Pottstown Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Cente

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.

53.2% 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 231 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 48.8% 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 127 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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 150 beds and averages 135.6 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 14 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.53 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.99 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% 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.

23 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-05-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow policies and procedures to prevent the spread of infection for four of 28 sampled residents. (Residents 84, 97, 112, 119) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Medication Administration, last reviewed on May 11, 2026, revealed that staff was to practice hand hygiene prior to administering medication and was to remove medication from source, taking care not to touch medication with bare hands. Review of the facility policy entitled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), last reviewed on May 11, 2026, revealed that staff was to wear a gown and gloves during high contact resident care activities, such as bathing and dressing residents with wounds, to prevent infections. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 84 had diagnoses that included a history of strokes, dementia, and diabetes. A Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 84 required…

  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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to electronically transmit encoded Minimum Data Set (MDS) data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) within 14 days of completion of the resident assessment for one of 26 sampled residents. (Resident 31)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 31's Discharge MDS assessment was completed on December 3, 2025, but had not been exported as of May 28, 2026. In an interview on May 29, 2026, at 10:10 a.m., the Regional Resource Nurse Manager confirmed that the MDS assessment had not been exported. 28 Pa. Code 211.5(d) Medical records.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services to maintain activities of daily living (eating and hygiene) for two of 28 sampled residents. (Residents 84 and 123)Findings include:Clinical record review revealed that Resident 84 had diagnoses that included a history of strokes, dementia, and diabetes. A Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 84 required maximum assistance with hygiene and self-care and had a cognitive impairment. Review of the care plan revealed that staff were to assist the resident with hygiene and self-care. On December 14, 2024, the physician ordered for staff to apply a left hand roll splint in the evening and remove it in the morning everyday. On May 27, 2026, at 8:21 a.m., the resident was observed in his room. The nails on both hands were long and dirty. The nails on his contracted left hand were digging into his palm. In an interview at that time, Resident 84 stated…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-29 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure physician's orders were implemented for one of 26 sampled residents. (Resident 119)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 119 had diagnoses that included diabetes, high blood pressure, and cellulitis of left lower limb (bacterial infection on the left leg). A physician's order dated May 14, 2026, directed staff to apply heel boots (devices to protect the skin of the feet) while in bed and check for skin breakdown throughout the day. Review of the care plan revealed that the resident was at risk for skin breakdown. Multiple observations on May 26 through 28, 2026, between 9:46 a.m., and 1:10 p.m., revealed Resident 119 in bed and the heel boots were not applied. In an interview on May 29, 2026, at 10:10 a.m., the Regional Resource Nurse Manager confirmed that staff did not apply the heel boots as ordered by the physician. 28. Pa Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide 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

  Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide ongoing assessment and monitoring for one of 26 sampled residents receiving dialysis (process of removing excess toxins and water from the blood). (Resident 11)Findings include: A review of the facility policy entitled, Dialysis: Hemodialysis- Communication and Documentation, last reviewed May 11, 2026, revealed that staff were to complete the pre-dialysis portion of the Hemodialysis Communication Record that provided information regarding the resident's ongoing status to send with the resident to dialysis. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 11 had diagnoses that included end-stage renal (kidney) disease and dependence on renal dialysis and had a physician's order dated April 27, 2026, for the facility to provide dialysis three days per week. There was a lack of evidence to support that the pre-dialysis portion of the resident's dialysis communication forms were completed and that the resident was assessed before dialysis on 10 of 13…

  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 · Ecited before2026-02-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
  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

  Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physician's orders for one of six sampled residents. (Resident 1)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included congestive heart failure, presence of a heart assist device, and atherosclerosis of coronary artery bypass graft(s). A review of physician's orders dated January 23 through 29, 2026, and the Treatment Administration Record for January 2026, revealed the following: Staff were to perform a self-test to ensure proper function of the left ventricular assist device (LVAD) every shift. There was no documented evidence that staff performed the self-test on two occasions. Staff were to record pump rate, pulse index, pump power, pump speed, and vital signs. Staff were to use a doppler to obtain mean blood pressure two times a day. There was no documented evidence that the rate, index, power, speed, vital signs, or mean blood pressure were obtained on six occasions. Staff were to ensure backup batteries were on charge at all…

  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 · E2026-01-21 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment on three of four nursing units and the beauty salon. (Second, Third, and Fourth Floors) Findings include:Observations on January 21, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. through 12:00 p.m., revealed the following environmental issues:In resident room [ROOM NUMBER] (bed A) there were areas of missing and peeling wallpaper above the resident's bed.In the hallway next to resident room [ROOM NUMBER], the wallpaper below the air conditioner unit had separated from the wall and bubbled along the length of the wall. There was some drywall exposed in this area. In the hallway next to the door to room [ROOM NUMBER] there is a dark mark on the wall. The ceiling adjacent to the air conditioner unit had several brown stains. In the hallway next to room [ROOM NUMBER] the ceiling tile was stained. Below the stained tile, the wallpaper was peeling and the exposed dry wall had a black substance on it.In resident room [ROOM…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physicians' orders for wound treatments were implemented for three of five sampled residents. (Residents 1, 2, 3) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included diabetes and kidney disease. On August 21, 2025, a physician ordered that staff clean the resident's pressure sore that was located on the second right toe with saline (wound cleaner) and apply one layer of Xeroform (sterile gauze to cover wounds) and an ABD (abdominal pad for large wounds), and wrap with a Kling (flexible bandage) every day on day shift and as needed. A review of Resident 1's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed that there was no evidence that staff provided treatment on September 3, 9, and 10, 2025. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 2 had diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis (paralysis on one side of the body) and hypertension (high blood pressure). On June 17, 2025, a physician ordered that staff apply amlactin…

  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 · E2025-04-10 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — pattern
  Provide 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 clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess bladder incontinence and provide services to restore bladder function as much as possible for three of four sampled residents. (Residents 45, 77, 129) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Continence Management, last reviewed March 31, 2025, revealed that facility staff was to complete a urinary incontinence assessment and/or bowel incontinence assessment upon admission and re-admission and with a change in condition or change in continence status. Staff would review the pre-admission history, assess the resident's current bladder and bowel elimination problem, and identify causes of incontinence. If there was a change in urinary and/or bowel incontinence, staff would provide appropriate treatment and services to restore continence to the extent possible and implement a toileting diary to determine a resident's voiding pattern for assistance in decision-making 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-10 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that call bells were accessible for one of 28 sampled residents. (Resident 13) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 13 had diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis (paralysis on one side of the body), contracture of muscle (stiffness in the connective tissues of the body), and muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set assessment, dated February 7, 2025, revealed Resident 13 was able to communicate needs to staff and required extensive assistance from staff for mobility and activities of daily living such as toilet use, grooming, and hygiene. Review of the care plan revealed that the resident had a self-care deficit due to physical limitations and contractures, and was a risk for behavioral symptoms. An intervention was for staff to provide Resident 13 with a handbell to call for assistance. On April 8, 2025, at 10:00 a.m., Resident 13 was observed in bed without a handbell. In an interview at that time, 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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to GENESIS HEALTHCARE — 184 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 17 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 78% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $5.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 33% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in PA