Locust Grove Retirement Village
69 Cottage Road, Mifflin, PA 17058 · For profit - Corporation · 104 certified beds · (717) 436-8921 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2024
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (39) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $12,831 in federal fines (most recent 2024-05-03)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 4 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 | 12.7% | 16.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.0% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 1.2% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.4% | 10.8% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.0% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.9% | 17.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 31.1% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.5% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.3% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.5% | 25.5% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.5% | 17.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.9% | 68.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.1% | 22.5% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.4% | 9.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.20 | 1.62 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.03 | 1.18 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
51.1% 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 69 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 57.1% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 21 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 35% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 51.1%CMS range 40.8–64.0 | 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 | 11.2%CMS range 6.9–15.2 | 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 | 57.1% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 47.6% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 52.4% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 87.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 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 | 0.84 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 104 beds and averages 66.3 residents a day — about 64% occupied, or roughly 38 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 3.91 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.60 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 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 3.24 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.18 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
39 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-05-03 · 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 observation, clinical record review, review of facility documents, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to protect the rights of a resident to be free from neglect by not providing the services necessary to avoid physical harm related to a sustained fracture on one of two nursing units, (Unit 100-300, Resident 33). This deficiency is cited as past noncompliance Findings include: Observation and interview with Resident 33 on May 1, 2024, at 9:49 AM revealed the resident was in bed. Resident 33 stated one person gave her a couple fractures and stated, She tried to get me into bed, she didn't use the lift. Resident 33 stated she hurt after that, and it was her fault, referencing the staff member. Resident 33 said her knee was broken. Clinical review for Resident 33 revealed an active physician's order dated November 8, 2023, for the resident to use a full mechanical lift as her transfer status. Review of Resident 33's plan of care revealed the resident requires a mechanical lift with two staff assistance for transfers initiated on 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 before2025-06-27 · 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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician ordered medication parameters for two of 17 residents reviewed (Residents 32 and 51) and failed to provide comprehensive skin assessments that are consistent with professional standards of practice, to promptly identify skin changes and to promote healing for one of three residents reviewed for skin condition concerns (Resident 1). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 51 revealed a diagnosis list that included essential hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of Resident 51's current care plan revealed the resident has hypertension and an intervention included to give anti-hypertensive medications as ordered and monitor for side effects such as orthostatic hypotension (a sudden drop in blood pressure when a person stands up) and increased heart rate, and effectiveness. Resident 51's care plan also noted the resident has a potential for an altered cardiovascular status related to the medical history. A review…
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 before2025-06-27 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician ordered pain medications for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 32) Findings include: Review of Physiopedia's and Wikipedia's definition of the numeric pain rating scale (parameters) from zero to 10 indicated that no pain was identified as zero, mild pain was identified as one to three, moderate pain was identified as four to six, and severe pain was identified as seven to 10. Clinical record review for Resident 32 revealed physician's orders for the following pain medications: Ordered on May 3, 2025, and discontinued on May 6, 2025, Acetaminophen (Tylenol, for mild pain) 325 milligrams (mg) 2 tablets by mouth (PO) every 6 hours as needed (PRN) for pain (1-5). Ordered on May 5, 2025, and discontinued on May 12, 2025, Acetaminophen 325 mg 2 tablets PO every 4 hours PRN for pain (1-5). Ordered on May 12, 2025, Acetaminophen 325 mg 2 tablets PO every 6 hours PRN for