The Pines At Philadelphia Rehab And Healthcare Ctr
8410 Roosevelt Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19152 · For profit - Corporation · 49 certified beds · (215) 708-1200 Medicare only — no Medicaid
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.7% | 68.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.2% | 22.5% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.3% | 9.5% | 12.0% | typical |
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.
64.1% 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 337 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 67.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 187 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 1.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 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 | 64.1%CMS range 58.8–69.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.5%CMS range 8.0–12.7 | 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 | 67.4% | 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 | 58.3% | 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 | 64.2% | 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 | 99.6% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.4% | 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 | 1.1% | 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 | 8.3%CMS range 5.2–11.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.26 | 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 49 beds and averages 47.3 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.43 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.12 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.87 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.29 to 0.69 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-28 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to assist a resident in maintaining or improving bowel and bladder continence to the extent possible for one of two sampled residents reviewed for continence care. (Resident R7)Findings:Review of the clinical record revealed Resident R7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS - periodic assessment of resident care needs) dated May 4, 2026 included diagnoses of benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms (enlarged prostate), malignant neoplasm of the prostate (prostate cancer), unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance (memory impairment), low back pain (back pain), and thyrotoxicosis without thyrotoxic crisis or storm (overactive thyroid). The resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 9, indicating moderate cognitive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 reviews, review of facility investigations and grievance logs, it was determined that the facility failed to report allegation for neglect and misappropriation for two of 18 residents reviewed (Resident R19 and R51).Finding include: Review of facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment and Misappropriation of Resident Property dated September of 2024 revealed that Misappropriation of resident property is defined as means the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary, or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the residents consent. Further review revealed that Neglect is defined as the failure of the facility, its employees or services providers to provide goods and services to a resident that are necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress. It is a policy of this facility that abuse allegations including abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment including injuries of an unknown source and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-17 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, facility policy, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the timely acquisition and administration of a prescribed pain medication to meet the needs of one of four residents reviewed for pain management (Resident R64). Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Pharmacy Services, revised 2019, revealed pharmacy services are available to residents 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Residents have sufficient supply of their prescribed medications and receive medications (routine, emergency or as needed) in a timely manner. Nursing staff communicate prescriber orders to the pharmacy and are responsible for contacting the pharmacy if a resident's medication is not available for administration. Review of Resident 64's clinical record revealed Resident R64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included muscle wasting and atrophy (loss of muscle mass and strength), chronic obstructive pulmonary 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 · E2024-09-12 · 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 review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary services to maintain adequate grooming for dependent residents for three of 13 residents reviewed (Resident R11, R22 and R95). Findings include: A review of the Bath(Bed/Shower) policy last updated November 30, 2018, indicated A bath is given to cleanse the skin and refresh the patient. Use whatever bath method is suitable to each patient, however, a bed bath is to be used only if it is impossible to bathe the patient in the tub or shower. Review of admission record indicated Resident R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis of fracture of lower end of right femur, fracture of upper end of right tibia, aftercare following joint surgery, difficulty in walking , presence of right artificial knee joints. Review of Resident R11's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated September 5, 2024, revealed 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 · E2024-09-12 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure 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 personnel files, facility documentation, policy review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff possessed the required skills to properly care for residents' needs for three of three personnel files reviewed related to skills competencies evaluations (Employees E8, E9, E10). Findings include: The facility policy titled Staff Training Policy last updated January 2024, revealed The facility is committed to providing high-quality care and services to its residents. To achieve this goal, the facility recognizes the importance of ongoing staff training and development. It further stated Competency Validation: Employees will be assessed for competency in their specific job duties and responsibilities. Review of Employee E8's personnel file revealed that the employee was agency employee worked on June 28, 2024, hired, as a registered licensed nurse. Review of Employee E9's personnel file revealed that the employee was agency employee worked on August 26, 2024, hired, as a nursing aid licensed nurse. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-12 · tag F0847 — patternInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of facility documents and resident clinical records and interviews with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents had the capacity to understand the terms of a binding arbitration agreement for two of two residents reviewed (Resident R11, and Resident R38). Findings include: Review of the Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual effective October 2019, indicated that a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) is a screening test that aides in detecting cognitive impairment. The BIMS total score suggests the following distributions: 13-15: cognitively intact 8-12: moderately impaired 0-7: severe impairment Review of admission record indicated Resident R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident R11's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - a periodic assessment of care needs) dated September 5, 2024, indicated the diagnoses of fracture and orthopedic aftercare and a BIMS score of 15 - cognition intact. Review of Resident R11'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 · D2024-09-12 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and 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 observations, clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure each resident timely received the necessary behavioral health care to attain or maintain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being for one of 13 residents sampled (Resident 38). Findings include: Review of admission record indicated Resident R38 admitted to the facility on [DATE].with diagnoses including anxiety. The Social Service assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident R28 had been experiencing feelings of being down, depressed, or hopeless for 7 to 11 days, which accounts for half or more of the days during that period. Resident 38's clinical record indicated a progress noted documented by the physician on August 22, 2024, that resident R38 has a diagnosis of anxiety. A further progress note, documented by Psychologist Employee E4 on August 27, 2024, revealed that Resident R38 exhibited anxiety about the future of her marriage. On September 10, 2024, at 12:18 p.m.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, review of facility policy and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that food stored in the refrigerator, freezer and resident's room was stored by professional standards for food service safety. Findings include: Review of facility policy Labeling and Dating System Protocol undated, revealed that All fresh and frozen foods must be dated with the date it was received into the kitchen, unless it has Purveyor shipping label ot it. Make sure to not date over or cover up the manufacture's expiration date on the product. It further, specifies Refrigerated items opened: mayo, garlic, dressings, salsa 30 days; cheese sliced or shredded opened 1 week from open date; Deli Meat opened unsliced 7 days; Deli meat opened sliced 3 days; Beef , Pork Poultry raw 3 days. An initial tour of the Food Service Department conducted on September 9, 2024, at 10:35 a.m. with Food Service Director, Employee E6, revealed the following: Observation in the main walking refrigerator had open catchup expired 5/27/24, 2 cheeses without labels one was…
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 before2024-09-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that physician orders were recorded completely and accurately for two of 16 records reviewed (Residents R96 and R145). Findings include: Review of clinical documentation for resident 96 revealed that he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]th, 2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, anemia, malnutrition, and dependence on renal dialysis. Continued review revealed an order for ProSource Nocarb 30mL two times a day for hemodialysis. No route of administration was recorded. Interview with employee E2, the director of nursing, on September 11, 2024, at 1:30 p.m. revealed that a complete physician order was to include the appropriate route of administration and confirmed the absence of such for this order. Review of clinical documentation for resident R145 revealed that he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including, but not limited to, methicillin resistant staphylococcus…
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 · D2023-12-14 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond 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 clinical records, review of facility policy and procedure, review of facility documentation and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough injury of unknown origin investigation regarding a hip fracture for one of 3 residents reviewed. (Resident CL1). Findings include: Review of facility policy, Abuse Prevention, date last revised February 25, 2022, revealed that It is the policy of Pines of Philadelphia does not tolerate any form of resident abuse, neglect , or exploitation by staff members, volunteers, visitors or family members, or by another resident. The facility will have an abuse prevention program that protects residents from physical and mental abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, and injuries of unknown origin in compliance with State and Federal regulations and the mission and philosophy of this facility. Review of facility policy, Incident and accident , dated last approved March 2019, revealed under…
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 10 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on a Resident Council meeting, resident interviews, review of facility policy and procedures, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that grievance forms were available and accessible to residents' on the nursing units for five of 14 sample residents reviewed (Residents R201, R197, R2, R23, R4). Findings include: A review of facility policy Resident Grievance , revised November 2023 revealed: A resident may file an anonymous grievance by filling out a grievance form and placing it in the secured anonymous grievance box located near the social services office. On November 15, 2023, at 10:03 a.m. a tour of the facility was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator, Employee E1 and Social Worker, Employee E10 revealed that grievance forms were not available to residents to make anonymous grievances. During the Resident Council meeting on November 15, 2023, at 1:15 p.m. Residents R201, R197, R2, R23, R4, who were alert and oriented reported that they did not know how to report grievances nor had seen the grievance forms. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a)Responsibility of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · 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 observation, review of clinical records, review of facility policy and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent the development of pressure ulcers and continue treatments to prevent new from forming for one of 14 resident records reviewed. (Resident R20). Finding include: Review of the facility's policy titled Skin-Pressure Ulcers updated on January 15, 2023, states the facility has a systemic approach to a zero tolerance of pressure ulcers. The degree of risk is high for all patients, as determined by this patient population. Individual risk factors will be noted on the Nursing admission Assessment to direct specific preventative treatments. Individual modalities will be incorporated in the care plan but will always include basic skin care, nurses will perform a thorough skin assessment on admission and once a week and will report any new or acquired…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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, clinical record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident received enteral feedings as prescribed and services designed to prevent potential complications associated with tube feedings for one resident receiving an enteral feeding out of one resident sampled (Resident 17). Findings include: Review of Resident 17's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses, of respiratory failure, dysphagia following cerebral infarction (stroke), oropharyngeal phase; hemiplegia (weakness of one entire side of the body) and hemiparesis (most severe form complete paralysis) following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting left dominant side, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. Resident 17 required a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG tube) also known as G-tube (gastrostomy tube is a medical procedure in which a tube is passed into the patient's stomach…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide 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 review of facility policies, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide