Casselman Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center
201 Hospital Drive, Meyersdale, PA 15552 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 99 certified beds · (814) 634-5966 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Jul 2025
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- CMS ownership filings flag it as owned by a private-equity firm or REIT — a category that performs worse on staffing on average, though that average says nothing certain about this home, and CMS filings undercount these ties, so other homes here may have them unflagged (what the research actually shows →)
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) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 1 to 3 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 | 14.4% | 16.8% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.9% | 6.2% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 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 | 32.1% | 10.8% | 6.5% | check this† — see note marked dagger 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 | 1.2% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 27.0% | 17.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 26.6% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.8% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.0% | 4.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.8% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.4% | 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 | 48.1% | 68.7% | 79.4% | worse |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. 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.
40.2% 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 32 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 46% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 14% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
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 | 40.2%CMS range 28.1–58.6 | 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 | 11.7%CMS range 7.3–16.4 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not 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 next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.76 | 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 99 beds and averages 47.7 residents a day — about 48% occupied, or roughly 51 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 3.41 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.78 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 3.40 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.57 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
40 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-09-29 · 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 reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that podiatry appointments were carried out, failed to follow podiatry recommendations, failed to provide weekly surgical wound assessments, and failed to provide treatments for an ingrown toenail resulting in an infection and pain for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 2). Findings include: An interview with the Resident 2 on September 27, 2023, revealed that she had concerns about cancelled podiatry appointments. One appointment was cancelled because she was late, but the other appointment was cancelled for an unknown reason, and she was not informed the reason. Resident 2 explained that she has been on treatments for an ingrown toenail for months now. She has been on multiple antibiotic medications, and it continues to be painful, red, and infected. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 2, dated August 30, 2023, revealed that the resident was understood, could understand, 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 before2026-08-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 a review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders for two of 34 residents reviewed (Residents 4 and 37).Findings include: A facility policy regarding medication orders, dated January 8, 2026, indicated that medications should be administered only upon the signed order of a person lawfully authorized to prescribe. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 4, dated May 21, 2026, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact, required maximum assistance from staff for daily care needs, had diagnoses that included diabetes, and received insulin (a diabetic medication to regulate glucose levels). Physician's orders for Resident 4 dated July 9, 2026, included an order for the resident to receive 6 units insulin aspart 100 units/milliliter (a fast-acting medication to regulate blood sugar levels) at 8:00 a.m. and to hold the medication if the blood sugar level was less than 110…
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 · E2026-08-06 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited mobility receives appropriate services, equipment, and assistance to maintain or improve mobility for one of 34 residents reviewed (Resident 39). Findings include: Review of the facility policy for Restorative Nursing Programs dated May 31, 2026, revealed that it is the policy of the facility to provide maintenance and restorative services designed to maintain or improve a resident's abilities to the highest practicable level. Restorative nursing program refers to nursing interventions that promote the resident's ability to adapt and adjust as independently and safely as possible. This concept actively focuses on achieving and maintaining optimal physical, mental, and psychosocial functioning. The interdisciplinary team, with the support of and guidance from the physician, will ensure the ongoing review, evaluation, and decision making regarding 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 · Ecited before2026-08-06 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 serve food that was palatable and at safe and appetizing temperatures for one of 34 residents reviewed (Resident 51). Findings include: The facility's policy regarding food quality and palatability, dated March 31, 2026, indicated that food is prepared by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor and appearance. Food is palatable, attractive and served at a safe and appetizing temperature. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) assessment for Resident 51, dated June 27, 2026, revealed that the resident was cognitively impaired, required substantial/maximum assistance with eating, required a mechanically altered diet, and had diagnoses that included cerebral infarction (lack of blood supply to the brain resulting in brain death to parts of the brain). A care plan for the resident, initiated April 6, 2026, indicated that she required cueing and prompting at mealtimes to feed herself as much…