mild pain. Review of Resident 32's MARs (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 · D2025-06-27 · 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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan regarding behaviors for one out of three residents reviewed for behaviors (Resident 54). Findings Include: Review of Resident 54's clinical record revealed that the facility admitted her on March 14, 2023. A Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, an assessment completed at specific intervals to determine care needs) dated March 20, 2023, indicated that the facility assessed her as having behaviors, such as refusal of care and agitation. The facility implemented a plan of care to address Resident 54's behaviors on March 17, 2023. There was no documented evidence in Resident 54's plan of care regarding interventions for staff to utilize if Resident 54 exhibits those behaviors during care. Review of Resident 54's plan of care for behaviors dated June 1, 2023, revealed that the facility added additional exhibited behaviors such as slapping and being combative with staff. There was no documented evidence in Resident 54's plan of care regarding…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-27 · 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 clinical record review, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement preventative measures to prevent pressure ulcers for one of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcer concerns (Resident 67). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed the facility admitted Resident 67 on November 19, 2024. Review of Resident 67's admission assessment noted that she had no open areas on her feet. A nursing progress note date January 4, 2025, at 6:26 AM revealed that Resident 67's left heel had bleeding and bruising noted. New orders were received for skin prep (applied to the skin to create a film to protect the skin) to bilateral heels, and to elevate heels while in bed. Further clinical record review revealed a wound clinic note dated February 3, 2025, that indicated Resident 67 had a new left heel deep tissue injury (DTI, skin injury that occurs beneath the surface of the skin due to sustained pressure) with current measurements of 5.5 cm (centimeter) x 6.5 cm, 100% eschar. The note indicated to cleanse with Dakin's (an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-27 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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
Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement a physician ordered device utilized to prevent further decline in range of motion for one of five residents reviewed (Residents 5). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 5 revealed a current physician's order for Restorative passive range of motion (PROM) to her left upper extremity and to place a carrot in the left hand after passive range of motion was complete. Observation of Resident 5 on June 24, 2025, at 12:20 PM revealed she was in bed. She acknowledged that she has limited motion on her left side to include her left hand. She did not have a carrot device in her left hand during this interaction. Review of documentation revealed that PROM was completed on this date. Observation of Resident 5 on June 26, 2025, at 11:40 AM revealed she was out of bed in her chair, and she did not have a carrot device in her left hand. Review of documentation revealed that PROM was completed on this date. Concurrent interview with Resident 5…
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 · D2025-06-27 · 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 clinical record review, review of facility documentation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly investigation a resident's accident in an attempt to prevent future incidents and implement interventions to prevent falls injuries for one of five residents reviewed for falls (Resident 3). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 3 revealed a physician's order dated February 25, 2025, for staff to implement a tab alarm (alarm that sounds when a person moves too far away from the alarm, releasing the magnetic catch, and causing the alarm to sound) when in bed or chair and to check for function and placement every shift for safety. Review of facility and nursing documentation revealed that Resident 3 fell on May 1, 2025, at 4:00 PM. Resident 3 was found in his room on his knees beside the bed. The fall was unwitnessed. Resident 3 was assisted back to bed with alarms on (after the fall occurred). Review of a staff witness statement dated May 1, 2025, revealed that staff heard Resident 3 shouting while walking past the resident'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 · D2025-06-27 · tag F0742 — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of select facility policies, clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physician ordered interventions for a resident's suicidal ideations for one of one resident reviewed (Resident 31). Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled Resident Expressing Suicidal Ideations, last reviewed on January 23, 2025, revealed it is the policy of the facility to ensure the safety of any resident that expresses the desire to harm themself. Clinical record review revealed that the facility admitted Resident 31 on May 30, 2025, with diagnosis of anxiety (feeling of worry, nervousness, or unease), major depressive disorder (a disorder characterized by a depressed mood, loss of interest in activities causing significant disruption in daily life), and dementia with behavioral disturbances (confusion with other symptoms such as depression, anxiety, agitation, and aggression). Clinical record review revealed a physician's order dated June 25, 2025, that indicated Resident 31 was to be on suicide…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-27 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized person-centered care plan to address dementia and cognitive loss displayed by one of 3 residents reviewed (Resident 67). