Cathedral Village

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

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.

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.

62.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 154 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 64.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 110 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 0.48 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 79% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 82 beds and averages 67.1 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 15 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.00 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.09 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 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 54% is about the same as 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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-06-16 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, review of clinical records, facility documentation, and facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one of four residents reviewed was free of neglect, (Resident R1). This failure resulted in actual harm to Resident R1 who was not provided care by two nurse aides while experiencing a combative episode. Resident R1 grabbed onto nurse aide, who moved resident's arm, resulting in a fracture of the right humerus (arm). Finding includes: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect or Exploitation, last dated October 2023, states, That each resident is provided with a safe environment where they are not subject to mental, physical, verbal, and sexual abuse. Residents shall also be protected from mistreatment, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of property. Review of Resident R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS-assessment of resident needs) dated May 17, 2025, revealed the resident was assessed as severely cognitively impaired, diagnosed with Traumatic…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 the review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and interviews with resident and staff, it was determined the facility failed to monitor the temperature of a hot liquid before being served to a resident. This failure resulted in actual harm to Resident R1 who spilled hot water and sustained a second degree burn on the forearm for one of two resident records reviewed (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of Resident R1's admissions, Minimum Data Set (MDS- assessment of resident needs) dated August 12, 2024, revealed a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 14 which indicated that the resident was cognitively intact. Continued review of the MDS revealed that the resident had physical impairments to both sides of her upper body, used a walker for ambulating, was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder, had a history of falls, and was dependent on staff (helper does all the effort to complete the task) for her activities of daily living including eating.) The same MDS had diagnoses for the resident that included dementia (cognitive loss)…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical documentation and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that one resident was free from accidents and hazards related to inappropriate transfers for one of five residents reviewed. This deficiency is cited as past non-compliance. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease (progressive degenerative disease of the brain, resulting in loss of reality contact), chronic kidney disease, and depression (major loss of interest inpleasurable activities). Review of facility documentation submitted to the State Survey Agency on February 28, 2026, revealed [Resident R1] was gently guided to the floor matt by one aide during transfer from bed to chair. When reviewing incident and care plan IDT (Inter-Disciplinary Team) noted that care plan reflects transfer utilizing 2 person stand up lift. Resident did not sustain any…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-05 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of policy, review of clinical records and review of facility provided documentation, it was determined that facility did not ensure to complete a thorough investigation for two of 18 residents reviewed regarding facility reported incidents (Resident R42, R2)Review of facility policy 'Falls management program,' indicates that when a resident sustains a fall, the assessment process will include an investigation using the Fall investigation analysis sheet. This is to help identify the root cause and whether or not the fall was avoidable or unavoidable.Review of Resident R42 clinical record revealed medical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, pain in bilateral knees, osteoarthritis, long-term use of insulin.Review of physical therapy discharge recommendations, completed on March 20, 2025, indicate that R42 is to continue to walk and stand with supervision.Review of R42's care plan, dated August 14, 2025, indicates that R42 is at risk for falling related to confusion, history of falls, poor safety awareness, with following interventions, dated November 5, 2025: 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement care plan interventions to meet resident needs for one of three residents reviewed (Resident R1). This deficiency was identified as past non-compliance.Based on review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement care plan interventions to meet resident needs for one of three residents reviewed (Resident R1). This deficiency was identified as past non-compliance.Findings Include:Review of facility policy Care Planning review 01/07/2026 revealed the facility will comprehensively evaluate and re-evaluate a resident's need for service and develop a plan to promote their highest practicable level of functioning.Review of Resident R1's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated October 9, 2025, revealed the resident was assessed as…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-12 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide 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 review of clinical records, facility documentation, and staff statements, it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living related to nutrition, incontinence care, and positioning for five residents reviewed. (Resident R1, R2, R3, R4, and R5). This was identified as past non-compliance. Findings Include: Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated June 2, 2025, indicated diagnoses including progressive neurological conditions, dementia (loss of cognitive functioning), Parkinson's disease (neurovegetative disorder that affects movement), paralytic gait (difficulty initiating movement), and dysphasia (language disorder); and had a BIMS score of six, indicating cognitive impairment. Further review revealed that Resident