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

Germantown Home

6950 Germantown Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19119 · Non profit - Corporation · 180 certified beds · (215) 848-3306 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (215) 848-3306 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
(215) 247-2996 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
6950 Germantown Ave · (267) 428-5187 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Acme<0.1 mi
7010 Germantown Ave · (215) 247-1160 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Lovett Park, 6923 Germantown Ave · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
13 E Mount Pleasant Ave · (215) 247-1303

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased21.3%16.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.8%6.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.4%0.7%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.2%10.8%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.8%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.6%17.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication5.4%20.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.7%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.1%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.1%25.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.8%17.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.1%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine51.2%68.7%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.8%22.5%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.8%9.5%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.711.621.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.141.181.80better

§ 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.

51.5% 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 63 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

51.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
36.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.12hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 36.0% 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 100 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF51.5%CMS range 41.0–62.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.2%CMS range 6.3–14.710.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge36.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge39.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge30.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified95.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting93.5%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.2%CMS range 3.5–10.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.841.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.48
RN hours/ resident / day
0.88
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.27
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.63
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.27
RN hoursweekends
26.4%
Total nursing turnover
18.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 180 beds and averages 174.9 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.63 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.48 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.27 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 3.29 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.76 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% 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

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-01)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-20)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based review of facility documentation, facility policy, clinical records, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was revised timely to address ongoing and escalating aggressive behaviors for one of two sampled residents. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of facility's policy, titled Resident Centered Care Plans revised January 2011, establishes that care plans are person-centered, interdisciplinary, and written in language that is understandable to all involved. The purpose of the care plan is to provide a resident-specific, timely, and comprehensive plan of care that addresses each resident's needs, conditions, impairments, and strengths. Care plans are developed promptly and include measurable goals, specific interventions, and time frames. Importantly, care plans must be updated whenever there are changes in the resident's condition, status, or treatment needs, not only during quarterly reviews. While the interdisciplinary team…

    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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of clinical records, review of facility policy, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive, resident-centered care plan for seven of 35 residents reviewed related to wounds and Enhanced Barrier Precaution's. (Resident R36, R71, R114, R156, R24, R187, and R41)Findings include:Review of facility policy Resident Centered Care Planning, revised on 06/06, indicates that purpose of policy is to utilize the Resident Assessment Process (RAP) according to Federal Regulations; further indicating that RAP is to be completed by Nursing staff for pressure ulcers.Review of Resident R36's clinical record revealed the resident was assessed with Stage IV (ulcer involving loss of skin layers, exposing muscle) pressure ulcer on coccyx.Review of R36's care plan revealed no evidence of goals or interventions related to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP).Review of Resident R71's clinical record revealed the resident was assessed with Stage…