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 67 revealed the facility admitted her on November 19, 2024, with a diagnosis including Dementia (loss of memory, language, problem-solving, and other thinking abilities that interfere with daily life). A review of Resident 67's current care plan entitled, Impaired cognitive function or impaired though processes related to dementia revealed that there was no indication that the facility had implemented an individualized person-centered care plan to address the resident's dementia and cognitive loss needs. The findings were reviewed with the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing on June 27, 2025, at 12:10 PM. 483.40(b)(3) Dementia Treatment and Services Previously cited 05/03/24 28 Pa Code 211.12 (d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-09 · 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 review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician ordered medications for five of five residents (Residents 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) and provide incontinence care for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 1). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 1 revealed physician orders for staff to administer the following medications: Metoprolol Tartrate 25 mg (milligrams) by mouth (PO) twice daily (BID) for hypertension (high blood pressure) Gabapentin 100 mg PO three times daily (TID) for venous insufficiency Hydralazine 25 mg PO TID for hypertension Lasix 60 mg PO in the morning for edema Escitalopram Oxalate 10 mg PO daily (QD) for major depression Aspirin EC Delayed Release 325 mg PO QD for cerebral infarction (stroke) Allopurinol 300 mg PO QD for gout Pramipexole Dihydrochloride 0.25 mg PO QD for restless legs Vitamin D3 25 mcg 5 tablets in the morning for vitamin deficiency Alphagan P Ophthalmic Solution 0.15% 1 drop bilateral (b/l) eyes BID…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-18 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to obtain dental care for one of six residents reviewed for dental concerns (Resident 1). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the diagnoses list for Resident 1 included the following: severe intellectual disabilities, a mixed receptive-expressive language disorder, and the need for assistance with personal care. Review of the current physician orders for Resident 1 included the following: Dental as needed and nothing by mouth, both dated February 26, 2024. Review of the current Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, an assessment completed at specific intervals to determine care needs) for Resident 1 dated April 6, 2024, revealed that the resident is rarely/never understood and is dependent on staff for personal hygiene. An admission MDS for Resident 1 dated March 4, 2024, revealed that the staff assessed the resident has having obvious or…
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 28 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-03 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide bathing assistance for a resident dependent on staff assistance for five of seven residents reviewed for activities of daily living (Residents 33, 39, 47, 52, and 63). Findings include: Interview with Resident 33 on May 1, 2024, at 9:52 AM revealed she is to get showered on Tuesdays and Fridays, during the day, and she doesn't refuse them, but stated she had a fracture and maybe that's why she wasn't getting them. Clinical record review for Resident 33 did reveal the resident had sustained a fracture in her leg in March 2024, and was scheduled to receive showers on Tuesdays and Fridays on the 2-10:00 PM shift and as needed. A review of Resident 33's bathing records for April 2024, revealed the resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing, and did receive a shower on April 2 and April 9, 2024, on her scheduled shower days after her fracture, but had only received a bed bath on April 5,…
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 · E2024-05-03 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of facility documents, and resident, family member, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to meet resident's needs for four of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 28, 33, 52, and 64). Findings include: A review of a facility complaint/grievance form dated March 6, 2024, noted a resident concern regarding call bell response times. The investigation to the concern was noted as completed on March 25, 2024, by a registered nurse, and indicated, Call bell response times have increased due to staffing shortages, response times are monitored and while it is found to have increased response time, it is not because staff are choosing to not respond it is simply because that are extremely busy. The concern form had not yet been noted as resolved as of May 3, 2024. Facility nurse staffing was reviewed for the week of March 22 - March 28, 2024, which included the March 25, 2024, date the grievance investigation was completed 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 · E2024-05-03 · 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 observation, review of select policies and procedures, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to secure medications and biologicals on one of two nursing units (One, Two, Three Hall nursing unit). Findings include: Review of the policy entitled Storage and Expiration of Medications, Biologicals, Syringes, and Needles, last reviewed on March 29, 2024, indicates that the facility should ensure that all medications and biologicals, including treatment items, are securely stored in a locked cabinet/cart or in a medication room that is inaccessible by residents and visitors. The policy indicates that the facility should ensure that medications and biologicals are stored at appropriate recommended temperatures. Observation of the One, Two, Three hall nursing unit on April 30, 2024, at 9:45 AM revealed medications laying on the counter to include Zofran (anti-nausea medication), Celexa (treats major depression), Buspar (treats anxiety), Incruse Ellipta inhaler (used to treat chronic lung conditions), and a bottle of liquid Keppra (used to treat seizures).…
