Rosemont Center
35 Rosemont Avenue, Rosemont, PA 19010 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 76 certified beds · (610) 580-0400 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 5.1% | 16.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.1% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 19.2% | 10.8% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 3.1% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 0.9% | 17.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.0% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.5% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.6% | 4.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.9% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.9% | 17.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 48.6% | 68.7% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.2% | 22.5% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.1% | 9.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.73 | 1.62 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.03 | 1.18 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Met the expected recovery: 51.6% 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 31 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 45% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.0%CMS range 6.7–15.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 51.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 58.1% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 45.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.4% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 3.7–12.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.79 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 76 beds and averages 65.0 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.31 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.94 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.38 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.60 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
32 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, review of policy, review of clinical record and review of facility provided documentation, it was determined facility did not ensure to provide adequate supervision to prevent elopement for one of three residents reviewed (Resident R1)Findings include: Review of facility policy 'Wandering, Unsafe Resident,' revised August 2014, indicated its purpose is to prevent unsafe wandering while maintaining the least restrictive environment for residents who are at risk for elopement. Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed a medical diagnosis of dementia with mood disturbance and agitation, depression, cognitive communication deficit, adjustment disorder with anxiety, conduct disorder. Review of elopement assessment completed on December 31, 2025, at 3:15 pm, revealed Resident R1 was at high risk for elopement. Review of facility provided investigation report, completed on February 13, 2026, revealed that on February 12, 2026, at 9:00 am, R1 was residing on second floor unit and managed to escape by taking stairs after pressing of fire doors for more than 15…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-09-08 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews and review of clinical records, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation to rule out abuse/neglect for 4 of 17 residents reviewed (Resident R1, R2, R23 and R51). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Abuse Prevention Program reviewed November 30, 2022, revealed all reports of resident abuse, neglect, mistreatment and/or injuries of unknown source shall be thoroughly investigated by facility management. The individual conducting the investigation will include, but not be limited to, interview any witnesses to the incident and interview staff members (on all shifts) who have had contact with the resident during the period of the alleged incident. The facility administration will protect our residents from abusee by anyone including, but not necessarily limited to facility staff, other residents, consultants, volunteers, staff from other agencies, family members. The facility will investigate and report any allegations of abuse…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-09-08 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, observations, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure kitchen equipment was maintained in safe and operating condition (Main Kitchen). Findings Include:Review of undated facility policy Pot and Pan Washing revealed proper pot and pan washing procedures reduce the possibility of food contamination. Review of facility policy revealed pots and pants will be washed in the first sink, rinsed in the second sink, and sanitized in the third sink. Pots and pans are sanitized using warm water and bleach or sanitizer to provide no less than 50 PPM chlorine in solution for one minute. An initial tour of the main kitchen was conducted on September 2, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. with Food Service Director, Employee E6. During a tour of the kitchen, a dietary aide was observed to be utilizing the 3-compartment sink to wash pots and pants. The third compartment of the 3-compartment sink was identified as the sanitizing sink.The Food Service Director, Employee E6, used a chlorine test strip to monitor the sanitizing solution of the water.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-08 · tag F0559 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
