Green Meadows Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
283 East Lancaster Avenue, Malvern, PA 19355 · For profit - Partnership · 184 certified beds · (610) 296-4170 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 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 | 5.4% | 16.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.5% | 6.2% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 22.1% | 10.8% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.1% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.5% | 17.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.9% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.2% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.6% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.1% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 24.8% | 17.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 32.2% | 68.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 25.2% | 22.5% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.9% | 9.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.07 | 1.62 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.89 | 1.18 | 1.80 | typical |
§ 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.
54.6% 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 165 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 65.4% 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 182 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 27% 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 | 54.6%CMS range 47.0–62.3 | 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 | 11.5%CMS range 8.6–14.6 | 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 | 65.4% | 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 | 63.2% | 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 | 59.3% | 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 | 25.5% | 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 | 99.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.8% | 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 | 0.4% | 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 | 6.0%CMS range 3.7–9.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.84 | 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 184 beds and averages 168.0 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 16 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.31 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.15 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.38 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% 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.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-29 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clincal record review, observations, and staff and resident interviews it was determined the facitliy failed to provided services that meet professional standards for one of one residents reviewed. (Resdient 1)Findings include:Review of facility's policy Medication Administration, stated .18 Administer medications as ordered in accordance with manufacturer specifications.19 Observe resident consumption of medication.Review of Resident 1's diagnosis sheet revealed diagnoses type 2 diabetes (insufficient production of insulin, causing high blood sugar) and chronic systolic(congestive)heart failure (excessive body/lung fluid caused by a weakened heart muscle).Observations were made in Resident 1's room on June 29, 2026, at 9:43 am, of a cup filled with medications set on the table in front of Resident 1.Interview with Resident 1 on June 29, 2026, at 9:43am, stated I did not know the medication was there.Review of Resident 1's active care plan failed to reveal a care plan for self-administration of medication.Observations made with the Director of Nursing on June 29, 2026, at…
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 · E2025-12-11 · 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 observations and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide hydration for fifteen of thirty-two rooms on the 1st floor dementia care unit.Observations made of resident rooms on December 8, 2025, December 9, 2025, and December 10, 2025, revealed rooms 100 through 115 had no cups of fresh water for resident's hydration or the cups were dated between November 14, 2025, and December 1, 2025. Rooms 116 through 132 were observed to have currently dated cups with fresh water.Observations made on December 8, 2025, December 9, 2025, and December 10, 2025, of rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] revealed cups of water dated November 14, 2025. Observations made on December 8, 2025, December 9, 2025, and December 10, 2025, of room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed a cup of water dated December 1, 2025.All remaining rooms between 100 and 115 had no water cups.Interview on December 10, 2025, at 12:43 p.m., with Registered Nurse Employee E4, E4 confirmed knowledge of rooms 100 through 115 not having fresh water 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 · E2025-12-11 · tag F0910 — patternEnsure resident rooms meet each resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide privacy curtains for three of thirty-two resident rooms and failed to provide clean privacy curtains for eighteen of thirty-two resident rooms located on the 1st floor dementia care unit.Observations made on December 8, 2025, December 9, 2025, and December 10, 2025, of resident rooms on the 1st floor dementia care unit revealed 3 rooms with missing privacy curtains. Observations made on December 8, 2025, December 9, 2025, and December 10, 2025, of resident rooms on the 1st floor dementia care unit revealed 18 rooms with privacy curtains that were soiled or had brown stains on them.Interview conducted with Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Director of Nursing (DON) on December 11, 2025, at 10:58 a.m., when the above information was presented, the NHA stated the facility was in the process of remodeling the 1st floor and new privacy curtains have already been ordered for all rooms. 28 Pa Code 201.18 (b)(1) Management 28 Pa Code 211.10 (d) Resident care policies 28 Pa Code…
