William Penn Care Center
2020 Ader Road, Jeannette, PA 15644 · For profit - Partnership · 145 certified beds · (724) 327-3500 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Jul 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (43) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $14,074 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-19)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 25.4% | 16.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 16.4% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.6% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 10.8% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.5% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 34.0% | 17.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.1% | 20.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.8% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 8.6% | 4.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 36.8% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.1% | 17.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.5% | 68.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.9% | 22.5% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.6% | 9.5% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.60 | 1.62 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.78 | 1.18 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
53.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 85 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 46.5% 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 58 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 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 61% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 53.6%CMS range 44.4–66.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.5%CMS range 7.5–15.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 46.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 62.1% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 51.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 96.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 1.2% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 6.2% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.3%CMS range 4.3–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.11 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 145 beds and averages 75.6 residents a day — about 52% occupied, or roughly 69 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.80 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.92 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 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 3.52 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.91 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.04 to 0.62 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% 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 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.
43 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 32 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-07-19 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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, resident clinical records, documentation provided by the facility, facility investigation, personnel records, family and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from neglect, which resulted in actual harm as evidenced by right tibia (the anterior of two bones below the knee) fractures for one out of three residents (Resident R27). Findings include: The facility Safe resident handling/transfer policy dated 1/30/24, indicated that the facility will ensure that residents are handled and transferred safely to prevent or minimize risks for injury and provide a safe, secure, and comfortable experience. Mechanical lifts may include equipment such as full body lifts, sit to stand lifts (a mechanical device used to transfer resident. Device is typically placed in front of the resident with staff assistance), or ceiling tracked mounted lifts. Two staff members must be utilized when transferring residents with a mechanical lift.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 policy, facility documents, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to reassess an elopement risk and implement interventions to prevent elopement after displaying exit-seeking behaviors, and the facility failed to ensure proper supervision for a resident (Resident R1) resulting in an elopement for one of five residents reviewed (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of facility policy Elopements and Wandering Residents dated 1/6/26, indicated the facility will ensure that residents who exhibit wandering behavior and/or at risk for elopement receive adequate supervision to prevent accidents, and receive care in accordance with their person-centered plan of are a dressing the unique factors contributing to wandering or elopement risk. The facility shall establish and utilize a systemic approach to monitoring and managing residents at risk for elopement or unsafe wandering, including identification, and assessment of risk, evaluation 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-08 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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 review of facility policy, clinical records, staff interview, and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident with a tracheostomy (trach- a surgical created opening in the neck that provides a direct secure airway) was monitored and documented as appropriate respiratory care for one of three residents (R3) and failed to provide appropriate respiratory care for four of six residents (Residents R11, R32, R67 and R69). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Administering Medications through a Small Volume (handheld) Nebulizer last reviewed 1/6/26, indicated the purpose of this procedure is to safely and aseptically administer aerosolized particles of medication into the resident's airway. Obtain a physician order, review the residents care plan, current orders and diagnoses to determine resident needs, check the treatment record. Store in a plastic bag with the resident's name and date on it. Change equipment tubing every seven days. Review of the facility policy…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-08 · tag F0849 — patternArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 facility policy, resident clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the coordination of hospice services with facility services to meet the needs of each resident for end of life care for three of five residents (Resident R9, R24 and R78).Findings include: Review of the facility policy Hospice Program dated 1/6/26, indicated that coordinated care plans for residents receiving hospice services will include the most recent hospice plan of care as well as the care and services provided by the facility in order to maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R9's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 3/12/26, indicated diagnoses of high blood pressure, heart failure (heart doesn't pump the way it should) and diabetes (high sugar in the blood). Section