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 before2026-08-06 · 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 clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that care and services were provided according to accepted standards of practice for two of 34 residents reviewed (Residents 1 and 55). Findings include: The Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, 21.11 (a)(1)(2)(4) indicated that the registered nurse was to collect complete and ongoing data to determine nursing care needs, analyze the health status of individuals and compare the data with the norm when determining nursing care needs, and carry out nursing care actions that promote, maintain, and restore the well-being of individuals. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's care needs and abilities) for Resident 1, dated June 3, 2026, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact, required assistance with daily care needs, received insulin (medication used to lower blood sugar levels), and had diagnoses including diabetes. Physician's orders for Resident 1, dated June 9, 2026,…
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 · D2026-08-06 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policies and clinical record reviews, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide dependent residents the necessary services to maintain nutritional status for one of 34 residents reviewed (Resident 51).Findings include: A facility policy regarding Activities of Daily Living, dated March 31, 2026, indicated that a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) assessment for Resident 51, dated June 27, 2026, revealed that the resident was cognitively impaired, required substantial/maximum assistance with eating, required a mechanically altered diet, and had diagnoses that included cerebral infarction (lack of blood supply to the brain resulting in brain death to parts of the brain). A care plan for the resident, initiated April 6, 2026, indicated that she required cueing…
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 · D2026-08-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policies as well as observations and interviews with staff it was determined that the facility failed to serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Findings include: The facility's policies regarding food handling, dated January 8, 2026, indicated that staff should avoid handling actual unwrapped food items with bare hands. Observations during lunch on August 4, 2026, at 11:54 a.m., of Hospice Registered Nurse 2 preparing resident 56 tray and touching the resident's dinner roll with her bare hands. Interview with Hospice Registered Nurse 2 on August 4, 2026, at 12:36 p.m. confirmed that she should have worn gloves when handling the resident's dinner roll. Interview with the Administration on August 4, 2026, at 3:45 p.m. confirmed that the hospice RN should have worn gloves. 28 Pa. Code 211.6(f) Dietary Services.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-29 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility documents, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident and staff environment was maintained in a safe and sanitary environment in one of two medication rooms (third floor). Findings include: Observations of the third-floor medication room on June 29, 2026, at 9:47 a.m. revealed that upon entering the medication room there was a strong musty odor. The ceiling had an area approximately two feet in diameter that was discolored, water damaged and had loose plaster and tape. There was a basin on the floor that contained water. The medication room contained the Pyxis machine (medication dispensing machine) and over the counter medications stored in cabinets. An e-mail communication, dated May 26, 2026, revealed that there were several roof leaks that were coming in on the third floor. The roof was in bad shape with shingles missing, waterways cracked and open, missing caps, nails popped up, and rotted plywood. A quote was received regarding the cost of the materials required to repair 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 · D2026-05-05 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to change an indwelling urinary catheter as ordered by the physician and to change an indwelling urinary catheter as recommended by the urologist for two of four residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2).Findings include:The facility policy for urinary catheter care, dated January 8, 2026, indicated that changing indwelling catheters or drainage bags at routine, fixed intervals, was not recommended. Rather it was suggested to change catheters and drainage bags based on clinical indications such as infection, obstruction, or when the closed system was compromised.A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 1, dated March 11, 2026, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact, had an indwelling urinary catheter, and had diagnoses that included neurogenic bladder (a lack of bladder control due to a brain, spinal cord, or nerve condition).Physician's orders for Resident 1, dated October…
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 before2026-02-18 · 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
Based on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain accountability for controlled medications (drugs with the potential to be abused) for one of 6 residents reviewed (Resident 2).Findings include: A facility policy related to controlled substances, dated April 7, 2025, indicated that waste and/or disposal of controlled medications are done in the presence of the nurse and a witness who also signs the disposition sheet. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 2, dated January 15, 2026, indicated that the resident was cognitively impaired, was dependent for care needs, had signs indicating delirium, received controlled medications including antianxiety medications (used to treat anxiety), and had diagnoses that included dementia, anxiety, depression and psychotic disorder. Physician's orders for Resident 2, dated January 14, 2026, included orders for the resident to receive a 0.5 milligram (mg) tablet of Ativan…