    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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that urinary catheter bag were properly position to prevent contact with the floor for one of one residents review with an indwelling urinary catheter. (Resident Review of facility policy titled Urinary Catheter Care, last reviewed on June 20, 2019, revealed the purpose of the policy is to reduce the risk of the indwelling urinary catheter becoming the source of infection and to reduce the transmission of infection to or between residents/ participants with indwelling urinary catheters. Furthermore, Drainage Bags should never touch the floor. Review of Resident R63's clinical record revealed that resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of End stage renal disease (Kidney failure), Aphasia (disorder that affects a person's ability to communicate). Review of Resident R63's physician order date March 20, 2024, revealed Change suprapubic catheter…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-01 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of clinical records, review of policies, and interview with staff, it was determined that facility did not ensure to provide and/or document the provision of pertinent information regarding the immunizations to the resident or the resident's representative such as the benefits and potential side effects of the influenza for 51 of 54 residents reviewed (Resident R41, R26, R28, R29, R30, R34, R42, R3, R43, R50, R12, R64, R65, R73, R75, R86, R97, R114, R117, R119, R120, R132, R136, R140, R141, R143, R11, R146, R151, R154, R171, R8, R178, R18, R24, R77, R107, R130, R139, R1, R152, R162, R173, R175, R21, R22, R25, R10, R27, R32, R35) Findings include: Review of facility policy 'Influenza vaccine - protocol for residents,' reviewed January 14, 2025, indicates that the immunization records of all residents in the facility will be reviewed annually. All residents will be offered the influenza vaccination unless there is a documented contraindication. Residents/Responsible Representative will be offered a copy of the current year Vaccination Information Statement (VIS)…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-01 · tag F0887 — pattern
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of clinical records, review of policies, and interview with staff, it was determined that facility did not ensure to provide and/or document the provision of pertinent information regarding the immunizations to the resident or the resident's representative such as the benefits and potential side effects of the covid-19 immunizations for seven of seven residents reviewed (Residents R120, R24, R141, R43, R145, R156, R83) Findings include:Review of facility policy 'Covid Vaccine protocol for staff and residents,' reviewed January 14, 2025, indicates that education will be provided for decline referencing CDC guideline.Interview with facility's infection preventionist, employee E6, on Wednesday, July 30, 2025, at 10:00 am, revealed that education on risks vs benefits for covid-19 immunizations is not completed unless a resident declines the vaccine.Review of facility provided documentation revealed Resident R120, received covid-19 immunization on March 25, 2025; review of R120's clinical record revealed no evidence of education provided. Review of facility provided…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-01 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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 revealed that the facility failed to ensure that a rational was documented related to pharmacy recommendations for one of 35 residents reviewed. (Resident R2)Findings include:Review of facility policy titled Pharmacy Consultation Recommendations revised on October 1, 2018, revealed The Pharmacy Consultant will review all resident charts monthly and as needed to assess the resident's medication regimen, associated orders to assure proper medication selection, and potential risks associated with pharmacological interventions and to suggest therapeutic changes. Under Procedure, policy states The Unit Manager/ RN supervisor will document the Physician/CRNP's (Certified Registered Nurse Practitioner) response as a verbal order if the Physician/ CRNP has accepted the recommendation, or as a narrative in the progress notes if the Physician/ CRNP has declined the recommendation including the Physician/ CRNP's reason for not accepting the recommendation. Review of Resident R2's clinical…

    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 · D2024-09-20 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    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 documentation and interview with staff, it was determined the facility failed to provide timely notice on non-medical coverage (NOMNC) for one of three residents reviewed. (Resident 117) Findings Include: Review of Resident R117's clinical records shows the resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident R117 remained at the facility after his last day of coverage was September 2, 2024. Review of the social service note from September 18, 2024 revealed Note Text: Resident Representative, notified on September 18, 2024 of resident's last coverage date of September 3, 2024. Resident Representative informed of right to appeal last coverage date. Resident Representative stated they would like resident to continue working with therapy. Social Services informed Resident Representative that resident will be picked up by rehab on Physical Therapy caseload per rehab Director. Social Services will provide Resident Representative copies of Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage and Advance…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-20 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure 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 observation, clinical record review, and interview with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that resident assessments accurately reflected resident status related to use of a urinary catheter and discharge status for two of 38 records reviewed (Residents R50 and R178). Findings include: Observations of Resident R50 conducted on September 17, 2024, at 11:30 a.m. confirmed that the resident had no urinary catheter present. Interview with the resident at this time revealed that the catheter had been in use because of my wound on my backside but that it had been discontinued due to the progress of the wound healing. Review of clinical documentation for Resident R50 revealed that she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses of pressure ulcer of the sacral region, stage 4 (stage 4 pressure ulcers extend through the skin and fat layers into the muscle, and may extend to the bone), and muscle weakness. Also revealed was a physician order to discontinue 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-20 · 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, observation, clinical record review, and interview with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility did not develop a comprehensive care plan related oxygen use for one of 35 records reviewed (Resident R167). Findings include: Review of Resident Centered Care Planning policy revised 2023, revealed that based on a comprehensive, interdisciplinary assessment, the care team will address individualized resident needs to include physical, psychosocial, functional, recreational, spiritual, educational and communication needs. Review of clinical documentation for Resident R167 revealed that she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses of asthma and obstructive sleep apnea. A physician's order was obtained on January 29, 2024, which stated O2 (oxygen) at 2LPM (liters per minute) via nasal cannula at bedtime for hypoxia (low blood oxygen levels). Review of the resident's care plan revealed that no care plan had been developed for the resident use of…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-20 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, observation, clinical record review and interview with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility did not revise and update the resident's plan of care related to urinary catheter use for one of 35 records reviewed (Resident R50). Findings include: Review of Resident Centered Care Planning policy revised 2023, revealed that based on a comprehensive, interdisciplinary assessment, the care team will address individualized resident needs to include physical, psychosocial, functional, recreational, spiritual, educational and communication needs. Observations of Resident R50 conducted on September 17, 2024, at 11:30 a.m. confirmed that the resident had no urinary catheter present. Interview with the resident at this time revealed that the catheter had been in use because of my wound on my backside, but that it had been discontinued due to the progress of the wound healing. Review of clinical documentation for Resident R50 revealed that she was admitted to the facility…