to ensure that one of 19 residents reviewed was properly access for pain and provided effective pain management. (Residents R190). Findings include: The facility policy entitled, Pain Management last reviewed February 2023, revealed The facility must ensure that pain management is provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences. An interview was held with Resident R190 on November 14, 2023, at 11:59 a.m. with his grandson by resident's bedside. Resident R190 reported that he had severe pain level 10 on his left side of the back going into his left tight. Grandson asked the license nurse, Employee E4 who was assigned to care for the Resident R190 if resident received Celebrex (anti-inflammatory medication) which was ordered yesterday November 13, 2023. Employee E4 reported that the physician had order Melaxican…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such 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 clinical record and review of facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents who require dialysis treatments and prescribed medication received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice for one of 14 resident clinical records reviewed (Resident R11). Finding includes: Review of the facility's Hemodialysis policy updated on January 15, 2023, revealed the purpose of hemodialysis is to maintain venous access, hemodynamic, fluid volume, temperature, nutrition and prevent injury or infection. The policy further states, all patient observations, interventions, etc. will be recorded in the patient record. Review of Resident R11's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with physician orders for the resident be taken to the dialysis center for dialysis every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday starting at 6:00 a.m. Review of Resident R11's October 2023 and November 2023 electronic medication administration 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 · D2023-11-17 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to post daily nurse staffing data on each nursing unit on November 15, 20023, on both nursing floors of the facility. (First floor and Second Floor) Finding include: Observations on November 15, 20023, at 10:03 a.m. on the first-floor receptionist desk did not reveal that the staffing information was posted in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. An interview on November 15, 20023, at 10:03 a.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator, confirmed that the staffing information was not posted for the current date. 28 Pa. Code 211.12 (d)(1)(3)(4) Nursing services
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · 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 the facility failed to ensure that a clinical rationale failed to provide the duration of a hypnotic medication for two of five residents reviewed (Resident R3 and Resident R87). Findings include: Review of Resident R3's October 2023 physician orders included an order dated October 30, 2023, for Zolpidem Tartrate Oral Table 10 milligrams (anti-psychotropic medication) 1 tablet by mouth every 24 hours as needed for sleep related to insomnia. Review of Resident R3's clinical record revealed a note to the attending physician/prescriber from the consultant pharmacist dated October 30 2023, with a recommendation to evaluate the use of prn (as needed) Zolpidem pm. The note indicated that per CMS regulation effective 11-28-2017 all PRN (as needed) psychotropic medication(s) are limited to 14 days of usage to limit their effect on the brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior. To extend the PRN order past the 14 days, the prescriber must document the rationale in the medical record and indicate 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 · D2023-11-17 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — isolatedEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident council interview, staff interviews, review of facility policy and reviews of the established mealtime schedule, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a nourishing snack was provided when 14 hours are between a substantial evening meal and breakfast in three of three nursing units. (A, B, and C nursing units). Findings include: A review of facility policy titled Nutritional Services last revised March 2023 revealed The facility is committed to meeting the nutritional needs of and creating a memorable dining experience for its residents by providing a choice of snacks at bedtime (HS). A review of the established meal schedule for the residents revealed that the dinner meal was scheduled for 5 p.m., and that the breakfast meal the following morning was offered at 8:00 a.m. This was a 15-hour meal span of time until breakfast the following day. An interview was held on November 14, 2023, at 10:28 a.m. with Resident R27 who reported that he/she eats dinner at 5:00 PM and breakfast is being served at 8:30 AM and no one offers snacks. Resident R27 does go…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the physician notes were was accessible in one of 14 resident clinical records reviewed (Resident R14). Findings include: Review of Resident R14's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of sepsis (acute infection) ischemic cardiomyopathy (the hearts decreased ability to pump blood), leading to heart failure (fluid builds in lungs causing excess fluid in the body and weight gain). The resident was documented with a weight of admission of 214.5 pounds and was ordered medications to rid the body of excess fluid. On November 15, 2023 the resident weighed 151.4 pounds a loss of 63.1 pounds in 41 days. Review of Resident R14's clinical records since admission revealed no documented evidence of physician notes recorded in the electronic clinical record and/or paper record for review. Interview with the Director of Nursing on November 16, 2023 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain proper infection control measures for COVID-19 (a highly contagious respiratory disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus) in one of three nursing units (A nursing unit). Findings include: A review of the facility documentation dated November 14, 2023, revealed 9 residents were residing in the designated COVID-19 rooms on the A nursing Unit. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing on November 14, 2023, at 7:45 a.m. revealed that the facility was having a COVID outbreak, 9 residents are located on Unit A. The required Protective Personal Equipment (PPE) for the COVID rooms as required by facilities policy Personal Protective Equipment that includes disposable mask, gowns, gloves, goggles, used to break the chain of infection and prevent its spread. Every staff, and/or visitor going into COVID room must put on the all PPE when going into the resident's room who are diagnosed with COVID. Observation conducted on November…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PARAMOUNT CARE CENTERS — 10 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 | 5 of 5 | 3.3 | +1.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 9 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.3★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KRAUS, ABRAHAM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 75% | since 05/31/2019 |
| PANETH, MORTON | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 05/31/2019 |
| MIMNA, SHAWNE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 05/31/2019 |
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 $413K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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
CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Pennsylvania Medicaid page for homes that do.
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 396070. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-17, 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.