Parkhouse Rehabilitation And Nursing Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

48.1% 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 159 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 64.2% 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 109 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 24% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 467 beds and averages 294.6 residents a day — about 63% occupied, or roughly 172 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 2.97 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.34 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.73 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 2.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.06 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.37 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% 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.

31 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-05-30 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of the facility's policy, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to timely and comprehensively assess a pressure ulcer wound resulting in actual harm to one resident (Resident 2) and failed to follow physician's wound treatment orders for three of the 11 residents reviewed (Residents 2, 62, and 225). Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Skin Integrity, dated April 1, 2022, revealed documentation and care interventions for skin integrity including assessment/observation to be completed within the first twenty-four hours of admission/quarterly/significant change in condition using admission Nursing Evaluation. Review of Resident 2's diagnosis list revealed diagnoses including Quadriplegia (paralysis of all four extremities), Epilepsy (seizures), protein calorie malnutrition, Bipolar Disorder (psychiatric disorder) and Major Depressive Disorder (mental disorder characterized by persistent and debilitating feelings of sadness, loss 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
• Potential for harm · E2026-06-12 · 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

  Based on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible by failing to ensure that the door leading to the trash chute on the memory care unit remained locked at all times.Findings include:Observations conducted on the memory care unit located on the 8th floor on June 9, 2026, at approximately 7:47 a.m. revealed a sign affixed to a door stating, TRASH CHUTE - This door must be kept locked at all times. THANK YOU. Further observation revealed the door was unlocked and located out of view of the nurses' station. A laundry cart had been placed in front of the trash chute, requiring the cart to be moved in order to gain access to the chute.Subsequent observations conducted on June 10 and June 11, 2026, revealed the door leading to the trash chute remained unlocked. The laundry cart remained positioned in front of the trash chute; however, the chute remained accessible once the cart was moved.An interview conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Assistant…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-06-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (an infection control strategy to prevent the spread of multi-drug-resistant organisms in long term care facilities) for two out of four hallways reviewed on Unit 2 West. Findings include: A review of facility policy titled, Isolation Steps: Categories of Transmission-Based Precautions, reviewed August 2025 revealed: All residents with any of the following should use enhanced barrier precautions.open wounds, and/or indwelling medical devices (e.g. central line, urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy) . wear a gown and gloves for all interactions that may involve contact with a resident or the resident's environment. Donning PPE (personal protective equipment) upon room entry and properly discarding before exiting the patient room is done to contain pathogens (germs that cause disease). Observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] on June 9, 2026, at approximately 6:58 a.m.…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to protect the residents' rights for one of thirty-five residents reviewed (Resident 99)Findings include:Resident 99 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with medical diagnoses that include Parkinsons's Disease (movement disorder of the nervous system), difficulty walking, need for assistance with personal care, unsteadiness on feet, and abnormality of gait (deviation from normal walking pattern.)A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 99, dated May 14, 2026, revealed that the resident utilizes a wheelchair, requires partial to moderate assistance with toileting hygiene, and substantial to maximum assistance with sit to stand and toilet transfers. Review of Resident 99's care plan revealed a focus dated November 11, 2025, noting the resident exhibits toileting deficits, putting them at risk for reduced independence…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-12 · tag F0579 — isolated
  Provide information about how to apply for and use Medicare and Medicaid benefits.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) within the required timeframe for one out of one residents reviewed (Resident #335).Findings include:Review of Resident 335's medical record revealed a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) indicating Medicare-covered skilled services were ending on May 14, 2026. The notice was signed and dated by the resident on May 13, 2026, at 9:00 a.m., which was 1 day prior to the end of Medicare-covered services.An Interview conducted on June 12, 2025, at 12:05 p.m., with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) confirmed the NOMNC was not provided within the required 2-day (48-hour) timeframe.The facility failed to provide the NOMNC within the required 2-day advance timeframe from which it should have been provided.28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1) Management28 Pa. Code 201.29(a) Resident Rights