O- Special…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 facility policy, clinical record review, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent cross contamination during a dressing change for one of three residents (Resident R24), failed to implement an infection control program that included a system of surveillance to identify possible communicable diseases or infections for three of 10 months (February 2026, March 2026, and April 2026) and failed to maintain a comprehensive program for water management to monitor the potential development and spread of Legionnaires (an infection of the lungs caused by bacteria, commonly spread by water) for 10 of 10 months. (July 2025 - April 2026).Findings include: Review of the facility Infection Prevention and Control Program last reviewed 1/6/26, indicated a system of surveillance is utilized for prevention, identifying, reporting, investigating, and controlling infections and communicable diseases for all resident, staff and volunteer's visitors and other…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-08 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement an antibiotic stewardship program for 3 of 10 months (February 2026, March 2026 and April 2026).Findings include:Review of facility Infection Control Plan, Program and Committee policy last reviewed 1/6/26, indicated the facility has established and maintains an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. An antibiotic stewardship program will be implemented as part of the overall infection control program. Antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use will be implemented as part of the antibiotic stewardship program. Review of the facility's Infection Control Program for February 2026, March 2026 and April 2026, failed to include documented evidence that antibiotic (medications used to treat infections) monitoring and ensuring appropriate usage was completed. During a telephonic interview completed on completed…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 clinical record review, facility policy, resident interview and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to treat each resident with respect by failing to address a resident by their preferred name for one of eight residents (Resident R61). Review of facility policy Resident Rights dated 1/6/26, indicated that residents will be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect, and individually. Staff shall speak respectfully to residents at all times, including addressing the resident by his or her name of choice and not labeling or referring to the resident by his or her room number, diagnoses, or care needs. Review of clinical record revealed that Resident R61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R61's care plan dated 11/21/25, revealed the name the resident prefers to be addressed as. Review of Resident 61's MDS (Minimum Data Set, periodic assessment of resident care needs) dated 2/20/26, indicated diagnoses of high blood…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-08 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, observation, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the confidentiality of resident's medical information on one of four medication carts (East Medication Cart).Findings include: Review of facility policy Quality of Life - Dignity dated 1/6/26, indicated that staff shall maintain an environment in which confidential clinical information is protected. During an observation on 5/4/26, at 11:38 a.m. the East Medication Cart at the nurses station was left unattended with the computer screen open with identifiable information any passerby could see resident personal and confidential information. During an interview on 5/4/26, at 11:38 a.m. Registered Nurse Employee E9 confirmed the above observation and that the facility failed to maintain the confidentiality of residents' medical information as required. 28 Pa. Code: 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee.28 Pa. Code: 201.29(c.3) Resident Rights.28 Pa. code: 211.5(b) Medical records.28 Pa. Code: 211.12(d)(1)(3) Nursing services.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-08 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide 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 facility policy, clinical record review, closed resident records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident or resident's representative of the facility bed-hold policy (an agreement for the facility to hold a bed for an agreed upon rate during a hospitalization) for two of four resident hospital transfers (Resident R24 and Closed Resident Record CR87).Findings include: Review of facility policy Bed Hold Notice Upon Transfer dated 1/6/26, indicated that at the time of transfer for hospitalization or therapeutic leave, the facility will provide to the resident and/or the resident representative written notice which specifies the duration of the bed-hold policy and addressees information explaining the return of the resident to the next available bed. In the event of an emergency transfer of a resident, the facility will provide within 24 hours written notice of the facility's bed-hold policy. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R24 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-08 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide 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 review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly monitor weight and nutrition status by failing to obtain a monthly weight for one of eight residents (Resident R8), and failed to individualize care plans to address the resident specific nutritional concerns for two of two residents (Resident R8, and R90).Findings include: Review of the facility policy Weight Policy dated 1/6/26, indicated that ongoing monthly weight will be obtained unless otherwise directed by the physician. Monthly weights will be obtained on the date of the first scheduled shower for the month; regardless of refusal of shower. Monthly weights will be obtained by the 7th day of each month. Weights will be documented in the resident's electronic medical record. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R8's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 3/5/26, indicated…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly secure a treatment cart while not in use for one of three treatment carts (East Hall Treatment Cart), failed to properly store medications in one of two medication storage rooms (East Medication Room) and in two of four medication carts (A Hall Medication Cart and C Hall Medication Cart).Findings include: Review of the facility policy Administering Medications last reviewed 1/6 /26, indicated during administration of medications, the medication cart will be kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse. When opening a multi-dose container, the date opened shall be recorded on the container. Review of the facility policy Storage of Medications last reviewed 1/6/26, indicated the nursing staff shall be responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner. Compartments containing drugs and biologicals shall be locked…
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.
