Findings include: The facility's policy regarding safety of water temperatures, dated February 6, 2026, indicated that tap water in the facility shall be kept within a temperature range to prevent scalding of residents. Water heaters that service resident rooms, bathrooms, common areas, and tub/shower areas shall be set to temperatures of no more than 110 degrees Fahrenheit, or the maximum allowable temperature per state regulation. Maintenance staff is responsible for checking thermostats 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.

  Quality of Life and Care 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.

Fines & penalties

$16,335 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $16,335 — penalty dated 2026-04-29

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 AKIKO IKE — 6 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

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 90% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. 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