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 before2025-09-17 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 serve food that was palatable and at safe and appetizing temperatures.Findings include: The facility's policy regarding food safety requirements, dated April 7, 2025 indicated that foods and beverages shall be distributed and served in a manner that is palatable, and the temperatures will be at the recommended temperatures per the Federal Food Code temperature Requirements which states that hot food must be held at 135 degrees Fahrenheit or higher.Observations in the kitchen for the lunch meal service on September 17, 2025, at 11:31 a.m. revealed that a test tray left the kitchen and arrived on the west wing at 12:01 p.m. The lunch meal on September 17, 2025, consisted of baked fish, rice, and mixed vegetables. Trays were passed to the residents in their rooms, and the last resident was served and eating at 12:06 p.m. The test tray on September 17, 2025, at 12:06 p.m. revealed that the temperature of the baked fish was 122.8 degrees Fahrenheit, rice was 143.3…
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 29 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-17 · 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
Review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to revise/update care plans after an incident for one of 5 residents reviewed (Resident 2). Findings include: The facility's policy regarding care plans, dated April 7, 2025, indicated that the care plan will be reviewed and revised to reflect changes in the resident's status. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 1, dated August 21, 2025, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact, could understand and was understood, required assistance from staff for her daily care needs and had diagnoses that included, morbid obesity, anxiety and chronic migraines. A care plan, revised July 14, 2025, indicated that Resident 1 had the potential to be verbally aggressive related to ineffective coping skills. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 2, dated August 3, 2025, indicated that 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 · Ecited before2025-07-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act and information submitted from the facility, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a licensed practical nurse's license remained current for one of one licensed practical nurse's reviewed (Licensed Practical Nurse 2). This was cited as past non-compliance.Findings include:The Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, State Board of Nursing, for the expiration and renewal of licensure revealed that notice of the renewal period of a license will be sent to each active licensee prior to the expiration date of the licensee's license. The applicant for license renewal may complete and submit an application online or may mail a completed application form to the Board's administrative office. When applying for licensure renewal, a registered nurse shall complete and submit the renewal application, including disclosing any license to practice nursing or any allied health profession in any other state, territory,…
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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and residents' clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete accurate Minimum Data Set assessments for three of 28 residents reviewed (Residents 3, 38, 52). Findings include:The Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, which gives instructions for completing Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments (mandated assessments of a resident's abilities and care needs), dated October 2024, revealed that Section N0415F1 (antibiotic medication) was to be checked if the resident received an antibiotic medication during the seven-day assessment period and Section N0415K1 was to be checked if the resident received an anticonvulsant medication during the seven-day assessment period.Physician's orders for Resident 3 dated May 1, 2025, included an order for the resident to receive 300 milligrams (mg) of Gabapentin two times a day for diabetic neuropathy (nerve damage that can cause pain, numbness, tingling, and weakness in the hands and feet, and sometimes other parts 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 before2025-07-31 · 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
Based on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care needs for two of 28 residents reviewed (Residents 4 and 9). A facility policy for Care Plan Revisions Upon Status Change dated April 7, 2025, indicated that the comprehensive care plan will be reviewed, and revised as necessary, when a resident experiences a status change. A significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's care needs and abilities) for Resident 4 dated May 2, 2025, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact, required assistance with daily care needs, and had diagnoses that included Multiple Sclerosis (disease in which the immune system eats away at the protective covering of nerves). The Care plan for Resident 4 dated October 13, 2023, indicated that the resident was receiving diuretic therapy (water pills, to increase urine production and help the body eliminate excess fluid and sodium). Review of the Medication…
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 before2025-07-31 · 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 a review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders related to bowel protocols for one of 28 residents reviewed (Resident 42).Findings include:A facility policy for Bowel Movements Monitoring dated April 7, 2025, indicated that all residents' bowel movements will be documented. If a resident has not had a bowel movement for three full days, the licensed nurse will follow bowel protocol as ordered by the physician. All shifts will then monitor for effectiveness. If initial laxative is ineffective, then a second laxative if ordered is given as per order. Resident will be monitored on all shifts for bowel movements to see if second laxative was effective. If the second laxative was ineffective, then an enema will be given per physician order. All three shifts will monitor resident for bowel movement to see if enema was effective. If enema is ineffective, notify the physician.A quarterly MDS assessment for Resident 42 dated July 3, 2025, indicated that the resident was cognitively…
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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0729 — isolatedVerify that a nurse aide has been trained; and if they haven't worked as a nurse aide for 2 years, receive retraining.