Show the remaining 32 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-08 · tag F0882 — isolatedDesignate 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, facility provided documentation, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to designate a consistent qualified individual(s) onsite, who is responsible for implementing programs and activities to prevent and control infections for one of 10 months (April 2026).Findings included: Review of facility Infection Control Plan, Program and Committee policy last reviewed 1/6/26, indicated the facility has established and maintains an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The designated Infection Preventionist is responsible for oversight of the program and serves as a consultant to our staff on infectious diseases, resident room placement, implementing isolation precautions, staff and resident exposures, surveillance and epidemiological investigations of exposures and infectious disease During an interview completed on 5/6/26, at 1:59 p.m. Human Resource (HR) Employee E15 revealed 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-20 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to initiate a thorough investigation for incident or accidents for one of five residents (Residents R1).The facility Incident and Accident policy dated 1/28/25, indicated for staff to report, investigate, and review and accidents or incidents that occur or allegedly occur, on facility property and may involve or allegedly involve a resident. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R1was admitted to facility 10/18/24. Review of Resident R1s Minimum Data Set (MDS, periodic assessment of resident care needs) dated 1/18/26 included diagnoses of cardiomegaly (enlarged heart), hyperlipidemia and anxiety. Review of Section C: Cognitive Patterns, Questions C0500 BIMS Summary Score revealed Resident R1' score to be 13, cognitively intact. Review of a progress note dated 2/17/26, at 11:36 a.m. indicated Registered Nurse was made aware that resident was outside in wheelchair by rehab. This nurse went outside to assess resident and was met by 2 another rehab…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 policy, clinical records, facility documents, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision resulting in an elopement (resident exits to an unsupervised or unauthorized area without the facility's knowledge) for one of five residents (Resident R1). Review of facility policy Elopements and Wandering Residents dated 1/28/25, indicated the facility ensures that residents which exhibit wandering behaviors and/or are at risk for elopement receive adequate supervision to prevent accidents, and receive care in accordance with their person-centered plan of care addressing the unique factors contributing to wandering or elopement risk. Alarms are not a replacement for necessary supervision. Staff are to be vigilant in responding to alarms in a timely manner. The facility shall establish and utilize a systemic approach to monitoring and managing residents at risk for elopement or unsafe wandering, including identification and assessment 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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-06-06 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — widespreadEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 policy, clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide documentation of medication regimen reviews (MRR) completed at least monthly for three of three sampled resident records (Resident R20, R59, R67). Finding include: The facility Medication regimen review policy dated 1/28/25, indicated that the drug regimen review of each resident is at least monthly by a licensed pharmacist and includes a review of the resident's medical chart. A medication regimen review (MRR) or drug regimen review, is a thorough evaluation of the medication regimen of a resident with the goal of promoting positive outcomes. Review of Resident R20's admission record indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R20's MDS assessment (MDS: Minimum Data Set assessment-a periodic assessment of resident care needs) dated 5/13/25, indicated she had diagnoses that included dementia (group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking, and social abilities…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 a review of policy, observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly maintain kitchen equipment in a sanitary condition creating the potential for cross contamination in the main kitchen of the facility. Findings include: A review of facility policy Food Safety and Sanitation dated 1/28/25, indicated all local, state and federal standards and regulations will be followed in order to assure a safe and sanitary food and nutrition department. During an observation on 6/2/25, at 10:00 a.m., of the walk-in cooler in the main kitchen, conducted with Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) Employee E1, revealed that the cold air condenser unit had a build-up of dust, grime, and dark colored debris around the fan covers and ceiling immediately forward of the fans. CDM Employee E1 confirmed observation by surveyor when viewed. During an interview on 6/2/25, at 10:05 a.m., CDM Employee E1 confirmed that the facility failed to properly maintain kitchen equipment, walk-in cooler, in a sanitary condition creating the potential for cross contamination in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 policy, clinical records, facility documents, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision resulting in an elopement (resident exits to an unsupervised or unauthorized area without the facility's knowledge) for one of four residents (Resident R44). Findings include: Review of facility policy Elopements and Wandering Residents dated 1/28/25, indicated the facility ensures that residents which exhibit wandering behaviors and/or are at risk for elopement receive adequate supervision to prevent accidents, and receive care in accordance with their person-centered plan