Fairlane Gardens Nursing and Rehab at Reading

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.

45.6% 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 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 38.1% 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 21 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 27% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 124 beds and averages 117.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.08 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.88 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 2.79 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.20 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

16 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2026-03-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  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 facility policy review, clinical record review, review of facility documentation, observation, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to monitor a resident at risk for elopement (unauthorized departure from the facility) and self-harm for two of six sampled residents (Residents 1and 3). In addition, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to monitor a resident at risk for choking for one of six sampled residents (Resident 2). These failures resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation. Findings include:Review of the facility policy entitled, Frequent Monitoring Policy, last reviewed July 14, 2025, revealed that if a resident was placed on one to one (1:1) monitoring, an assigned staff member must remain with the resident at all times and that documentation of the monitoring would be noted in the medical record. Review of the facility policy entitled, Elopements/Elopement Policy, last reviewed July 14, 2025, revealed that…

  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 · D2026-06-23 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolated
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, review of facility documentation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet resident needs. Findings include: Review of the facility's meal service start time revealed that the dining room doors opened at 11:15 a.m. Observation of the main dining room on June 23, 2026, at 11:30 a.m., revealed the room was empty and the door was closed. At the time of the observation, the Food Service Director stated the lunch meal would not be served in the main dining room due to a shortage of nursing staff. Observation on the Side 2 nursing unit on June 23, 2026, from 12:00 p.m. to 12:40 p.m., revealed residents were eating lunch in the lounge area, while other residents were observed eating lunch in their rooms. At the time of the observation, three nurse aids (NA 1, NA 2, and NA 3) stated that the main dining room was closed due to a shortage of nursing staff. The nurse aides reported they had to assist residents with meals in the lounge area and deliver meals to the residents' rooms. Review of facility…

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

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-27 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide 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 a review of facility policy, clinical record review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician ordered medications were available from the pharmacy for one of six sampled residents. (Resident 1) Findings include:A review of the facility policy entitled, Medication Ordering and Receiving from the Pharmacy, last reviewed May 5, 2026, revealed that medications were to be received from the dispensing pharmacy on a timely basis. New medications were to be ordered and timely delivery was required so that the medication administration was not delayed. Original prescriptions for controlled medication were to be given to the pharmacy delivery personnel at the time of the delivery. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included chronic respiratory failure, anxiety, chronic pain, and migraines. According to the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], the resident was alert 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to include interventions to meet each resident's medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for two of six sampled residents. (Residents 1, 2)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included acute kidney failure, anxiety, depression, and a history of suicidal ideation (thoughts centered around death or suicide). On February 25, 2026, staff documented that the resident was found outside after climbing out the window. Review of facility documentation dated February 25, 2026, revealed that Resident 1 removed two safety brackets, two screws, pushed the screen out and climbed out the window. On March 2, 2026, the psychology provider (a licensed mental health professional who evaluates and treats mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders through talk therapy, behavioral interventions, 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment on four of four nursing units. (1A, 1B, 2A, 2B)Findings include:Observations on December 10, 2025, from 9:00 a.m. through 1:37 p.m. revealed the following:Debris and black, red, and brown substances were observed on the hallway floors of Units 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B and in rooms 107, 115, 116, 122, 129, 201, 206, 216, 217, 305.42 CFR S 483.10(i) Safe EnvironmentPreviously cited 8/14/2528 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee. 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1) Management.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-14 · 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 four of four nursing units. (1A, 1B, 2A, 2B)Findings include:Observations on August 12, 2025, from 9:00 a.m. through 12:17 p.m. revealed the following:Debris and a dark/black substance splattered throughout the hall floors of Units 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B and rooms 101, 109, 110, and 115.The floor in 217 had red and brown spots between the beds.There were brown spots on the ceiling in the hallway at room [ROOM NUMBER].There were red spots on the wall by the door in room [ROOM NUMBER]. The radiator in the resident lounge was broken with sharp, loose parts lying on the floor. The wall by the left entrance door in the main dining room was damaged. The wall behind both beds in room [ROOM NUMBER] was damaged. The ceiling and wall behind the toilet in room [ROOM NUMBER] were damaged. The mirrors were damaged in the bathrooms in rooms 217, 224, 308, 309, and 310.There were flying winged insects noted…