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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based upon clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure appropriate advance directives regarding code status were in place for one of 33 residents reviewed. (Resident 114)Findings include:Review of Resident 114's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated October 18, 2025, stating Resident 114 was a Full Code.Review of Resident 114's current care plan revealed Resident 114 had a Full Code Status.Review of a Physician's Order for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) signed by Resident 114 and dated November 7, 2025, revealed Resident 114's wishes to have a Do Not Resuscitate status.Interview with the Director of Nursing on December 11, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. confirmed that Resident 114's clinical record did not concur with the POLST signed by Resident 114. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of LicenseePreviously cited 10/9/202428 Pa. Code 211.12(c)(d)(3) Nursing ServicesPreviously cited 10/9/2024, 4/30/2025
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-11 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure accurate assessments for one of 33 residents reviewed (Resident 29)Findings include:Review of Resident 29's admission MDS (Minimum Data Assessment - periodic assessment of resident needs) dated November 30, 2025, section H, Bladder and Bowel, indicated that the resident had an indwelling catheter (flexible tube that carries fluids into or out of the body).Further review of the clinical record no evidence that the resident had an indwelling catheter.Interview with the licensed staff E3 on December 11, 2025, at 10:45 a.m. confirmed that the resident did not have an indwelling catheter and that the MDS was coded incorrectly.28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based upon clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure appropriate monitoring for side effects and effectiveness were completed for the use of an anti-depressant medication for one of 33 records reviewed (Resident 35).Findings include:Review of Resident 35's diagnosis list revealed a diagnosis of major depressive disorder.Review of Resident 35's physician's orders dated November 27, 2025, revealed an order for Mirtazapine (antidepressant) to be administered for treatment of Resident 35's depression.Further review of Resident 35's clinical record failed to reveal evidence of monitoring for side effects of the anti-depressant medication and failed to reveal documented evidence of the effectiveness of the anti-depressant medication.Interview with the Director of Nursing on December 11, 2025, at 11:00 a.m. confirmed that no monitoring for side effects of the anti-depressant medication was conducted and further that no monitoring of the effectiveness of the medication was conducted. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(c)(d)(3) Nursing ServicesPreviously cited 10/9/2024,…
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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide an assistive device for one of seven residents investigated, (Resident 7).Review of Resident 7's physician orders revealed an order for regular diet, regular texture, thin consistency [NAME] Cup (a spill-proof drinking cup with a secure lid and J-shaped handle) built up fork and spoon dated May 21, 2025.Review of Resident 7's care plan revealed a care plan for nutritional problem or potential nutritional problem related to need for assist with meals, intellectual disability, and weight stable.Review of Resident 7's face sheet revealed medical diagnoses that include Encephalopathy (a group of conditions that cause brain dysfunction).Observations made of Resident 7 on December 8, 2025, December 9, 2025, and December 10, 2025, during lunch service revealed the resident drinking from a regular cup with a straw.Interview on December 10, 2025, at 12:43 p.m., with Unit Manager Registered Nurse Employee E4, E4…
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 · D2025-04-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the pharmacy provided medications timely for two of four residents reviewed (Residents 1 and 3). Findings include: Review of Resident 1's clinical record revealed Resident 1 was admitted [DATE], with diagnoses of but not limited to hypertension (high blood pressure), hyperlipidemia (high levels of fats in the blood), COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - progressive lung disease characterized by chronic respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation), and surgical aftercare following aortocoronary bypass graft (heart bypass surgery - procedure to restore blood flow to areas of the heart), Review of physician's admissions orders revealed a start date of March 30, 2025, for the following medications: Metoprolol Succinate ER (extended release) 50 MG (milligrams), one tablet by mouth twice a day for hypertension (high blood pressure), Spironolactone Oral Tablet 25 MG, one tablet by mouth one time a day…
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 · E2024-10-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store food in the dry storage located next to the main kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled, Labeling and storage, dated 2017, revealed that All food should be dated upon receipt before stored, food labels must include the food item name, and the use-by date . Observations during the tour of the main kitchen on October 6, 2024, at 9:12 a.m., revealed the following: Observation of the dry storage 2 area, noting eight opened bags of uncooked pasta without a label and use-by date and were nor properly sealed. Interview conducted on October 6, 2024, at 9:15 a.m., with the Dietary Director E3 confirmed the eight bags of uncooked pasta should have had a label with the name of the item and a use-by date. E3 also stated the above items should have been properly sealed. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, observation, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide documented evidence that consisted, adequate catheter care was provided to one of seven residents reviewed for catheters (Resident 94). Findings include: Review of facility policy, Catheter Care, implemented March 1, 2024, revealed: Catheter care will be performed every shift and as needed by nursing personnel .Document care and report any concerns noted to the nurse on duty. Observation of Resident 94 on October 7, 2024, at approximately 12:30 p.m. revealed the resident had a suprapubic catheter (tube that drains urine from the bladder through a small incision in the abdomen). Review of Resident 94's clinical record failed to reveal documented evidence that staff were providing catheter care. Interview with the Director of Nursing on October 9, 2024, at approximately 11:15 a.m. confirmed there was no documented evidence of catheter care for Resident 94's suprapubic catheter. 28 Pa Code 211.12(d)(5) Nursing Services