of care addressing the unique factors contributing to wandering or elopement risk. Alarms are not a replacement for necessary supervision. Staff are to be vigilant in responding to alarms in a timely manner. The facility shall establish and utilize a systemic approach to monitoring and managing residents at risk for elopement or unsafe wandering, including identification 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-06 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide 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 a review of the facility policy, clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately assess the nutritional status, and failed to update an individualized care plan to address the resident's specific nutritional concerns for one of four residents (Resident R65) records reviewed. Findings include: Review of facility's policy Nutritional Assessment, dated 1/28/25, indicated part of the comprehensive assessment, a nutritional assessment, including current nutritional status and risk factors for impaired nutrition, shall be conducted for each resident. The dietitian, in conjunction with the nursing staff and healthcare practioners, will conduct a nutritional assessment for each resident upon admission (within current baseline assessment timeframes) and as indicated by a change in condition that places the resident at risk for impaired nutrition. As part of the comprehensive assessment, the nutritional assessment will be a systemic, multidisciplinary process…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-26 · tag F0573 — isolatedLet each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
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 facility policy and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide medical record access for one of four residents (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of Release of Medical Records dated 1/1/25, indicated medical records will be released with a valid request and in accordance with state and federal laws. Requests for records should be referred to the Director of Nursing or Administrator, or another staff member previously designated by the facility. The facility should request copies of any legal papers necessary to authenticate authority. The legal papers should be attached to the request for records. The corporate office/risk manager should be notified of the request for records. Upon receipt of a request for medical record copies, the facility should notify the requesting party, in writing of the cost for obtaining records and that records are available two days after the receipt of payment for the copies. Records should be assembled in chronological order. When documents…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-26 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan 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 review of clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement an effective discharge planning process that focuses on the resident's discharge goals and effectively transition them to post-discharge care for one of three residents (Resident R2). Findings include: Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R2's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 2/14/25, indicated diagnoses of encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the digestive system, colostomy (a surgical procedure that changes the way stool exits your body), and high blood pressure. Review of Resident R2's care plan dated 2/12/25, indicated to assist the resident with obtaining durable medical equipment (DME) and medical supplies prior to discharge. Review of a physician order dated 2/12/25, indicated to administer oxygen at two liter per minute (LPM) continuously. Review of a physician…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 review of clinical record review and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician orders for one of two residents (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of the clinical record indicated that Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis that included malignant neoplasm of upper lobe, right bronchus or lung, cyst of kidney and ischemic cardiomyopathy (a condition that occurs when the heart muscle is damaged by a lack of blood flow). Review of Resident R1's physician orders dated 1/8/25, indicated that Resident R1 is to be Nothing by Mouth(NPO) diet, NPO texture, NPO consistency, enteral feed every shift by j-port. A review of Resident R1's physician orders dated for January indicated two medications were ordered to be given by mouth. They include the following: Oxycodone HCl Oral Tablet 5 MG (Oxycodone HCl),semi-synthetic narcotic analgesic, give 0.5 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed Claritin Oral Tablet 10MG (Loratadine), an antihistamine…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-17 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a transfer notice to a representative of the Office of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman Division for three out of nine residents (Residents R1, R2 and R3). Findings include: Review of Resident R2's admission record indicated she was originally admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included diabetes, anxiety disorder and fibromyalgia (chronic condition that causes widespread pain and tenderness in the body). Review of Resident R2's annual MDS assessment (MDS-Minimum Data Set assessment: periodic assessment of resident care needs) dated 8/29/24, indicated that the diagnoses were current upon review. Review of Resident R2's clinical record revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital on 8/20/24, and returned to the facility on 9/9/24. Review of Resident R2's clinical record indicated the facility failed to include documented evidence that the facility provided a written transportation notification…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-17 · tag F0850 — failed to provide social-work services — isolatedHire a qualified full-time social worker in a facility with more than 120 beds.
