West Park Rehabilitation And Nursing Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

40.6% 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 46 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 79.0% 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 62 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 13% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 200 beds and averages 177.4 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 23 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.15 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.550 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.54 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 3.60 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.38 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.66 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 70% is well above 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.

34 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2026-01-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, review of clinical records, facility documentation, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure Resident R1 was provided with the necessary equipment of wheelchair leg rest to ensure safety and proper positioning during transportation. This failure resulted in actual harm to Resident R1 who fell forward from the wheelchair and sustained a left frontal scalp hematoma and periorbital contusion for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident R1).Findings included: Review of facility policy titled Assistive Devices and Equipment revised May 2025, revealed devices and equipment that assist with resident mobility, safety and independence are provided to resident. These include a). wheelchairs (manual and powered) b). walkers and c). canes. Further review of facility policy revealed Recommendations for the use of devices and equipment are based on the comprehensive assessment and documented in the resident's plan of care. Staff will be trained and will…

  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
• Actual harm · G2024-09-30 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical records, incident/accident reports, staff training records, resident and staff interviews and information submitted by the facility, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that Resident R1 was free from neglect related to not providing the assistance of two staff during a transfer from bed to chair via mechanical lift. This failure resulted in actual harm for Resident R1 who sustained a fall, a head injury and laceration to the head for one of three residents reviewed. This deficiency was cited as past non-compliance. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed the diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a lung condition cause by damage and inflammation that limits airflow), age related physical debility, morbid (severe) obesity, osteoarthritis of knee (degeneration of joint cartilage), lack of coordination, muscle weakness and history of falling. Review of Resident R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS- assessment of resident care needs) dated August 2, 2024, revealed that the resident had a BIMS (Brief…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-09-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on a review of facility policies, clinical records, incident/accident reports, staff training records, and information submitted by the facility, as well as staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure resident environment remained as free of accident hazards and failed to ensure that safe techniques were used during a transfer via mechanical lift. This failure resulted in actual harm for Resident R1 who sustained a head injury and laceration to the head for one of three residents reviewed. This deficiency was cited as past non-compliance. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of facility policy using a mechanical lift machine dated August 2024, revealed The purpose of this procedure is to establish the general principles of safe lifting using a mechanical lifting device. It is not a substitute for manufacturer's training or instructions. 1. At least two (2) nursing assistants are needed to safely move a resident with a mechanical lift. 2. Mechanical lifts may be used for tasks that require: a. Lifting a resident from the floor; b.…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-30 · 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 a review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that treatment to for pressure ulcer was obtained for Findings include:Review of the facility policy Pressure Ulcers/Skin Breakdown - clinical protocol, undated, revealed the nursing staff and practitioner will assess and document an individual's significant risk factors for developing pressure ulcers; for example, immobility, recent weight loss, and a history of pressure ulcer(s). In addition, the nursing shall describe and document/report the following: full assessment of pressure sore including location, stage, length, width and depth, presence of exudates and necrotic tissue, resident mobility status, current treatments, including support surface and relevant active diagnosis. Under Treatment/Management it further stated The practitioner will order pertinent wound treatments, including pressure reduction surfaces, would cleansing and debridement approaches, dressings (occlusive, absorptive, et)…

  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 · D2026-03-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  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 a review of facility policy, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions for one of four residents with a feeding tube (Resident R2) and for one resident with airborne precautions. (Residents R2 and R3).Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, undated, revealed: To minimize the transmission of germs transferred from residents to staff hands and clothing, staff will wear a gown and gloves when providing care to residents that require significant physical contact and are at high risk of acquiring or spreading multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Enhanced barrier precautions will be applied to: (A) residents with an indwelling medical device, including a central venous catheter, urinary catheter, feeding tube (PEG tube), or tracheostomy/ventilator, regardless of their MDRO status; and (B) residents with a chronic wound, regardless of their MDRO status. Chronic wounds include pressure…

  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 · Dcited before2026-01-28 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
  Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations of the resident rooms, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the Resident call bell system in working condition for two out of 10 residents' rooms observed for call bell functioning.Findings Include:On January 28, 2026, a tour of the fourth floor of the facility was conducted, and at 11:53 a.m., observations in room [ROOM NUMBER], Bed D, revealed the call bell device was non-functioning. Resident R2 of room [ROOM NUMBER], Bed D, stated that the call bell was not functioning for a few days.On January 28, 2026, a tour of the fourth floor of the facility was conducted, and at 11:57 a.m., observations in room [ROOM NUMBER], Bed B, revealed the call bell device was non-functioning.On January 28, 2026, at 11:57 a.m., the findings were confirmed with E 3, a Licensed Nurse.28 Pa Code 207.2(a) Administrator's responsibility