    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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-20 · tag F0685 — isolated
    Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
    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, observation, clinical record review and interview with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that services were provided to maintain hearing and vision for two of 35 records reviewed (Residents R53 and R142). Findings include: Review of Guidelines for Use of the Consult Tracking Log policy reviewed April 2022, revealed that a physician's order for a consult is entered in the electronic record as needed. A progress note should be written in PCC for the reason of consult by the nurses. Unit Clerk will review the order in PCC and schedule the appointment, notify the resident representative with the date and time, schedule the escort if needed, and transportation. Unit clerk or designee will write a note under consultation confirming the appointment, responsible party notification and transportation notification. In an interview with Resident R142 on September 17, 2024, at 1:45 p.m., the resident stated that they had checked her hearing a while…

    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 · D2024-09-20 · tag F0801 — isolated
    Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interviews and a review of employee credentials, it was determined that the facility failed to employ a qualified director of food and nutrition services (Employees E9). Findings include: An interview on September 17, 2024, at 10:30 a.m. with Employee E4, Food Service Director (FSD), revealed that his responsibilities included oversight of ordering, receiving, storing, preparation and service of food. Further interview with the FSD confirmed that he was not currently a certified dietary manager (CDM); or a certified food manager (CFM); or had a national certification for food service management and safety from a national certifying body; or had an associate's or higher degree in food service management or hospitality from an accredited institution; and that she had not received frequently scheduled consultations from a qualified dietitian. A review of Employee E4's credentials revealed that Employee E4 did not meet the statutory qualifications of a director of food and nutrition services. During an interview on September 19, 2024, at 11:30 a.m. with the Administrator,…

    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 · D2023-10-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide 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 facility policy, clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that facility failed provide resident with pressure injury measures to prevent the development or worsening of pressure injury for one resident. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of facility policy on wound prevention and maintenance guidelines revealed that under section Policy: It is the policy for this facility that all residents are assessed for skin risk, using the Braden Scale, and that residents at risk, including those with pressure injury, will have appropriate plans of care implemented. Under section Purpose: To provide at-risk residents with pressure reducing or relieving surfaces and devices to reduce the mechanical forces of pressure, shear, friction and/or moisture, which contribute to tissue breakdown. Under section Procedure: #4. Based on the assessment and Braden Scale, a licensed nurse will initiate treatment with appropriate pressure redistribution and devices. #8. Products vary greatly…

    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
  • No harm found · Bcited before2025-08-01 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure 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 review of facility documentation, review of clinical record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately complete a resident assessment for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident R37).Findings Include: Review of Resident R37's clinical record revealed a progress note dated June 5, 2025, that the resident was assessed and evaluated by the hospice care team. Resident R37 was subsequently admitted on to hospice with a diagnosis of cerebral atherosclerosis (build-up of plaque in the blood vessels of the brain occurs). Review of Resident 37's clinical record revealed a physician order dated June 5, 2025, for hospice care services. Review of Resident R37's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated June 11, 2025, revealed Section O - Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs hospice care was marked as no. Interview on August 1, 2025, with the Nursing Home Administrator, Employee E1, confirmed Resident R37'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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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.

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
NEWCOURTLANDOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 02/17/2025
DUFFEY, JOSEPHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/01/2018
MCGRATH, JOSEPHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2014
NAYLOR, MARYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2018
DEMARCO, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2018
HOWARD, PAMELAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2019
KENT, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/01/2018
ROCKINGHAM, DAMEICAIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 07/19/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$17.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-37.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 90%Medicare 3%Other / private 6%

About 90% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.3M 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 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

$380per resident / day
operating cost
$11,566per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$276per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 395360. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-01, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next