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 the facility assessment and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a qualified full time social worker for a facility with more than 120 beds. Findings include: The facility assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the facility will have a full time Social Services Director. The faciliy has a capacity of 145 requiring a full time Social Worker. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) revealed that the Social Worker left 9/6/24. The facility hired a new social worker, start date in a few weeks. During an interview on 9/17/24, at 11:45 a.m. the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed there is currently no social worker employed at the facility as required. 28. Pa. Code: 201(b)(2) Management. 28. Pa. Code: 201(a) Social services.
- Potential for harm · F2024-09-09 · tag F0836 — widespreadEnsure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility financial documents, interviews with vendor and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to pay bills in a timely manner. Findings include: 28 PA Code Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Long Term Care Licensure Regulations, subsection 201.14(g), dated July 1, 2023, indicated that a facility owner shall pay in a timely manner bills incurred in the operation of a facility that are not in dispute and that are for services without which the residents' health and safety are jeopardized. Review of the Nursing Home Administrator's signed job description dated 9/20/21, indicated the primary purpose of the nursing home administrator is to direct the day-to-day functions of the facility with current federal, state, and local standards, guidelines and regulations that govern nursing facilities to assure that the highest degree if quality care can be provided to our residents at all times. During an interview on 9/9/24, at 9:36 a.m. Kitchen Manager, Employee E1 stated Vendor 1 has cut of services a couple of times. Kitchen Manager, Employee E1 indicated she is not…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 a review of facility policies, observations and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to properly store food products, and verify the washing temperature of the dish machine in the Main Kitchen (Main Kitchen), which created the potential for food borne illness. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy Cleaning Dishes/Dish Machine, last reviewed 1/320/24, indicated that the dish machine will be checked prior to meals to assure proper functioning and appropriate temperatures for cleaning and sanitizing. Prior to use, verify proper temperatures and machine function. Staff should check the dish machine gauges throughout the cycle to assure proper temperatures for sanitization. Thermal strips may be used as verification that the temperature is adequately hot. During an observation in the Main Kitchen walk-in refrigerator, on 7/15/23, at 9:45 a.m., a plastic bag containing an employee's lunch dated 7/14/24, was noted to be stored amongst the residents' food supply. During an additional observation on 7/16/24, at 10:40 a.m. in the Main Kitchen walk-in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-19 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide 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 a review of the facility policy, clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess the nutritional status of three of six residents ( Resident R3, R35, and R67) records reviewed. Findings include: Review of facility's policy Role Delineation for Certified Dietary Manger, dated 1-30-24, indicated that the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) may write progress notes by stating factual information such as diet order, percent of food intake, as noted by nursing, height, weight, usual body weight, lab values, medications, etc. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R3's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 5/8/24, indicated diagnoses of high blood pressure, hallucinations (a perception of having seen, heard, touched, tasted, or smelled something that wasn't actually there), and schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by disruptions in thought processes,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 facility policy, clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions for two of twenty residents (Residents R33 and R74), failed to have proper signage for Transmission Based Precautions, and staff knowledge for one of one positive Covid resident (Resident R180). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) dated 1/30/24, indicated EBP refer to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities. A physician order will be obtained for EBP for residents with any of the following wounds, indwelling medical devices even if the resident is not known to be infected with a MDRO. Review of the facility provided Pennsylvania Health Alert Network (PAHAN) 694, dated 5/11/23, indicated establish a process to identify and manage individuals with…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-19 · tag F0882 — patternDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to have a designated Infection Preventionist (IP) qualified with specialized training in infection prevention and control for six of twelve months (February 2024 - July 2024). Findings include: Upon review of the infection prevention tasks during annual survey 7/15/24, it was discovered that the Director of Nursing was also the current Infection Preventionist. Interview on 7/15/24, at 9:18 a.m. the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the Director of Nursing has been covering the Infection Preventionist (IP) role since the previous IP's last day of work on 2/5/24. Interview on 7/19/24, at 12:30 p.m. the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the facility failed to have a designated Infection Preventionist (IP) qualified with specialized training in infection prevention and control for six of twelve months (February 2024 - July 2024). 