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 job descriptions and personnel files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that staff renewed their nurse aide registry to allow individuals to work as a nurse aide for one of three nurse aides reviewed (Nurse Aide 3). Findings include:The facility's job description, undated, revealed that a nurse aide certification was necessary to perform functions of the position. This was cited as past-noncompliance.The personnel file for agency Nurse Aide 3 revealed that her certification on the nurse aide registry expired on [DATE]. The facility was unaware that Nurse Aide 3's certification on the nurse aide registry had expired until they were notified on [DATE], by Nurse Aide 3. Nurse Aide 3 worked in the facility from [DATE] through [DATE] and was immediately removed from the schedule when it was discovered that her registry had expired. Interview with the Director of Human Resources on [DATE] at 11:06 a.m. confirmed that Nurse Aide 3'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 before2025-07-31 · 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 policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications were properly labeled for one of 28 residents reviewed (Resident 37). Findings include:The facility's policy regarding labeling of medications, dated April 7, 2025, indicated that all medications and biologicals used in the facility will be labeled in accordance with current state and federal regulations to facilitate consideration of precautions and safe administration of medications. Labels for individual drug containers must include appropriate instructions and precautions. The pharmacy must be informed of any changes or changes in directions for use of the medication. Physician's orders for Resident 37, dated July 1, 2025, indicated that the resident was to receive two 300 milligram (mg) capsules of Gabapentin (a medication used to treat nerve pain) daily and one 300 mg capsule of Gabapentin at bedtime. Observations during the medication administration on July 31, 2025, at 8:24 a.m. revealed that Licensed Practical…
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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain laboratory studies as ordered by the physician for one of 28 residents reviewed (Resident 3).Findings include:The facility's policy regarding laboratory services and reporting, dated April 7, 2025, revealed that the facility would provide or obtain laboratory services when ordered by a physician, physician assistant, nurse practitioner, or clinical nurse specialist in accordance with state law. The facility would provide or obtain laboratory services to meet the needs of its residents.A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 3, dated June 25, 2025, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact and had diagnoses that included hypothyroidism (when the thyroid gland doesn't make and release enough hormone into your bloodstream). A pharmacy review for Resident 3, dated May 3, 2025 revealed the resident was taking levothyroxine (medication used to treat hypothyroidism) 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 · D2025-07-02 · 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
Based on review of facility policy, clinical records and facility investigative documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from misappropriation of medications for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 3).Findings include:The facility's policy regarding controlled narcotics dated April 7, 2025, indicated that the facility complies with all laws, regulations, and other requirements related to handling, storage, disposal, and documentation of controlled medications (listed as Schedule II-V of the comprehensive drug abuse prevention and control act of 1976). Misappropriation was defined as the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent example drug diversion (taking the residents medication).A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 3, dated May 29, 2025, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact, required assistance…
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 before2025-07-02 · 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
Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate accounting of controlled medications (medications with the potential to be abused) for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 1).Findings include:The facility's policy regarding medication administration, dated April 7, 2025, indicated that the individual administering the medication initials the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) on the appropriate line after giving each medication and before administering the next ones.The facility's policy regarding controlled substance administration, dated April 7, 2025, states that an individual controlled substance record is made for each resident who will be receiving a controlled substance.A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 1, dated May 14, 2025, revealed that the resident is cognitively intact, required assistance for daily care needs, and had medical diagnosis that include…
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 · D2025-04-01 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that call bells were within reach for two of six residents reviewed (Residents 3, 5). Findings include: The facility's policy for call lights: accessibility and timely response, dated May 31, 2024, indicated that the purpose was to ensure the facility is adequately equipped with a call light at each residents' bedside, toilet, and bathing facility, to allow residents to call for assistance. Staff would ensure the call light was within reach of residents and secured, as needed. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's care needs and abilities) for Resident 3, dated March 21, 2025, revealed that the resident could usually make herself understood and understand others, had moderate cognitive impairment, required assistance from staff for care needs, was occasionally incontinent of bladder, and had diagnoses that included seizures. A care plan for Resident 3, dated February 16, 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 · Dcited before2025-04-01 · 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
