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

Pleasant View Communities

544 North Penryn Road, Manheim, PA 17545 · Non profit - Corporation · 92 certified beds · (717) 665-2445 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (717) 665-2445 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 6 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • 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
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2028 Town Sq · (717) 544-8075 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
129 Doe Run Rd · (717) 665-7171 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
75 Doe Run Rd · (717) 665-2315 · Call to confirm hours
Park
127 E High St · (717) 367-8844 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
54 N Penryn Rd

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 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 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased35.2%16.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.2%6.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%10.8%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.7%3.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened23.1%17.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication11.8%20.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.8%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.4%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.6%25.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table17.9%17.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.8%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine47.6%68.7%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission30.2%22.5%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.5%9.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.771.621.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.591.181.80better

* 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.

36.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 75 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

36.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
69.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.43U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.23hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 69.4% 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 36 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 0.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 73% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF36.7%CMS range 28.1–46.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.5–14.710.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge69.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge63.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge63.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified95.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened4.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.5–14.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.711.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.69
RN hours/ resident / day
1.13
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.86
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.68
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.48
RN hoursweekends
34.2%
Total nursing turnover
31.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 92 beds and averages 90.5 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.69 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.86 is at or above 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 4.31 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.82 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.77 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-24)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-01)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

  • Potential for harm · E2025-07-24 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide residents access to grievance forms on one of three units observed (Third Floor); and failed to provide residents access to the right to file written grievances anonymously on three of three units observed (First, Second, and Third Floor). Findings include: Review of facility policy, titled Resident Grievances, last reviewed January 2025, read, in part, It is the policy of this facility to support each resident's and family member's right to voice grievances without discrimination, reprisal or fear of discrimination or reprisal. Grievances may be voiced in the following forums. Verbal complaint to a staff member or Grievance Official. Written complaint to a staff member or Grievance Official. Written complaint to an outside party. Verbal complaint during resident or family council meetings. Via the company toll free Customer Service Line (if applicable). A grievance may be filed anonymously.During a group interview with Residents 2, 6, 37, and 73 on…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure 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 surveyor observation, facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store schedule IV-controlled medication in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment for one of three (500 west medication storage room refrigerator) areas observed. Findings Include: Review of facility provided policy, Controlled Medications Orders, revised September 17, 2013, revealed, Medications included in the DEA classifications as scheduled II thru V and are considered controlled substances by state law are subject to special ordering, receipt, and record keeping requirements in the facility. The facility failed to provide any more specific information regarding how the medication would be stored. Observation of the 500 west medication storage room refrigerator on July 31, 2024, at 10:00 AM, revealed two 30 ml bottles of 2 mg/ml Lorazepam (sedative medication and schedule IV-controlled substance). The two bottles of Lorazepam were in the main part of the refrigerator and not secured in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment in any way.…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, review of facility policy, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store and serve food/beverages in accordance with professional standards for food safety on the spice rack in the main kitchen, in three of three nourishment pantry refrigerators, and in one kitchenette refrigerator. Findings include: Review of facility policy, Food Storage Chart, no date, read, in part, butter should be stored in the refrigerator and is good for four days once removed from the master case, and commercially prepared nutritional supplements should be used within seven days once thawed. Observation on the spice rack in the main kitchen on July 29, 2024, at 9:32 AM, revealed the following items were not labeled to identify contents or date marked: one metal pan containing a red colored spice blend with a black plastic spoon inside; one plastic container with a red colored spice blend inside; and one metal pan containing roux (a cooked flour and butter mixture use for thickening liquid). During an interview with Employee 2 (Assistant Manager of Dining…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to maintain a data collection system of surveillance designed to identify possible communicable disease or infection for three of 10 months reviewed (October 2023, November 2023, and December 2023). Findings include: A review of the facility policy, titled Infection Preventionist, last reviewed May 21, 2024, read, in part, the Infection Preventionist will Establish facility-wide systems for the prevention, identification, reporting, investigation, and control of infections and communicable diseases of residents, staff and visitors. The facility's monthly infection control logs for October 2023 through December 2023 were unable to be provided by the facility. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Nursing Home Administrator on August 1, 2024, at 9:46 AM, revealed the facility's former DON did not complete the line listing during October 2023, November 2023, and December 2023 to track resident disease or infection. 28 Pa Code 201.14(a)(c) Responsibility of licensee 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were offered the pneumococcal vaccine as required for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 56). Findings include: A review of the facility's policy, titled Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine, recently revised June 12, 2024, read, in part, All residents should be offered the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine to aid in preventing pneumococcal infections (i.e. pneumonia). The policy continued, Prior to or upon admission, residents should be assessed for eligibility to receive the pneumococcal vaccine, and when indicated, should be offered the vaccination within thirty (30) days of admission to the community unless medically contraindicated or the resident has already been vaccinated. Also, Before receiving the pneumococcal vaccine, the resident or resident representative should receive information and education regarding the benefits and potential side effects of the pneumococcal vaccine. Provision of such education should be documented in 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0887 — isolated
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were offered any current COVID-19 vaccinations as required for two of five residents reviewed (Residents 16 and 56). Findings include: A review of the facility's policy, titled Covid-19 Vaccine for Residents, effective June 1, 2021, read, in part, All residents should be offered the COVID-19 vaccine to aid in prevention and transmission of COVID-19 infections. The policy continued, Before receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, the resident or resident representative should receive information and education regarding the benefits and potential side effects of the covid vaccine. Provision of such education should be documented in the resident's medical record. Also, In situations where COVID-19 vaccination requires multiple doses, the resident, the resident representative is provided with current information regarding those additional doses, including any changes in the benefits or risks and potential side effects, associated with the COVID-19 vaccine,…

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
BLOUGH, AMYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 03/02/2020
GAISSERT, GARYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/11/2021
HOLLINGER, JONATHANIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/27/2015
MYERS, STEVENIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/04/2016
BAILEY, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2019
BRADLEY, CHARLESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
ECCLESTON, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2022
HARTMANN, TERESAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2019
HERSHEY, DALEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
KEGARISE, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2017
LAUGHLIN, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020
MOYER, SCOTTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/20/2014
NESTLEROTH, HAZELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
PATRICK, DENNISIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 14 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.

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.

$17.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-68.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 26%Medicare 3%Other / private 72%

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

$570per resident / day
operating cost
$17,333per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$338per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in PA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Pennsylvania Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Pennsylvania
$11,954/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$13,688/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,480/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 395786. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next