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(3) Management. 28 Pa. Code: 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(3) Nursing services.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-19 · tag F0940 — failed to train staff — patternDevelop, implement, and/or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility in-service documentation, personnel records, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to implement and maintain an effective training program for five of ten employee files reviewed (Nurse Aides (NA) Employee E9, NA Employee E16, NA Employee E25, NA Employee E27, and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Employee E26). Findings include: Review of NA Employee E9's personnel record indicated a date of hire on 7/5/2010. Review of NA Employee E9's personnel record did not include annual in-service training on resident rights, abuse, quality assurance performance improvement (QAPI), and behavioral health training in the last year. Review of NA Employee E16's personnel record indicated a date of hire on 7/10/2014. Review of NA Employee E16's personnel record did not include annual in-service training on abuse, dementia care, infection control, communication, QAPI, falls/incident accident, restorative care, emergency preparedness, and fire safety in the last year. Review of NA Employee E25's personnel record indicated a date of hire on 7/5/12.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records and facility provided documents, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from misappropriation (the act of stealing something that you have been trusted to care of and using it for yourself) of $5,251.83 for one of three residents reviewed (Resident R5). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Abuse dated 1/30/24, indicated each resident has the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation. Review of admission record indicated Resident R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R5's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 6/4/24, indicated the diagnoses of high blood pressure, renal insufficiency (condition where the kidneys lose the ability to remove waste and balance fluids), and heart failure (heart doesn't pump blood as well as it should). Review of facility provided documentation dated 12/13/23, at 4:00 p.m.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 policy, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property of residents for one of three residents reviewed (Closed Record Resident CR1). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Abuse dated 1/30/24, indicated - Protection: the facility will take all reasonable measures to ensure protection of the resident during an abuse investigation from any possible existing threat. In the event that the alleged perpetrator is an employee, that employee will be suspended pending investigation outcome or police intervention. Review of the admission record indicated Resident CR1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident CR1's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 2/5/24, indicated the diagnoses of high blood pressure, renal insufficiency (condition where the kidneys lose the ability to remove waste 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 policy, clinical records, facility provided documents, resident, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to report an alleged allegation of misappropriation of property for one of three residents (Resident CR1). Findings include: Review of the facility's policy Abuse dated 1/30/24, indicated any reasonable suspicion of a crime committed against a resident of the facility will be reported to the Department of Health and at least one law enforcement entity. If the event that caused the suspicion did not result in serious bodily injury the facility will report the suspicion within 24 hours after forming the suspicion. Review of the admission record indicated Resident CR1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident CR1's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 2/5/24, indicated the diagnoses of high blood pressure, renal insufficiency (condition where the kidneys lose the ability to remove waste and balance fluids), 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond 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 review of facility policy, clinical records, facility provided documents, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to investigate a potential allegation of abuse/neglect for misappropriation of property for one of three residents (Closed Record Resident CR1). Findings include: Review of the facility's Abuse policy dated 1/30/24, indicated all allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment of residents will be thoroughly investigated by the administrator and support staff. Review of the admission record indicated Resident CR1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident CR1's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 2/5/24, indicated the diagnoses of high blood pressure, renal insufficiency (condition where the kidneys lose the ability to remove waste and balance fluids), and atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm). Review of facility provided documentation dated 6/18/24, at 12:00 p.m. indicated the facility was contacted by…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0620 — isolatedNot require residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits, or pay privately as a condition of admission; and must tell residents what care they do not provide.