Based on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care for pressure ulcers in accordance with professional standards of practice, by failing to ensure that recommendations from a wound consultant were reviewed with the attending physician for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 2) who had pressure ulcers. Findings include: The facility's policy regarding the prevention of pressure ulcers, dated May 31, 2024, indicated that the facility would review the resident's care plan and identify the risk factors as well as the interventions designed to reduce or eliminate those considered modifiable. The resident was to be assessed on admission for existing pressure injury risk factors, repeated weekly, and upon any changes in condition. The facility was to select appropriate support surfaces and pressure redistribution based on the resident's risk factors, in accordance with current clinical practice. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's 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 · D2025-01-31 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 maintain a clean, homelike environment in the second floor ice room and in resident rooms for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident 1). Findings include: Observations in the second floor ice room on January 29, 2025, at 9:09 a.m. revealed that there was an ice machine sitting on a wooden type bench/platform. The platform was greenish/blue in color with a moderate amount of chipped paint. The front and top of the platform was noted to have a blackish-brown, removable substance on it that measured approximately 10.0 x 15.0 inches. Interview with the Maintenance Director on January 29, 2025, at 12:17 p.m. confirmed that in the past the ice machine leaked and dripped water onto the top of the platform, which over time resulted in the blackish, removable substance. Observations in Residents 1's room on January 29, 2025, at 9:13 a.m. revealed that there were four holes in the dry wall to the left of the resident's television measuring approximately 5.0 x 4.0 inches each. Interview with Resident 1…
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 · D2025-01-31 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and manufacturer's instructions, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that battery packs were replaced in mechanical lifts. Findings include: Manufacturer's directions for the ArjoHuntleigh Lifter Battery Pack SPL3021, dated August 9, 2016, used for the facility mechanical lifts (equipment used to safely and easily move residents) revealed that the battery life is variable (2-5 years) and depends on proper charging practices. Batteries were to be recharged on a regular basis (at least monthly), they were not to reach a low charge state, and the battery packs were to be removed from the lift when not used for a long period of time. Interviews with Nurse Aide 1 and Nurse Aide 2 on January 29, 2025, at 10:10 a.m. indicated that even when the mechanical lift batteries are fully charged, they are losing their charge very quickly, which makes it difficult and frustrating to provide timely and safe care to the residents. Observations of the five battery chargers in the second floor dining and linen rooms on January 29, 2025, at 12:30…
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 · D2024-11-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that clinical records were complete and accurately documented for one one of six residents reviewed (Resident 5). Findings include: A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 5, dated October 4, 2024, revealed that the resident was understood; could understand others; had diagnoses that included anemia (low blood count), heart failure (a serious condition that occurs when the heart is unable to pump enough blood and oxygen to the body's organs), hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetes, cerebral vascular accident (CVA - commonly known as a stroke), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD -a common lung disease that makes it difficult to breathe); and received oxygen therapy. A nursing note for Resident 5, dated November 2, 2024, at 2:00 a.m., and completed by Licensed Practical Nurse 1, revealed that at approximately 2:00 a.m. the writer went down to the second floor to change 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 · Ecited before2024-08-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications were properly secured in the medication cart. Findings include: The facility's policy regarding medication labeling and storage, dated May 31, 2024, indicated that compartments (including but not limited to drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts, and boxes) containing medications are locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items are not left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others. Observations on August 13, 2024, at 8:58 a.m. revealed that Licensed Practical Nurse 1 left a medication cart out of sight, unattended and unlocked in the hallway when she entered a resident's room. An interview with Licensed Practical Nurse 1 at the time of the observation confirmed that her medication cart was not locked when she entered a resident's room, and it should have been. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on August 13, 2024, at 9:17 a.m. confirmed that the medication cart should have…
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 · E2024-08-15 · 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
Based on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the designated interdisciplinary team member obtained the required information from the contracted hospice provider for one of 31 residents reviewed (Resident 26) who were receiving hospice services. Findings include: The facility's Hospice Program policy, dated May 31, 2024, indicated that in general, it was the facility's responsibility to meet the resident's personal care and nursing needs in coordination with the hospice representative, and ensure that the level of care provided was appropiately based on the individual resident's need, which included communicating with the hospice provider (and documenting such communication) to ensure that the needs of the resident were addressed and met 24 hours per day. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 26, dated July 24, 2024, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact, received hospice services, and had a…
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 · D2024-08-15 · 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
Based on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident and resident's representative in writing of the transfer and reason for hospitalization for one of 31 residents reviewed (Resident 54). Findings include: A nursing note for Resident 54, dated May 20, 2024, revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility that afternoon. A nursing note for Resident 54, dated May 25, 2024, revealed that the writer received a call from the resident's son at 7:28 p.m. that the resident was not answering her cell phone. The resident's son stated that he felt that the resident has had a decline over the last few days. The writer relayed information to the resident's son that she received in report about the resident's increased weakness and orthostatic blood pressures (a condition where blood pressure drops suddenly when someone stands up from a sitting or lying position). The writer assured the resident's son that she would go back and assess the resident, update him, and make sure the resident's phone was charged and within…
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 before2024-08-15 · 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