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 · E2024-05-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of select facility policies and procedures, observation, clinical record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement appropriate enhanced barrier transmission-based precautions on two of two nursing units (400, and 100/200/300 nursing unit; Residents 65, 74, 231, and 232). Findings include: Review of the memo entitled Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP, gown and glove use) in Nursing Homes to Prevent the Spread of Multi-drug Resistant Organisms released by the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) on March 20, 2024, with an implementation date of April 1, 2024, revealed that nursing care facilities are to use EBP for residents with chronic wounds or indwelling medical devices (i.e., indwelling urinary catheters) during high-contact resident care activities regardless of their multidrug-resistant organism status. High-contact activity would include things like dressing, transferring, changing linens, providing hygiene, changing briefs, wound care, or device care. Review of the CDC (Centers for Disease…
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 · D2024-05-03 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to establish clear and consistent resident's wishes regarding advance directives (written instruction, such as a living will or durable power of attorney, relating to the provision of healthcare, for a time when a resident may be incapacitated and not able to make decisions) for one of one resident reviewed (Resident 16). Findings include: Review of Resident 16's clinical record revealed that the facility admitted her on February 26, 2024. A physician's order dated February 26, 2024, indicated that Resident 16 was to be a full code, which would include CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Review of a POLST (Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment, a document for specific medical orders to be honored by health care workers during a medical crisis) form signed by Resident 16's responsible party on [DATE], indicated that she wished for Resident 16 to be a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate, not to perform cardiopulmonary…
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 · D2024-05-03 · 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 review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, and family and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure reasonable care for the protection of the resident's property for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident 228). Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Personal Items Inventory, last reviewed without changes on March 29, 2024, revealed that the facility's procedure included: Enter the resident's name, room number, medical record number, and the date of inventory on the Inventory of Personal Effects Identify articles as listed, indicating quantity and presence with a check (x) Describe items of specific value. Describe color and size. Do not indicate type of metal or stone Sign Inventory of Personal Effects sheet: signature of resident or responsible party/date; signature of nurse/date; If resident or responsible party is unable to sign, two facility personnel (one being a nurse) are to sign the inventory on admission Telephone interview with Resident 228's husband on April 30, 2024, at 12:13 PM revealed that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-03 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on a review of select facility policies and procedures, employee personnel record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain attestation of Pennsylvania residency as required for one of five personnel records reviewed (Employee 3). Findings include: In accordance with Act 13 Elder Abuse Mandatory Reporting and Act 169 Criminal Background Checks, nursing facilities are required to obtain a criminal background check on all newly hired employees. Facilities are required to obtain the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) background check within 30 days of hire on all prospective employees. If the applicant has not been a Pennsylvania resident for the two years before application, they will need to have a PSP criminal history background check completed and an FBI Background Check. The facility policy entitled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Misappropriation, last reviewed without changes on March 29, 2024, revealed that persons applying for employment will be screened for a history of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation of resident…
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 · D2024-05-03 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff, resident, and family interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the resident and their representative a summary of the baseline care plan for two of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 228 and 231). Findings include: Interview with Resident 228's husband on April 30, 2024, at 12:27 PM revealed that he believed the facility's contracted hospice provider staff were organizing his wife's care. Resident 228's husband was not aware of the frequency of visits completed by hospice staff. Review of the facility's CMS-802 (form used to list all current residents and pertinent care categories) revealed that Resident 228 received hospice services. Clinical record review for Resident 228 revealed that the facility admitted her on April 17, 2024. Review of active physician orders for Resident 228 revealed no evidence that she was to receive services from a hospice provider. Interview with Employee 11 (licensed practical nurse) on May 1, 2024, at 11:14 AM revealed that a baseline care plan form in Resident 228's clinical record…