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 and the review of clinical records, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that written notification was received prior to a resident's room change for 1 out of 17 residents reviewed (Resident R1). Review of Resident R1's September 2025 physician orders revealed the diagnoses of anxiety (intense, excessive and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations); depression (a mood disorder that may be described as feelings of sadness, loss, or anger that interfere with a person's everyday activities); cerebral vascular disease (a group of disorders that affect blood flow to the brain, leading to conditions such as stroke, aneurysms, and vascular malformations); dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and unspecified pain. Review of a Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated December 13, 2024 indicated that the resident was cognitive intact.Review of the facility policy, Room Change/Roommate Assignment, revised September 2017,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-08 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, review of clinical records, observations, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide personal privacy during care for two of 17 residents reviewed (Resident R3, and R46). Findings Include: Observation of the first-floor unit conducted September 2, 2025, at 10:56AM revealed that Nurse Aide, Employee E4, was providing care for Resident R3. Further observation revealed that Resident R3's roommate was in Bed-B, next to the window. Further, the privacy curtain for Resident R3 was drawn only partially at foot of the bed, exposing Resident R3 to his/her roommate. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), Employee E2, conducted at the time of the observation confirmed that Nurse Aide, Employee E4, did not fully draw the curtain to provide Resident R3 with full privacy during care. Further observation of the first-floor unit conducted September 2, 2025, at 12:24PM revealed that Nurse Aide, Employee E4, was providing care for Resident R46. Further observation revealed that Resident R46's roommate was in Bed-B next to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-08 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, and review of clinical records, it was determined that that facility failed to ensure that prompt efforts were made to resolve a resident's grievance regarding a room change request for 1 out of 17 residents reviewed (Resident R51). Findings include:Review of Resident R51's August 2025 physician orders revealed the diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder (a mental health condition that is marked by a mix of schizophrenia symptoms, such as see things and hearing voices and believing things that are not real or true, anxiety (intense, excessive and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations); adjustment disorder (a mental health condition characterized by an excessive emotional or behavioral response to a significant life stressor, leading to distress and functional impairment); hypertension (high blood pressure); muscle weakness, and hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol).Review of the facility's undated policy, Grievances/Complaints, Filing, indicated that all grievances, complaints or recommendations stemming from resident or family groups concerning…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to revise a care plan related to aggressive behaviors for one of 17 residents reviewed. (Resident R51) Findings include:Review of the August 2025 physician orders for Resident R51 revealed the diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder (a mental health condition that is marked by a mix of schizophrenia symptoms, such as see things and hearing voices and believing things that are not real or true, and mood disorder symptoms; anxiety (intense, excessive and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations); adjustment disorder (a mental health condition characterized by an excessive emotional or behavioral response to a significant life stressor, leading to distress and functional impairment); hypertension (high blood pressure); muscle weakness, and hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol).Review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a periodic assessment of a resident's needs) dated May 2, 2025 indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-08 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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, staff interview and review of facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that proper feeding tube placement was established prior to administering medication through a feeding tube for one of two residents observed (Resident RF27).Findings include:Review of facility Policy on Administering mediations through an Enteral Tube revised in March 2015, revealed that under section Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the safe administration of medications through an enteral tube. To assess for tolerance of enteral feeding. Under section Equipment and supplies: 12: Stethoscope. Undersection Steps in the Procedure: 18. Conform placement of feeding tube. #20. Check gastric residual volume to assess tolerance of enteral feeding. #21 when correct tube placement and acceptable gastric residual volume have been verified, flush tubing with 15-30 ml warm sterile water (or prescribed amount).Review of Resident R27's clinical record 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-08 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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 review of facility policy, review of clinical records, observations, and staff and resident interviews it was determined that the failed to provide treatment/services to maintain or improve range of motion/mobility for one of four residents reviewed for limited range of motion (Resident R12).Findings Include:Review of facility policy Restorative Nursing Services revised July 2017 revealed residents will receive restorative nursing care as needed to promote optimal safety and independence. Review of Resident R12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated August 5, 2025, revealed the resident was cognitively intact and had diagnoses of hemiplegia (affecting left non-dominant side), muscle weakness, and need for assistance with personal care. Further review of Resident R12's MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident had impairment of functional limitation in range of motion on one side to the upper and lower extremities.Review of Resident R12's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-08 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, review of facility documentation, review of personnel files, review of clinical records, observations, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to assure that nursing