Based on review of facility policies, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physicians orders were followed for one of 31 residents reviewed (Resident 21). Findings include: An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 21, dated June 25, 2024, revealed that the resident was understood and able to understand others, was cognitively impaired, required substantial assistance from staff for daily care needs, and had diagnoses that included heart failure and hypertension (high blood pressure). A care plan for for Resident 21, dated August 5, 2024, indicated that the resident had an actual fall due to poor balance and an unsteady gait. A nursing note for Resident 21, dated August 4, 2024, at 1:31 a.m., revealed that resident was found sitting on his buttocks on the floor in his room. The resident was incontinent of bowel at the time of the fall. A nursing note for Resident 21, dated August 4, 2024, at 9:40 p.m., revealed that he had a witnessed fall.…
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 before2024-06-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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
Based on review of facility policies, as well observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an environment free of potential safety hazards related to the facility's hot water temperatures. Findings include: A facility policy for safe water temperatures, dated January 31, 2024, included that water heaters that service resident rooms, bathrooms, common areas, and tub/shower areas shall be set to temperatures of no more than 110 degrees Fahrenheit (F), or the maximum allowable temperature per state regulation. Observations of the Maintenance Director checking water temperatures in sinks on the second and third floors on June 21, 2024, between 9:52 a.m. and 10:09 a.m. revealed temperatures from 114 degrees F to 125 degrees F. Interview with the Maintenance Director on June 21, 2024, at 10:18 a.m. revealed that the water temperature in the sinks in the residents' rooms should be no higher than 110 degrees F, and that he could adjust the water temperatures as needed. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on June 21, 2024, at 11:42 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 · Dcited before2024-05-15 · 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
Based on a review of facility policy, clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the accountability of controlled medications (drugs with the potential to be abused) for three of four residents reviewed (Residents 2, 3, 4). Findings include: A facility policy for medication administration, dated January 31, 2024, revealed that after the medication has been administered, the nurse will initial the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) on the appropriate line and will record the date and time. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 2, dated March 7, 2024, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact, required assistance with care needs, was receiving hospice services, and received opioid (controlled drug used to treat pain) medication. Physician's orders for Resident 2, dated February 28, 2024, included an order for the resident to receive 50 milligrams (mg) of tramadol (controlled drug used to treat pain) every four hours as…
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 before2024-03-26 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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
Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care needs for four of seven residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2, 4, 6). Findings include: A facility policy regarding plans of care, dated January 31, 2024, indicated that resident assessments are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the resident and their condition changes. The facility's policy regarding behaviors, dated January 31, 2024, indicated that interventions and approaches would be based on a detailed assessment of physical, psychological and behavioral symptoms and their underlying causes, as well as the potential situational and environmental reasons for the behavior. The care plan would include, as a minimum, a description of behavioral symptoms, targeted and individualized interventions for the behavioral and/or psychosocial symptoms, the rationale for the interventions and approaches, specific and measurable goals for targeted…
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 · D2024-03-26 · 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
Based on review of facility policies, clinical records, and investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from abuse for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 4). Findings include: The facility's policy for abuse, dated January 31, 2024, indicated that residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, corporal punishment, and involuntary seclusion. Abuse was defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. Willful meant the individual must have acted deliberately, not that the individual must have intended to inflict injury or harm. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 1, dated January 23, 2024, indicated that the resident was usually understood and could usually understand others, was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, and had diagnoses that included anxiety…
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 before2023-12-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — patternProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to administer medications timely for a wound infection for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 1) and failed to follow treatment recommendations for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 1). Findings include: A significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 1, dated December 17, 2023, indicated that the resident was usually understood and could usually understand others, was dependent on staff for personal hygiene needs, had a pressure ulcer (skin breakdown caused by prolonged, unrelieved pressure) and surgical wound, and had diagnoses that included osteomyelitis (infection in the bone) of the vertebra (spinal column), sacral (base of the spine) and sacrococcygeal (sacrum and tailbone) region. A skin and wound note for Resident 1, dated August 28, 2023, at 1:05 p.m. revealed that the resident was seen by the wound consultant who recommended an extended course of 100 milligrams (mg) 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 · E2023-11-02 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy and written menus, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow their planned menu. Findings include: The facility's policy for menus, dated July 31, 2023, revealed that menus are served as written unless changed in response to preference, unavailability of an item, or a special meal. The written menu for the week of October 29, 2023, revealed that there was to be beef ravioli, marinara sauce, Italian parmesan vegetable medley, garlic french bread, and pineapple upside down cake for lunch. A plain beef ravioli recipe, dated October 11, 2023, indicated that six beef ravioli was a standard portion. Observations on Wednesday, November 1, 2023, revealed that the lunch meal consisted of cheese ravioli, marinara sauce, Italian parmesan vegetable medley, garlic french bread, and pineapple upside down cake. The posted menu outside of the dining hall indicated that the lunch meal was to be beef ravioli. Interview with the Dietary Manager on November 1, 2023, at 2:48 p.m., revealed that she was not working during…