  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 · E2025-08-14 · 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 review of facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer medications in accordance with physician orders for four of 24 sampled residents. (Residents 2, 6, 19, 34)Findings include: Review of the policy entitled, Medication Administration, last reviewed July 14, 2025, revealed staff were to obtain vital signs if necessary, and document physician indicated medication administration information.Clinical record review revealed that Resident 2 had diagnosis of hypertension (high blood pressure). On April 3, 2025, the physician ordered staff to administer a blood pressure medication (lisinopril) one time a day. The medication was to be held if the resident's systolic blood pressure (SBP, the first measurement of blood pressure when the heart beats and the pressure is at its highest) was less than 110 millimeters of mercury (mm/Hg) or if the resident's heart rate (the number of times a heart beats in one minute) was less than 60 bpm (beats per minute). Review of Resident 2's Medication Administration Records…

  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 before2025-08-14 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed to accurately reflect the resident's status for two of 24 sampled residents. (Residents 27, 78) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Section N (Medications) of Resident 27's MDS assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident was not on an antipsychotic medication during the seven-day review period. Review of the resident's Medication Administration Record from June 2025 revealed that the resident did receive an antipsychotic (lurasidone) during the seven-day review period. Clinical record review revealed that section O (Special treatments, procedures, and programs) of the MDS assessment dated [DATE], indicated that Resident 78 did not receive tracheostomy care during the seven-day review period. Review of Resident 21's Treatment Administration record from July 2025 revealed that the resident did receive tracheostomy care during…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-14 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and services to prevent a reduction in range of motion and/or to improve or maintain mobility on a consistent basis for two of 24 sampled residents. (Residents 27, 78) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 27 had diagnoses that included muscle weakness and difficulty in walking. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident was cognitively impaired and required limited assistance from staff for activities of daily living. On April 17, 2025, the physical therapist had recommended a Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) for ambulation. A physician's order dated April 17, 2025, directed staff to provide the RNP for 15 minutes twice a day, seven days a week. There was a lack of documentation to support that between July 16, 2025, through August 13, 2025, the resident was offered restorative ambulation twice a day, as ordered, on 30 of 30 days. Clinical…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-05 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident interview, and a review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate resident food allergies one of three sampled residents. (Resident 1) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and that he was allergic to bananas. On March 31, 2025, a nurse noted that the resident reported that he had been served yogurt containing bananas at dinner. In an interview on April 5, 2025, at 8:30 a.m., the resident stated that he had recently been served yogurt containing bananas, and that it happened several times before. Review of facility investigation documents confirmed that on March 31, 2025, the resident was served yogurt containing bananas and that he ingested a small amount. The facility investigation further revealed that he had been served food containing bananas on three prior occasions. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee. 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b) Management.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-12 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide restorative nursing services to prevent a reduction in range of motion and/or to improve or maintain mobility on a consistent basis for two of 20 sampled residents. (Residents 11, 21) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 11 had diagnoses that included traumatic brain injury, functional quadriplegia (complete inability to move due to severe disability), and bilateral hand contractures. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident was cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for all activities of daily living. Review of Resident 11's current care plan revealed that the resident is at high risk for contractures due to immobility and that staff was to provide a restorative nursing program for passive range of motion to bilateral upper extremities at fingers and shoulders to reduce risk for further contracture twice a day. There was a lack 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.

  Quality of Life and Care 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

$101,602 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $101,602 — penalty dated 2026-03-24

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 LME FAMILY HOLDINGS — 15 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 14 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

7 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 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% 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.

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