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 policy, resident records, admission documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain admission documentation for two of three residents (Resident R2, R60). Findings include: The facility Admissions policy last reviewed 1/30/24, indicates the facility will maintain an admissions policy governing admissions to the facility to ensure fair and impartial admisssion practices. Review of Resident R60 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that include dementia (loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life), cardiomegaly(enlargement of the heart) and chronic kidney disease. Review of the Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual effective October 2019, indicated that a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) is a screening test that aides in detecting cognitive impairment. The BIMS total score suggests the following distributions: 13-15: cognitively intact 8-12:…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy, clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that the necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider for two out of two residents sampled with facility-initiated transfers (Residents R67, and R72). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Transfer or Discharge, Emergency dated 1/30/24, indicated that should it become necessary to make an emergency transfer or discharge to a hospital the facility will prepare a transfer form to send with the resident. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R67's MDS dated [DATE], indicated diagnoses of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD- a disorder that develops when a person has experienced or witnessed a scary, shocking, terrifying, or dangerous event), cerebral vascular accident (an interruption in the flow of blood to cells of the brain), and dysphagia (difficulty…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 review of facility policy, clinical records, observations, resident and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide care as per physician's order and failed to provide weekly assessments for one out of four sampled residents with a surgical area (Resident R74). Findings include: The facility Negative pressure wound therapy policy dated 1/30/24, indicated that to promote wound healing, the facility will provide evidence-based treatments in accordance with current standards of practice and physician orders. Negative pressure wound therapy is an active wound care treatment that uses controlled sub-atmospheric (negative) pressure to assist and accelerate healing. The therapy will be provided in accordance with physician orders, including the desired pressure settings, continuous or intermittent therapy, and frequency of dressing change. Monitoring throughout the use of negative pressure wound therapy shall include pain, device functioning, settings, and response to therapy…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 review of facility policies, observations, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate care of respiratory equipment for two of four residents (Residents R70 and R71). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Replacement and Maintenance of Respiratory Equipment dated 1/30/24, indicated on Mondays all nasal cannulas (a thin tube in the nostrils to deliver oxygen supplementation) will be labeled with the date issued every fourteen days. Review of the clinical record indicated that Resident R70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R70's Minimum Data Set (MDS - periodic assessment of care needs) dated 7/3/24, indicated diagnoses of high blood pressure, obstructive sleep apnea (intermittent airflow blockage during sleep), and insomnia. Review of Resident R70's physician's order dated 7/7/25 indicated to administer CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure- a respiratory therapy intervention used to help people…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
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 policy, resident record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a trauma survivor with trauma informed care to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for two of two residents (Resident R1, and R67). Findings include: Review of facility policy Trauma Informed Care dated 1/30/24, indicated that nursing staff are trained on screening tools, trauma assessment and how to identify triggers associated with re-traumatization. Caregivers are taught strategies to help eliminate, mitigate or sensitively address resident's triggers. Review of the clinical record indicated Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R1's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated 6/13/24, indicated diagnoses of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD- a disorder that develops when a person has experienced or witnessed a scary, shocking, terrifying, or dangerous event), high blood…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store medications properly and securely in two of three medications carts (East Hall Medication Carts A and B). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Medication Storage in the Facility dated 1/30/24, indicated when the original seal of a manufacturer's container or vial is initially broken, the container or vial will be dated. The nurse shall place a date opened sticker on the medication and enter the date opened and the new date of expiration. Observation on 7/15/24, at 11:18 a.m. of the East Hall medication cart B, the following medications failed to have a date opened: Resident R10's albuterol inhaler (breathing medication), opened without a date. Resident R21's ipratropium albuterol (breathing medication), opened without a date. Interview on 7/15/24, at 11:18 a.m. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) E18 confirmed the medications failed to have a date opened as required. Observation on 7/15/24, at 11:25 a.m. of the East Hall medication cart A, the following…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0847 — isolatedInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