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 · D2023-11-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility policy, clinical record reviews, as well as observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop individualized care plans that included the resident's individualized care needs for two of 20 residents reviewed (Residents 4, 13). Findings include: A facility policy for Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plans, dated July 31, 2023, included that the interdisciplinary team, in conjunction with the resident and his or her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident. The comprehensive person-centered care plan is developed within seven days of the completion of the required comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs). A quarterly MDS assessment for Resident 4, dated August 25, 2023, revealed that the resident was able to make herself understood and understood others, was dependent on staff for personal care needs, and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. A documentation report, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-02 · 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
Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care needs for one of 20 residents reviewed (Resident 17). Findings include: A facility policy for Plans of care dated July 31, 2023, included that assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the residents' conditions change. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's care needs and abilities) for Resident 17, dated September 9, 2023, indicated that the resident could make herself understood and could understand others, required extensive assistance with personal care needs, and had diagnoses that included end-stage renal disease. A care plan for Resident 17, dated August 7, 2023, revealed that the resident was at risk for falls and was to have a fall mat on the right side of her bed. Observations of Resident 17 on November 2, 2023, at 10:30 a.m. revealed that 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 before2023-11-02 · 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
Based on review of policies, clinical records, and the facility's investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents' environment remained as free from accident hazards as possible and failed to develop and implement interventions to prevent falls for one of 20 residents reviewed (Resident 6) who had a history of falling. Findings include: The facility's policy for managing falls and fall risk, dated July 31, 2023, indicated that staff will identify interventions related to the resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and try to minimize complications from falling. If falling recurs despite initial interventions, staff will implement additional or different interventions. If underlying causes cannot be readily identified or corrected, staff will try various interventions, based on assessment of the nature or category of falling until falling is reduced or stopped, or until the reason for the continuation of the falling is identified as unavoidable. In conjunction 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 · D2023-11-02 · 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
Based on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that weekly weights were obtained as recommended by the dietician for one of 20 residents reviewed (Resident 4) who had a weight loss. Findings include: A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 4, dated August 25, 2023, revealed that the resident was able to make herself understood and could understand others, was dependent on staff for personal care needs, and had diagnoses that included adult failure to thrive. A care plan for Resident 4, dated July 11,2023, indicated that the resident had the actual weight loss related to recommended mechanical and therapeutic diet. A care plan approach, dated July 27, 2023, revealed that the resident was to receive weights as necessary. A dietician note for Resident 4, dated August 7, 2023, revealed that she had unplanned weight loss with a plan to provide weekly weights to monitor more closely. A dietician note for Resident 4, dated September 14, 2023,…
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 ABRAHAM SMILOW — 7 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 | 2 of 5 | 1.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
The other 6 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.4★, 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
CMS ownership filings flag an owner of this facility as a private-equity firm. That’s a fact worth knowing: peer-reviewed research links private-equity and REIT ownership to lower staffing and more citations on average — though any individual home can run well or poorly regardless. Read the inspection and staffing record above on its own merits.
- LADS AVENUE ASSOCIATES LLC — private equity · 1.50% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
Source: CMS SNF ownership filings (PECOS). These flags are self-reported and undercount — federal auditors (GAO) and researchers find CMS captures only a fraction of true private-equity and REIT ties, so the absence of a flag on other homes is not proof they lack investor owners. How investor ownership affects care →
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GHC SNF OPCO HOLDING COMPANY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/01/2023 |
| SMILOW, ABRAHAM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 95% | since 04/01/2023 |
| BLOUGH, BRENDA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/29/2023 |
| THIMONS, DAVID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| GHC CONSULTING COMPANY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| GHC SNF PROPCO HOLDING COMPANY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/15/2025 |
| MEYERSDALE SNF PROPCO COMPANY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2025 |
| T3 REAL ESTATE INITIATIVES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/15/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 90% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $624K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in PA
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 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 395661. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-08-06, 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.