staff possess the competencies, and skill sets necessary to provide nursing and related services to meet the residents' needs for two of five nursing staff reviewed (Employee E5 and E9).Findings Include:Review of facility policy Restorative Nursing Services revised July 2017 revealed residents will receive restorative nursing care as needed to promote optimal safety and independence.Review of facility's job description for nurse aides revealed that nurse aide staff are responsible for reviewing care plans and daily assignments and perform nursing care as outlined.Review of facility's job description for licensed practical nurse (LPN) revealed that LPN staff are responsible for rendering professional nursing care to residents, follow facility policies and procedures to implement treatment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 22 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, observations, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with standards of food service safety (Main Kitchen). Findings Include:Review of undated facility policy Food Storage revealed leftover food is stored in covered containers or wrapped carefully and securely.Observations during an initial tour of the main kitchen on September 2, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. with Food Service Director, Employee E6, revealed the following:Observations of the walk-in refrigerator revealed deli meats in open plastic bags, not sealed. Further observations revealed opened containers of chicken and beef broth base, with no open date.Observations in the walk-in freezer revealed a box of cauliflower open to air, not sealed. 28 Pa. Code 201.14 (a) Responsibility of licensee.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, review of clinical records, observations, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to implement an effective infection control program related to medication administration and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in enhanced barrier precautions 4 of 17 residents reviewed (Resident R27, R47, R14, R59). Findings Include:Review of facility policy on Enhanced Barrier Precaution (EBP) dated April 1, 2024, revealed that it is the policy of the facility to follow state and federal guidelines to minimize the spread of Multidrug Resistant Organism (MDRO's) by implementing effective personal protective equipment (PPE) usage. The policy is intended to provide guidance for PPE use as well as room restriction for preventing transmission of MDRO's. Under section Key Points #2. EBP is indicated for residents with the following: wounds or indwelling medical devises, regardless of MDRO colonization status; infections or colonization with an MDRO when contact precaution do not otherwise apply. Observation of the first-floor unit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 6 of 18 resident records reviewed (Residents R17, R41, R44, R48, R49, and R59). Findings include: Review of Resident R17's clinical record revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], diagnosed with Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure With Hypoxia (a condition that occurs when the body doesn't have enough oxygen in its tissues); and was ordered, dated August 6, 2024, with oxygen at 2L/Min, via nasal cannula continuously, every shift, related to acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low lwvels of oxygen) On October 10, 2024, at 1:13 p.m., Resident R17 was observed that R17 receiving oxygen via nasal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, and review of facility documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident's rights to privacy and confidentiality of his/her medical records was maintained for one of 24 residents observed (Resident R28). Findings include: Upon request of facility's HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) policies and procedures, the facility provided surveyors with the facility's HIPAA Training Program on confidentiality. Review of facility HIPAA Training Program on confidentiality revealed that policy statement. All facility personnel, including business associates, are required to attend our HIPAA Compliance training program. Under section Policy Interpretation and Implementation. Number one to ensure the confidentiality of our residents protected health information and facility information, HIPAA and Data Security training program will be provided for all employees and business associates who have access to protected health and facility information. The HIPAA training program…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of clinical record review, review of facility documentation and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident/resident representative were notified of resident's discharge/transfer for three of three residents reviewed (Resident R11, R41, R42) Findings include: Request for the policy on Resident/Resident Representative and Ombudsman notification of resident's discharge/transfer revealed that the facility was not able to produce a policy. Review of Resident R11's clinical record revealed that Resident R11 was transferred to a local hospital on September 28, 2024, after a seizure episode which resulted in a fall. Further review of Resident R11's clinical record revealed no documented evidence that the facility notified the resident and the resident's representative(s) of the transfer or discharge and the reasons for the move in writing and in a language and manner they understand. Review of Resident R41's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility diagnosed with epilepsy, depression, anxiety and past…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