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 before2024-05-03 · 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 review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care related to intravenous access and medication administration for one of two residents reviewed for intravenous access concerns (Resident 74); implementation of interventions for one of four residents reviewed for skin conditions (Resident 231); and bowel protocol medications for one of one resident reviewed for constipation concerns (Resident 231). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 74 revealed a plan of care initiated by the facility on April 25, 2024, to address antibiotic therapy related to an endocarditis infection (inflammation of the inner lining of the heart chambers and valves; usually caused by a bacterial infection). Interventions listed in the plan of care included: PICC line (PICC, long, thin, tube that is inserted through a vein in the arm and passed through to a larger vein near the heart. The line requires careful care and monitoring for complications including bleeding, infection, and blood clots) and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-03 · 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 clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess a blister for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 10). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 10 revealed a progress note dated April 10, 2024, at 10:57 AM noting the resident had a blister that opened on his left great lateral toe and the resident had stated he rubbed it on his footboard. It was also noted a longer bed was needed and bacitracin (antibacterial ointment) and a Band-Aid were applied. A follow up progress note dated April 10, 2024, at 3:27 PM noted the resident had a 0.5 cm (centimeter) x 0.5 cm blister that opened on his left great lateral toe and Vaseline and a band aid were applied. A maintenance work order dated April 11, 2024, indicated a longer bed was provided for the resident, and a review of physician orders revealed a treatment order for the resident's toe on April 10, 2024, and changed on April 11, 2024, to apply Vaseline to the area and cover with a band aid. The order was discontinued on April 19, 2024. As of May 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 · Dcited before2024-05-03 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide services to maintain a resident's range of motion for one of three residents reviewed (Residents 39). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed a quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set, an assessment completed at specific intervals to determine resident care needs) dated September 6, 2023, noting staff assessed Resident 39 as having no upper or lower extremity impairments. Further review of Resident 39's clinical record revealed a significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE], noting nursing staff assessed Resident 39 as having a limited range of motion (ROM, movement of the body to maintain a resident's ability) to his lower extremity. Nursing staff again assessed Resident 39 as having a limited range of motion to his lower extremity on his most recent quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE]. Review of occupational therapy documentation revealed Resident 39 was discharged from occupational therapy on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-03 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement interventions to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status for one of six residents reviewed for nutritional concerns (Resident 233). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 233 revealed nursing documentation dated April 23, 2024, at 3:00 PM that indicated the facility admitted him from the hospital after multiple intensive care unit assignments, a history of necrotizing pancreatitis (severe inflammation that causes tissue death in the pancreas organ), and with treatment that had included TPN (total parenteral nutrition, medical intervention that provides all the nutrients and calories a person needs through a vein) since March 8, 2024. The documentation stipulated that Resident 233 was to have TPN from 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM. Nursing documentation dated April 23, 2024, at 7:32 PM, and April 24, 2024, at 8:13 PM revealed that the TPN was not available from the pharmacy for…
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 · D2024-05-03 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to identify triggers related to a resident's diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, to provide culturally, competent, trauma-informed care, and to eliminate or mitigate re-traumatization for one of five residents reviewed for mood/behavior (Resident 3). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 3 revealed a diagnosis of Chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD, a mental and behavioral disorder that develops related to a terrifying event) since October 27, 2023. Review of a social service progress note dated April 7, 2023, 12:22 PM revealed Employee 13 (social worker) reviewed recent behaviors of increased agitation and yelling out, including some verbal abuse towards others. Documentation revealed Resident 3 continues to be significantly confused at baseline and continues medication management for mood and behavior concerns. Employee 13's documentation noted Resident 3 has expressed at times that he has just returned from the war and that he has 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 · D2024-05-03 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of select facility policies and procedures, observation, and review of personnel records, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure specific competencies necessary to care for resident needs for one of two residents reviewed for intravenous access concerns (400 hall nursing unit, Resident 74, Employee 7). Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Flushing, last reviewed without changes on March 29, 2024, revealed that infusion therapy in the post-acute care facility is performed by licensed nurses according to state law and facility policy. The nurse is responsible and accountable for obtaining and maintaining competence with infusion therapy within his or her scope of practice. Competency validation is documented in accordance with organizational policy. According to, Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Chapter 21, Functions of the LPN, an LPN (licensed practical nurse) may perform only the IV (intravenous) therapy functions for which the LPN possesses the knowledge, skill, and ability to perform in a safe manner.…
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 before2024-05-03 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement individualized person-centered care plans to address dementia and cognitive loss displayed by one of two residents reviewed (Resident 3). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 3 revealed the facility admitted him on September 17, 2021. A diagnosis of dementia (loss of memory, language, problem-solving, and other thinking abilities that interfere with daily life) was added on November 29, 2022. A review of Resident 3's most recent annual Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, a form completed at specific intervals to determine care needs) dated August 15, 2023, indicated that the facility assessed Resident 3 as having a diagnosis of dementia. The facility determined that a care plan for dementia and cognitive loss would be developed. A review of Resident 3's care plan revealed that there was no indication that the facility had developed and implemented a person-centered care plan to address the resident's dementia and cognitive loss. Interview 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 · D2024-05-03 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident's medication regime was free from potentially unnecessary medications for one of five residents reviewed for medication regime review (Resident 3). Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that the facility admitted Resident 3 on September 17, 2021. Resident 3's clinical record revealed a physician's order for Seroquel (an antipsychotic medication) 25 milligrams (mg) every 24 hours as needed (PRN) for agitation on September 20, 2023. Review of the consultant pharmacist's recommendation dated September 22, 2023, revealed Resident 3 has a PRN order for Seroquel without a stop date. The consultant pharmacist requested the facility discontinue Resident 3's PRN Seroquel or add a stop date that does not exceed 14 days from initiation. If the PRN antipsychotic cannot be discontinued at this time, the prescriber should directly examine the resident to determine if the antipsychotic is still needed and document the specific condition being treated before issuing a new…
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 · D2024-05-03 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of select facility policies and procedures, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate below five percent (100/200/300 hall nursing unit, Residents 62 and 15). Findings include: The facility's medication error rate was 6.67 percent based on 30 medication opportunities with two medication errors. The facility policy entitled, Medication - Oral Administration Of, last reviewed without changes on March 29, 2024, revealed that staff should compare the medication unit/dose label against the MAR prior to returning the medication container or card to the medication cart or disposing of the empty container; and prior to supporting the resident to accept and ingest the medication. The policy did not include the expectation of nursing staff when there are specific instructions printed on the pharmacy label such as, give with food, or give with a meal. Review of the facility's mealtimes revealed that the 100 Hall receives the breakfast meal at 7:15 AM. Observation of a medication administration pass on the 100…
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 before2023-08-04 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician ordered pain medications for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 53). Findings include: Review of Physiopedia's and Wikipedia's definition of the numeric pain rating scale (parameters) from zero to 10 indicated that no pain was identified as zero, mild pain was identified as one to three, moderate pain was identified as four to six, and severe pain was identified as seven to 10. Clinical record review for Resident 53 revealed physician's orders for the following pain medications: Ordered on June 17, 2023, Tylenol (for mild pain) 325 milligrams (mg) 2 tablets by mouth (PO) every 6 hours as needed (PRN) for mild pain. Ordered on June 19, 2023, and discontinued on June 27, 2023, Tramadol (for moderate pain) 50 mg PO every 8 hours PRN for moderate pain. Review of Resident 53's June, July, and August 2023 MAR (medication administration record, a form to document medication administration) revealed the following: Staff…