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-09 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to report results for laboratory studies to the ordering physician timely for one of 40 residents reviewed. (Resident 22) Findings Include: Review of Resident 22's Physician orders revealed an order dated September 11, 2024 for a UA C+S (test of urine to determine if there is a Urinary Tract Infection). Review of Resident 22's Laboratory report for the UA C+S revealed the report was final and was reported on September 15, 2024. Review of Resident 22's Progress Notes revealed a nursing entry on September 18, 2024 stating the results were posted and reported to the physician who ordered antibiotics to treat the urinary tract infection. Interview with the DON on October 9, 2024 at 11:30 a.m. confirmed the results were final on September 15, 2024 but not reported to the physician for orders to begin treatment until September 18, 2024. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(c)(d) (1)(3)(5) Nursing services
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-30 · 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
Based on clinical record and facility documentation review and resident/staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely treat a burn and failed to follow a physician medication parameter for two of 33 residents reviewed (Residents 32 and 58). Findings include: Interview with Resident 32 on November 28, 2023, at 9:10 a.m. revealed the resident had a burn on her abdomen from spilling coffee in September. Review of Resident 32's progress notes revealed a nurse's note dated September 10, 2023, at 10:31 a.m. which stated: notified by aide that resident had a skin area on upper abdomen. Upon arrival to room, this nurse noted 4x4 gauze pad on abdomen and once removed, a slightly red non-opened area noted (measured 4cm W x 4 ½ L). Resident stated 'I burnt myself with coffee on [September 8] a blister appeared and it popped [September 9, 2023.]' Nursing supervisor notified. Cleansed area with [normal saline], applied [triple antibiotic ointment], and covered with bordered gauze. Review of facility documentation revealed on September 8, 2023, at approximately 11:00 a.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 · D2023-11-30 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical records facility documentation review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely assess a resident's skin impairment and inform the physician of a newly found skin impairment for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 58). Findings include: Review of Resident 58's clinical records revealed resident was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of Malignant Prostate Cancer, Diabetes, and Severe Protein Calorie Malnutrition. The admission skin assessment dated [DATE], revealed no skin impairment in the resident's midback area. Review of facility documentation, and staff statement dated November 7, 2023, revealed that on November 3, 2023, a bandage gauze dressing was observed on the resident's upper back which was not present during initial assessment. Review of Resident 58's clinical records failed to reveal a completed skin assessment of the mid-upper back upon observing a bandage gauze dressing on November 3, 2023. Review of Resident 58's clinical records,…
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 before2023-11-30 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure one of 33 residents reviewed was free of unnecessary medications (Resident 137). Findings include: Review of Resident 137's physician's orders revealed an order dated May 20, 2021, to evaluate for verbal and non-verbal signs and symptoms of pain every shift. Review of Resident 137's July 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the resident reported no pain a total of 78 times. Review of Resident 137's August 2023 MAR revealed the resident reported no pain a total of 48 times. Review of Resident 137's September 2023 MAR revealed the resident reported no pain a total of 42 times. Review of Resident 137's October 2023 MAR revealed the resident reported no pain a total of 50 times. Review of Resident 137's November 2023 MAR revealed the resident reported no pain a total of 50 times. Review of Resident 137's clinical record revealed a nurse's note on November 24, 2023, at 8:39 a.m. which stated that the resident approached this writer stating she will not take any of her prescribed…
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.
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PRESTIGE HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES — 15 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.1 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 14 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPSH HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 07/01/2021 |
| STERN, MOSHE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 98% | since 07/01/2021 |
| BERGER, YAAKOV | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 06/01/2018 |
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 86% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $3.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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 395519. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-11, 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.