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · 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 clinical record and care plan reviews, observations of residents, policy and procedure review and interviews with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility failed to review and revise the residents care plan for three of 28 residents reviewed, in a timely manner, to ensure the greatest benefit to each resident for safety needs, hospice care, and oxygen use Residents (R4, R7, and R28) Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled care plans, comprehensive person-centered dated August 2025 revealed that it was the responsibility of the staff at the facility to develop and implement a care plan to meet the medical, psychosocial, physical and functional needs of each resident. The policy indicated that the care plan interventions were derived from a thorough analysis of the information gathered as part of the comprehensive assessment. The policy also indicated that the care plan would include measurable objectives and time frames for the resident to meet their goals and attain or…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure physician orderes were followed for one of six residents reviewed for nutrition (Resident 110).Findings include: Review of physician orders for Resident R110, dated July 24, 2024, revealed that the resident was ordered to receive snacks at 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. review of the clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including malnutrition (lack of proper nutrition) and abnormal weight loss, and had a BIMS score of 3, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Observation conducted on December 15, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. revealed the resident had a small bag of Cheez-It crackers labeled snack 2/14. Further observations conducted on December 16 and 17, 2025, at 10:00 a.m., 10:30 a.m., 2:00 p.m., and 2:15 p.m. revealed the residents did not receive snacks per physician orders. During follow-up interview conducted with Nurse Aid, Employee E11 on December 12, 2025, at 2:11 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interview with resident and staff as well as review of clinical record and review of facility policy, it was determined that facility did not ensure to provide appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decline for one of 28 residents reviewed (Resident R118)Review of facility policy Resident mobility and range of motion, revised on January 2025, indicates that residents with limited range of motion will receive treatment and services to increase and/or prevent a further decrease in range of motion (ROM).Further review of policy indicates that residents with limited mobility will receive appropriate services, equipment and assistance to maintain or improve mobility unless reduction in mobility is unavoidable.Review of Residents R118 clinical record revealed a medical history of hemiplegia and hemiparesis (weakness and paralysis) following stroke affecting left non-dominant side, need for assistance with personal care.Review of Resident R118's physician orders revealed an active order placed on December 5, 2025, for…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
  Provide 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer pain medication in accordance with physician orders for one of three residents reviewed for pain management (Residents R84). Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Pain Assessment and Management, revised 2025, revealed pain management is defined as the process of alleviating the resident's pain to a level that is acceptable to the resident and is based on his or her clinical condition and established treatment goals. Clinical record review revealed Resident R84 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting left side (affect movement/sensation on one side of body), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (condition that prevents airflow to the lungs, causing breathing problems), and pain. Review of Resident R84's physician's order, dated October 07, 2025, revealed an order for Percocet (opioid for moderate to severe pain)…

  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 · D2025-12-18 · tag F0699 — isolated
  Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide culturally competent, trauma care in accordance with professional standards of practice, accounting for the resident's past experiences and preferences in order to eliminate and/or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for one of three residents sampled for behavior. (Resident R45)Findings include: Review of Resident R45's clinical record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including schizophrenia (mental health condition that affects how people think, feel, and behave) and epilepsy (neurological disorder). Review of progress note for Resident R45 dated April 24, 2025, revealed that Resident R45 reported a history of sexual abuse and disclosed that the abuse occurred in the past. The note further documented that the resident was abused in the streets and around violence and reported not feeling safe in the streets.…

  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 · D2025-12-18 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolated
  Provide or obtain dental services for each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations of resident care and services, interviews with staff and residents, clinical record and policy and procedure reviews, it was determined that for one of eight residents reviewed for nutritional needs and support with eating, the facility failed to assist each resident with obtaining routine dental care in a timely manner. (Resident R15) Findings include:A review of the facility policy titled dental services dated August 2025 revealed that it was the responsibility of the facility to ensure routine dental services was provided for each resident to meet their oral health needs. The policy indicated that a consultant dentist service was responsible to provide each resident with professional dental care. The policy also indicated that the social services department was responsible for assisting residents with timely appointments with the dental group. The policy said that all dental services provided were to be documented in the resident's clinical record. Clinical record review revealed a…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-01 · tag F0628 — isolated
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of facility provided documentation, review of closed record and interview with staff, it was determined facility did not convey the discharge summary to the continuing care provider at the time of discharge and did not contain required components for one of two closed records reviewed (Resident R2) Findings include: Review of facility policy 'Discharge summary and plan,' revised May 2025, indicates discharge summary shall include a description of the residents reconciliation of pre- and post- medications, post discharge plan of care; and any post-discharge medical and non-medical services. Review of Resident R2's clinical record on July 1, 2025, indicated that the resident was admitted to facility on August 9, 2022 and discharged on June 4, 2025. Review of discharge summary plan, completed on June 3, 2025, by Licensed nurse, Employee E3, revealed that after discharge, resident was to receive ostomy care and peg tube care. Resident R1 was discharged with active tracheostomy (tube inserted through the neck to assist with breathing) treatment. Further review of Resident…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$25,847 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $12,923 — penalty dated 2024-09-30
• $12,924 — penalty dated 2024-09-30

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ALLAIRE HEALTH SERVICES — 20 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $3K 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

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