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 · E2023-08-04 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides received an annual performance evaluation for three of five employees reviewed (Employees 13, 14, and 15). The findings include: On August 4, 2023, at 9:00 AM the surveyor requested from the Nursing Home Administrator the most recent annual performance evaluations for Employees 13, 14, and 15. Three of the five annual performance evaluations were not provided. Interview with the Director of nursing on August 4, 2023, at 10:05 AM confirmed that the facility did not have completed evaluations for Employees 13, 14, or 15 in their personnel file. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on August 4, 2023, at 11:45 AM confirmed that Employees 13, 14 and 15 were employed by the facility for the past 12 months and should have had a performance evaluation completed. 28 Pa. Code 201.19 Personnel policies and procedures
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain equipment in a safe and sanitary condition in the facility's main kitchen and store food items in a safe and sanitary manner in a facility dining room located between the 200 and 300 Nursing Units. Findings included: Initial tour of the facility's main kitchen on August 1, 2023, between 9:50 AM and 10:30 AM with Employee 12, Dietary Manager, revealed the following: The entire length of the water drainage pipe from the ice machine to the floor drain was covered in a black colored mold-like substance. Observation of a facility dining room located between the 200 and 300 Nursing Units on August 2, 2023, at 12:00 PM and August 4, 2023, at 9:25 AM revealed the following: A pantry area in the dining room contained multiple plastic spoons unsecured in a drawer. They were stored on top of an open pack of personal cleaning cloths. The cloths had a large dried, brown colored stain on the top of the package. There was an accumulation of debris and crumbs in the bottom of the drawer. A second drawer…
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 before2023-08-04 · 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 clinical record review, review of facility documents, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to protect the rights of a resident to be free from neglect by not providing the services necessary to avoid a fall out of bed resulting in injury for one of one resident reviewed for neglect related to a fall (Resident 60). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 60 revealed a nursing progress note dated July 13, 2023, at 9:53 PM that indicated he was witnessed by staff to roll out of bed onto the floor. The note indicated that he landed on the floor face first and that he denied pain other than his knees. His knees were red from laying on the floor and he had an abrasion on his left elbow. Further clinical record review for Resident 60 revealed a nursing progress note date July 13, 2023, at 10:09 PM that revealed a nurse aide was performing incontinence care on him and had him propped on his left side holding himself up with his right hand. The nurse aide turned his head for a second and the resident rolled onto the floor. 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 before2023-08-04 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of select facility policies and procedures, employee personnel records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement its established abuse prohibition policy regarding criminal background checks and abuse training for two of five newly hired employees reviewed (Employees 1 and 3). Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Misappropriation, last reviewed without changes on March 16, 2023, revealed that screening procedures included persons applying for employment with the facility would be screened, which would include, but not be limited to, criminal background checks. Training procedures included that employees of the facility would receive education and training on resident rights, resident abuse, and abuse reporting during orientation and annually thereafter. Review of the list provided by the facility of newly hired employees for the past four months revealed that the facility hired Employee 1 (licensed practical nurse) on May 17, 2023. A review of Employee 1's personnel file revealed no…
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 · D2023-08-04 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, and family, resident, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected residents' status for three of 18 residents reviewed (Residents 17, 39, and 33). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 17 revealed a quarterly MDS assessment (MDS, Minimum Data Set, an assessment tool completed at specific intervals to determine resident care needs) dated February 8, 2023, that assessed her as the following: Independent after setup help for bed mobility Independent for transfers between surfaces Supervision after setup help for toileting An annual MDS dated [DATE], assessed that Resident 17 declined to the following status: The physical assistance of one person and supervision for bed mobility The physical assistance of one person and supervision for transfers between surfaces The physical assistance of one person and supervision for toileting Interview with Employee 4 (registered nurse assessment…
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 before2023-08-04 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician ordered vital signs for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 78). Findings include: Clinical record review for Resident 78 revealed a physician's order dated July 17, 2023, that staff were to complete vital signs (blood pressure, pulse, respirations, and temperature) every shift. Review of Resident 78's clinical documentation revealed that staff did not complete Resident 78's vital signs on the following dates and shifts: July 31, 2023, day shift July 29, 30, and 31, 2023, evening shift July 26, 27, 29, 30, and 31, 2023, night shift August 1 and 2, 2023, night shift The surveyor reviewed the above information during an interview on August 3, 2023, at 2:30 PM with the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing. 483.25 Quality of Care Previously cited 8/12/22 28 Pa. Code 211.10(d) Resident care policies 28 Pa. Code 211.12(c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-04 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement treatment and services to prevent development and promote healing of pressure ulcers for two of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcer concerns (Residents 2 and 54). Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Pressure Injury Record, last reviewed without changes on March 16, 2023, revealed that it is the facility's policy to document the presence of skin impairment/new skin impairment related to pressure when first observed and weekly thereafter until the site is resolved. The procedure included to enter the size of the pressure injury, the tissue type and color, and a description of the wound edges, drainage, and surrounding area. The facility policy entitled, Skin and Wound, last reviewed without changes on March 16, 2023, revealed that it is the facility's policy to provide a system for identifying risk, 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 · D2023-08-04 · 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
Based on review of select facility policies and procedures, review of personnel files, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an individual completed required retraining for one of five personnel records reviewed (Employee 2). Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Misappropriation, last reviewed without changes on March 16, 2023, revealed that persons applying for employment with the facility will be screened which includes, but is not limited to, employment history. Department of Health, Nurse Aide Enrolling and Testing, stipulates that a Pennsylvania nurse aide registry will lapse if an individual does not work providing nursing related services for 24 months or more. Review of Employee 2's (nurse aide) personnel file revealed the facility hired her on June 6, 2023. The personnel file included a work history that ended, 2021. The information did not include a month or specific date. Review of reference checks obtained by the facility revealed that staff failed to complete the dates of employment or…
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 · D2023-08-04 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
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 select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assist a resident to obtain routine dental services for one of four residents reviewed for dental concerns (Resident 75). Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Dentist, last reviewed without changes on March 16, 2023, revealed that the facility will assist a resident in obtaining routine and emergency dental care. The facility will provide Medicaid residents services and routine services covered under the State plan at no charge. If any resident of the facility is unable to pay for needed dental services, the facility will attempt to find alternative funding sources or alternative service delivery systems to ensure the resident maintains his/her highest practicable level of well-being. Interview with Resident 75 on August 2, 2023, at 9:45 AM revealed that she was edentulous (without natural teeth) but was not wearing her dentures that she…
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 · D2023-08-04 · 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 review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure accurate clinical record documentation for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident 13). Findings include: Interview with Resident 13 on August 1, 2023, at 12:41 PM revealed that he had natural teeth; however, he believed that he had not been evaluated by a dentist this year. Resident 13 could not remember the last time that a dental professional evaluated the condition of his teeth. Clinical record review for Resident 13 revealed documentation by the facility's consulting dentist dated January 31, 2023, that indicated Resident 13 had decay, was missing several teeth, and had several retained roots. The documentation indicated that x-rays were taken and that any treatment needs were noted. The same document noted that the extractions of six teeth were, Planned. There was no evidence in Resident 13's clinical record of any further professional dental services in the six months since the January 31, 2023, appointment. The surveyor requested evidence of any professional…
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
$12,831 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $12,831 — penalty dated 2024-05-03
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AVARDIS HEALTH — 38 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 | 3 of 5 | 2.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 1.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.3 | +1.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIFFLIN PARENTCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/01/2025 |
| JUNIATA HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2025 |
| PAOP HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2025 |
| MIFFLIN RE OWNER, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| CLARK, ALYSSA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| HOBACK, TIFFANY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| SNF MGR LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/11/2025 |
| CRIAG, MICHELE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| JONES, TEQUILLA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| ROSCOE, BRANDON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| SIMPSON, LOUANN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 11 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 79% 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 $423K 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 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 395350. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-27, 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.