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-12 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on a review of the facility's policy, clinical records review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to monitor the resident's behaviors, and medication side effects, for residents receiving a psychotropic medication for three of the five residents reviewed (Resident 15, 17, and 327). Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled Antipsychotic/Anxiolytic Utilization, last review in April 2025, revealed that documentation is necessary to assist in assessing whether the resident's behavioral symptom needs some form of intervention, determining whether the behavioral symptom is transitory or permanent. A review of Resident 15's physician order dated June 2, 2026, revealed an order Quetiapine Fumarate (Atypical anti-psychotic) Oral Tablet 25 mg 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for anxiety A review of Resident 15's Medication Administration Records and progress notes medication revealed side effects were not monitored since the Quetiapine Fumarate medication started on March 12, 2026. A review of Resident 17's physician order dated August 28, 2025,…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-12 · 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 records review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for three of the 35 residents reviewed (Residents 2,3, and 283). Findings Include: Review of Resident 2 progress note on 4/15/2026 at 12:47 nursing note stated Resident 2 sustained a witnessed fall after breakfast at 9:2am. [NAME] did strike her head, and she landed on her L hip after the fall. Further review of Resident 2 progress note on 4/18/2026 at 11:38 nurses note stated: Resident Xray results received after rereading DX:Acute left sub capital femur fracture with impaction (broken left side of your thighbone). Md notified and recommended for resident to be sent to hospital. Resident sent to Phoenixville Hospital. Daughter contacted but no answer. Brother contacted and aware of situation. A review of Resident 2's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS- A standardized assessment tool that measures health status in long-term care residents) MDS is…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-12 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, resident and staff interviews and review of resident clinical records it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living for 1 of thirty-five residents reviewed (Resident 99).Findings include:Facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), last reviewed December 2024, notes it is the policy of the facility to understand the principals of quality of life, and honor and support these principals for each resident, and that the care and services provided are person centered, and honor and support each resident's preferences, choices, values and beliefs. The facility will provide care and services for hygiene-bathing, and toileting care.Resident 99 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with medical diagnoses that include Parkinsons's Disease (movement disorder of the nervous system), difficulty walking, need for assistance with personal care, unsteadiness on feet, and abnormality of gait (deviation from normal walking…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physicians' orders for three of 24 sampled residents (Residents R1, R16, R56 and R262). Findings include: Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed an admission date of April 27, 2026. Clinical record review revealed that Resident R1's had diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, unspecified (COPD, a condition caused by damage to the lungs resulting in swelling and irritation, also called inflammation, inside the airways that limit airflow into and out of the lungs), dependence on supplemental oxygen, psychosis (collection of symptoms that disrupt a person's thoughts and perceptions, making it difficult to distinguish what is real from what is not), and major depressive disorder, recurrent, moderate (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed a physician order stating, Ear mates to oxygen tubing at all times to help relieve pressure, with a…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, clinical records review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow a wound treatment order correctly and in a timely manner for one of ten residents reviewed (Resident 259).Findings: A review of Resident 259's active care plan revealed the resident was at risk for skin integrity impairment related to immobility and incontinence. The interventions, including an air mattress, repositioning, and treatment as ordered, were put in place. Additional interventions include applying Calamine-Zinc Oxide External Lotion, applied to the buttocks topically every day and evening shift for protectant (Dermaseptin ointment- A soothing skin protectant used to treat and prevent minor skin irritations by creating a protective, moisture-repelling barrier). A review of the nursing progress notes dated April 1, 2026, at 2:32 p.m., revealed the resident was observed with a new skin area of concern to the sacrum a large, (triangular bone located at the base of the spine, just below the lumbar vertebrae and between the hip bones), a DTI (Deep Tissue…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-12 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure proper monitoring of fluid restrictions for two of three residents reviewed for nutrition/hydration needs (Resident 108, and Resident 259). Findings: Review of facility policy, titled Restricting Fluids last revised November 11, 2025, documents the purpose of this procedure is to provide the resident with the amount of fluids necessary to maintain optimum health. A review of the facility's policy titled Weight Assessment and Intervention, last revised on March 11, 2025, revealed that weights will be measured monthly unless discontinued by the physician. Significant weight changes are defined as more or less than 5% within 30 days; more or less than 7.5% over 3 months, and more or less than 10% within 6 months. I the weight change meets the definition of Significant, the Dietitian should discuss with the IDCP team and make recommendations. The resident's physician will be made aware of the weight loss. Review of Resident 108's medical diagnoses revealed…

  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 no plan of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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 89% 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 $986K 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