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, review of the Resident Assessment Instrument and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a significant change Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) for one of twenty-four residents reviewed who had a below the knee amputation (Resident R59). Findings include: Review of Resident R59's clinical record revealed that Resident R59 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a most recent readmission of September 15, 2024, from a local hospital status post (S/P or after) Right Below the Knee Amputation. Further review of Resident R59's clinical record revealed that Resident R59 had the following diagnoses Acute Osteomyelitis of the right ankle and foot dated July 20, 2024, Type two Diabetes Miletus dated July 20, 2024, and Acquired Absence of Right Leg Below the Knee dated September 16, 2024. Review of Resident R59's clinical record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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 observations, review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited range of motion received treatment and services to maintain or improve range of motion/mobility for one of 24 residents reviewed for limited range of motion (Resident R49). Findings include: Review of Resident R49's OT (Occupational Therapy) Discharge summary dated [DATE], revealed a discharge recommendation for splint/brace and AROM (active range of motion) and PROM (passive range of motion), transfers and grooming. Review of Resident R49's physician's order dated March 14, 2024, revealed Splint: RUE (right upper extremity) resting hand splint, on after lunch meal daily and worn per tolerance; patient may remove independently. Review of Resident R49's March 2024- October 2024 Treatment Administration Record no documented evidence that donning and doffing of splint was performed. Further review of resident R49's clinical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care and services for two of 18 residents reviewed (Residents R17, R38). Findings include: Review of Resident R17's clinical record revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], diagnosed with Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia (a condition that occurs when the body doesn't have enough oxygen in its tissues); and was ordered, dated August 6, 2024, with oxygen at 2 liters/min, via nasal cannula continuously, every shift, related to acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen). On October 10, 2024, at 1:13 p.m., observed that Resident R17 was administered oxygen at 3 liters/min via nasal canula. and not 2 liters/min, as ordered by the physician, and the same was confirmed with a Licensed Nurse, Employee E5, at the time of the finding. Review of Resident R38's clinical record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program related with wound treatment for one out of one resident observed and disinfecting of medical equipment (R44). Findings include: Review of physician order for Resident R44, dated September 27, 2024, indicated to administer wound care to right hip to right buttock, with cleanser: normal saline, Primary; Santyl, Calcium Alginate; Secondary: bordered gauze dressing, every shift and as needed; apply Santyl to the Slough and Eschar only, every shift to maintain Skin Integrity and every 8 hours, as needed to maintain skin integrity. On October 10, 2024, at 12:22 p.m., observed the wound treatment administered to Resident R44, by a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Employee E4. It was observed that Employee E4, transported the whole treatment cart into R44's room, the room which was marked for Enhanced Barrier Precaution. Employee E4 was observed cleansed the wound of R44 without following the rule to cleanse from center to outer side of the wound.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-25 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment in one resident room on the 1st floor. (room [ROOM NUMBER]) Findings: On June 25, 2024, at 10:08 a.m. observations were conducted in rooms 105A bed and 105C bed. Bed 105A Resident R1 was lying in a bariatric bed which was located between the A and B section of the room. Room was cluttered with open and closed boxes on the floor against the wall. Room had two drawers full of items on the top. On the top of those boxes there was large number of random items including spices, hygiene, snacks, multiple basins, jewelry, clothing stored. Open grocery paper bags were stored on the floor with random items such as snacks, nuts, sodas, jams, bottles of water. Underneath the bed there were grocery paper bags with random papers, snacks, fruit cups and there was a urinal container. The chair was full of clothing, papers, snacks, sodas, on the top of each other. In addition, a 5-power…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-15 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and the review of the clinical record, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the physician was notified of a change in the resident's medical status for one out of four residents reviewed (Resident R1). Findings include: Review of the facility policy, Change in a Resident's Condition of Status, with a revision date of May 2021 indicated that the facility will notify the resident, his/or attending physician and the resident's representative of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status. Continued review of the policy indicated that the nurse will notify the resident's attending physician or the physician on call when incidents including, but not limited to the following has occurred with the resident: accident or incident involving the resident; discovery of injuries of an unknown origin; adverse reaction to medication; significant change in the resident's physical/emotional/mental condition; refusal of treatment for two or more consecutive times, or the need to transfer the resident out of the hospital. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan related to psychotropic medications and behavior management for one of 14 residents reviewed (Resident R27). Findings include: Review of Resident R27's admission MDS (Minimum Data Set - a mandatory periodic resident assessment tool), dated December 19, 2023, revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses including dementia (decline in memory or other thinking skills severe enough to reduce a person's ability to perform everyday activities), anxiety disorder (intense, excessive, persistent worry or fear) and sleep disorder. Review of progress notes for Resident R27 revealed a nurses note, dated December 15, 2023, at 6:49 a.m. which indicated that the resident exhibited several behaviors, including agitation, verbal aggression, inability to be re-directed and disrobing. Continue review of progress notes for Resident R27 revealed a nurses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-01 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, reviews of clinical records, facility policies and procedures, and interviews with staff and resident, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate treatment and care for a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of 30 residents reviewed (Resident R354). Findings include: According to the standards of nursing practice guidelines in the Journal of the American Nurse's Association, dated November 2013, complications of a PICC line includes, but is not limited to catheter-tip migration (assessed by external length of the catheter-amount of catheter tubing that is visible outside of the vein moves from original insertion and may cause medical complications). Review of this facility policy Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC's) , dated May 18, 2020, revealed that Must be assessed using sterile technique with the maintenance of positive pressure. PICC's are to be capped when not in use. The extension tubing attached to the PICC at the time of the insertion must not be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-01 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the review of clinical records, facility documentation, observations, interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff possessed the appropriate competencies and skill sets related to the care of residents with PICC line ( a tube placed in a large vein in the neck, chest, groin, or arm to give fluids, blood, or medications or to do medical tests quickly). Two of two employee records reviewed. (Employee E4 and E5). Findings Include: Observation of a PICC line medication administration for Resident R354 on January 30, 2024, at 12:16 p.m. with the extension tube and the cap for both lumens were missing which exposed the PICC line. Employee E4 was preparing medication to be administered via PICC line. It appeared that the staff was given instruction by Employee E5 during the medication preparation, setting up of IV pump, and medication administration. Employee E4 worn gloves when preparing medication in the hallway, using the same gloves touched medication cart, IV pump pole and the resident. Further observation revealed that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-01 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the review of Quality Improvement Program (QUAPI) plan, facility documentation, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to demonstrate and maintain an effective Quality Improvement Program with systems and reports demonstrating systematic identification, reporting, investigation, analysis, and prevention of adverse events and performance indicators. Findings include: Review of the facility policy QUAPI, revealed, Our organization's written QAA/QAPI plan provides guidance for our overall quality improvement program. Quality assurance performance improvement principles will drive the decision making within our organization. Decisions will be made to promote excellence in quality of care, quality of life resident choice person directed care, and resident transitions. Focus areas will include all systems that affect resident and family satisfaction, quality of care and services provided, and all areas that affect the quality of life for persons living and working in our organization. The facility's QUAPI policy failed to address the following…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-01 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on a review of facility documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure its nurse aide staff was receiving in-service training to be proficient and competent and that the training be no less than 12 hours annually for five of five nurse aide staff training information reviewed (E6. E7, E8, E9 and E10). Findings Include: Review of the nurse aide annual training information provided during the survey revealed that there were no training logs/tracking to review for nurse aides E6. E7, E8, E9 and E10 Review of the nurse aide training/in-service information provided during the survey revealed that nurse aides training logs did not contain evidence that the training met the twelve hours of annual training requirement. An interview with the Director of Nursing on February 1, 2024, at 11:00 a.m. confirmed that the facility did not track the in-service training for their nurses' aides and the facility documentation did not contain evidence of that the training for E6. E7, E8, E9 and E10 met the twelve hours of annual training requirement. 28 Pa.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-28 · tag F0559 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policies, clinical record review and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notice, including reason for transfer before a resident's room was change for two of four residents reviewed (Residents R1 and R2). Findings Include: A review of facility policy titled, Room Change/Roommate Assignment revised May 2017, indicated that prior to changing a room or roommate assignment all parties involved in the change/assignment, residents and their representatives will be given a notice in advance of such change. Advance notice of room change will include why the change is being made. Review of Resident R1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) dated November 4, 2023, revealed Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Continued review of Resident's MDS revealed a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 14, indicating that the resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide wound treatment related to a resident's wound for one of two residents reviewed. (Resident R1) Findings include: Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed that Resident R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of Peripheral Vascular Disease (a systemic disorder that involves the narrowing of peripheral blood vessels) and open wound on the lower leg. Review of Resident R1's quarterly MDS (Minimum data set-a federally required resident assessment completed at a specific interval) dated September 15, 