R1 was dependent with eating, oral hygiene, toileting and personal hygiene. Review of Resident R2's clinical record revealed a quarterly…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Number of residents sampled: n/aNumber of residents cited: n/a the facility did not ensure food was stored, prepared, and served in accordance with professional standards of practice Based on observations and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.Findings include:Review of facility policy titled, Labeling and Dating Food, dated February 25, 2025, revealed that All received food product must have a Date Received' clearly marked on the package and that distributer dating is not to be followed.A tour of the Food Service Department was conducted on July 14, 2025, at 10:30 a.m. with the Assistant Foodservice Director, Employee E3, and the Food Service Director (FSD), Employee E4.Observations revealed the following food items were defrosted and dated July 14, 2025; multiple food items were observed labeled with the same date- the first date of the survey: eye of round bottom; raw ground beef; to boxes of 40- pounds chicken thighs.In…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-17 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation to rule out an allegation of neglect for one of four residents reviewed (Resident R4). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Abuse Neglect or Exploitation reviewed July 2, 2025, revealed neglect is the failure of the facility, or its employees, to provide goods and services to a resident that are necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress to the resident despite knowledge that the care and services were required.Further review of facility policy revealed events involving evidence of abuse and neglect should be thoroughly investigated including obtaining statements from all potential persons who might have had contact with the resident in the previous 24 hours or within the timeframe that has been identified.Review of Resident R4's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-17 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Number of residents sampled: 3Number of residents cited: 2the facility did not ensure a medication error rate of < 5%Based on observations, review of clinical records, and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it was free of medication error rate of five percent or greater for two of three residents observed during medication administration (Residents R32, and R67). Findings include: On July 15, 2025, at 9:35 a.m., observed that Employee E6, a Licensed Nurse, administered to Resident R67, the medicine, Citalopram (Celexa) 20 mg, and Citalopram (Celexa) 10 mg tablets, totaling Citalopram (Celexa) 30 mg.Review of physician order for Resident R67, revealed an order, dated March 27, 2025, to administer Citalopram (Celexa) 20 mg, by mouth every day for Generalized Anxiety Disorder. But, the Licensed Nurse, E6, did not follow the physician order as E6 administered to Resident R67, the medicine, Citalopram (Celexa) 20 mg, and Citalopram (Celexa) 10 mg tablets, totaling Citalopram (Celexa) 30 mg.At the time of the finding, during 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-17 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to correctly administer medications in accordance with physician orders for two of three residents observed during medication administration observed, resulting in a significant medication error (Residents R32, and R67).Based on observation, interview, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to correctly administer medications in accordance with physician orders for two of three residents observed during medication administration observed, resulting in a significant medication error (Residents R32, and R67).Findings include:On July 15, 2025, at 9:35 a.m., observed that Employee E6, a Licensed Nurse, administered to Resident R67, the medicine, Citalopram (Celexa) 20 mg, and Citalopram (Celexa) 10 mg tablets, totaling Citalopram (Celexa) 30 mg.Review of physician order for Resident R67, revealed an order, dated March 27, 2025, to administer Citalopram (Celexa) 20 mg, by mouth every day for Generalized Anxiety Disorder.But, the Licensed Nurse, E6, did…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-02-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews with staff, and a review of facility procedures, it was determined that the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Findings include: Review of policy titled, Sanitizing of Equipment revised May 2, 2022, revealed that employees must check the sanitizer for proper concentrating and record solution PPM on log. Review of policy titled, Labeling and Dating of Food revised April 3, 2023, revealed that All received food product must have a Date Received' clearly marked on the Package. Do not rely on the distributer or produce stickers for dating purposes. On large items, place the received date sticker beside the distributer sticker for easy viewing. Date and rotate items; first in, first out (FIFO). Discard food past the use-by or expiration date Use a date gun that lists the day, month and year that the item was received. Review of facility policy titles, Leftover Foods undated, revealed that Leftover foods shall be stored in appropriate refrigeration units for 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-02-10 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
  Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observations and an interview with staff it was determined that the facility did not ensure that garbage and refuse was disposed of properly. Finding include: A tour of the Food Service Department was conducted on February 4, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. with the Assistant Food Service Director, Employee E4, and revealed the following concerns: Observation revealed a lot of debris around the compactor including used latex gloves, paper and plastic waste, and piles of leaves. Further observation revealed large puddles of oily liquid discharge from the trash compactor. An interview with the Assistant Food Service Director, Employee E4 on February 4, 2025, at approximately 10:30 a.m. confirmed the above findings. 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(3) Management 28 Pa. Code 207.2(a) Administrator's responsibility

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

$208,039 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $32,526 — penalty dated 2024-09-19
• $175,513 — penalty dated 2024-05-02

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 PRESBYTERIAN SENIOR LIVING — 11 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 →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 58 rows in the source record cover these 51 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

20 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $4.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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