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 facility documents, resident clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a representative signed a binding arbitration agreement on behalf of a resident lacking capacity to understand the agreement terms for two of three residents (Resident R2, R60). Findings include: The facility Facility Binding Arbitration Agreements policy last reviewed 1/30/24, indicates the facility asks all residents to enter into a binding arbitration agreement. Review of Resident R60 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that include dementia (loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life), cardiomegaly(enlargement of the heart) and chronic kidney disease. Review of the Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual effective October 2019, indicated that a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) is a screening test that aides in detecting cognitive impairment. The BIMS total score suggests the following…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 facility policy, clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for identified resident problems for one for eight residents (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of facility policy Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered dated 1/31/23, indicated that a comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include Dementia(condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning), diabetes mellitus (disease in which the body ' s ability to produce or respond to the hormone insulin is impaired) and bipolar (psychiatric illness characterized by both manic and depressive episodes). A review 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 policy, clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for identified resident problems for one for eight residents (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of facility policy Incident/accident reporting dated 1/31/23, indicated to maintain resident safety in the least restrictive manner. A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include Dementia(condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning), diabetes mellitus (disease in which the body's ability to produce or respond to the hormone insulin is impaired) and bipolar (psychiatric illness characterized by both manic and depressive episodes). A review of Resident R1's Minimum Data Set (MDS-a periodic assessment of resident care needs), dated 4/10/24, indicated diagnoses remained current. Review of Resident R1'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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-14 · tag F0850 — failed to provide social-work services — isolatedHire a qualified full-time social worker in a facility with more than 120 beds.
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 the facility assessment and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a qualified full time social worker for a facility with more than 120 beds. Findings include: The facility assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the facility will have a full time Social Services Director. The faciliy has a capacity of 145 requiring a full time Social Worker. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) revealed that the Social Worker left at the end of October 2023. The facility hired a new social worker, start date 12/28/23. During an interview on 12/14/23, at 11:45 a.m. the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed there was no social worker employed at the facility from approximately 10/27/23 to current as required. 28. Pa. Code: 201(b)(2) Management. 28. Pa. Code: 201(a) Social services.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$14,074 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $14,074 — penalty dated 2024-07-19
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| FELLO, HEATHER | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2020 |
| WUKICH, ALEXIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2020 |
| QUEST HEALTHCARE DEVELOPMENT INC | Organization | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2014 |
| FERRI SUPERMARKETS INC | Organization | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/01/2012 |
| BOSTARD, KENNETH | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2015 |
| LIPPINCOTT, ERIC | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/01/2012 |
| LIPPINCOTT, KYLE | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/01/2012 |
| LIPPINCOTT, LYNNE | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/01/2012 |
| PERRY, DAVID | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/01/2012 |
| SHEVCHIK, GRANT | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2014 |
| WUKICH, BRITTANY | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/01/2012 |
| WUKICH, DANIEL | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 12/31/2014 |
| WUKICH, RICHARD | Individual | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 03/01/2012 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
2 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.
This home reported $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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
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.
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 396056. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-08, 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.