2023, revealed that Section C0500 BIMS (brief interview for mental status) scored 13 suggesting that Resident R1 was cognitively intact. Review of MDS section M (skin conditions) revealed that Resident R1 was at risk for pressure ulcer, had venous or arterial ulcers and skin tears. Further review of Resident R1's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], section M1200 (I) Application of dressing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 observations, staff interviews, review of facility policy and the review of clinical records, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a care plan was updated with the correct positioning device for 1 resident (Resident R3) and not updated for colostomy care for one resident for 2 out of 15 residents reviewed (Resident R3 and Resident R49). Findings include: Review of the policy, Care Plans Comprehensive Person-Centered, with a revision date of March 2022 indicated that the resident's comprehensive, perso-centered care plan describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintained the resident's highest practicable physician, mental and psychosocial well-being, including any specialized services, and describes which professional services are responsible for each element of care; reflects currently recognized standards of practice for problem areas and conditions. The policy also indicated that assessments are ongoing and revised as information about the residents and the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 observations, review of facility policy, staff interviews and the review of clinical records, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident received appropriate care and services related to activities of daily living for 2 out of 15 records reviewed (Resident R3 and Resident R34). Findings include: Review of the facility policy Activities of Daily (ADL), Supporting with a revision date of March 2018, residents will [sic] provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs). The policy also indicated that residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. Review of the September 2023 physician orders for Resident R3 included the following diagnosis: history of traumatic brain injury; hearing loss; Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD-a disease characterized by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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, staff interviews and the review of clinical records, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's restorative nursing care program was implemented for 2 out of 15 residents reviewed (Resident R15). Findings include: Interview with Resident R15 on September 25, 2023, at 1:30 p.m., stated he was supposed walk with staff assistance five times a week and he was not receiving it. He stated most of the days there was short staffing and staff did not get time to assist him to walk. Review of care plan for Resident R15 dated December 2, 2021, revealed that the resident had self-care deficit related to impaired ambulation and required one person assist and rolling walker for ambulation. Continued review of the care plan revealed that Resident R15 was care planned to walk up to 120 feet with rolling walker and with stand by assist of one person for 15 minutes, five times a week for the goal to maintain lower extremity strength and walking ability. Review of nursing assistant restorative nursing documentation for Resident R15 revealed that 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the review of facility policies, clinical records, observations and interview with resident and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide pain management consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for one of 18 residents reviewed. (Resident R49). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Pain Assessment and Management, dated March 2020, revealed that During the comprehensive pain assessment gather the following information as indicated from the resident (or legal representative): a. History of pain and its treatment, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. b. Characteristics of pain: (1) Location of pain; (2) Intensity of pain (as measured on a standardized pain scale); (3) Characteristics of pain (e.g., aching, burning, crushing, numbness, burning, etc.); (4) Pattern of pain (e.g., constant or intermittent); and (5) Frequency, timing and duration of pain. c. Impact of pain on quality of life; d. Factors that precipitate or exacerbate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
The other 14 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLES HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/14/2018 |
| BE SMARTS TR | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/14/2018 |
| BFSNMC LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/14/2018 |
| HAMILTON 3P LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/14/2018 |
| HMSNMC LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/14/2018 |
| LAHASKY FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/14/2018 |
| BORENSTEIN, PHILLIP | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 05/14/2018 |
| LEWIS, STEVEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/14/2018 |
| FEUER, SAMUEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/14/2018 |
| KATZ, LARRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/14/2018 |
| LESHKOWITZ, ELI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/14/2018 |
| BRAUNSTEIN, BARRY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/14/2018 |
| ROSENSTOCK, YITZCHOK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/16/2025 |
| GEARY PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/14/2018 |
| GPH ROSEMONT LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/14/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 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 92% 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 $339K 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 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Pennsylvania Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 395193. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-08, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.