No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health Care Center

121 Walnut Bottom Road, Shippensburg, PA 17257 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 125 certified beds · (717) 530-8300 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (717) 530-8300 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Aug 2023
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • 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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Urgent care / clinic
127 Walnut Bottom Rd · (717) 988-9015 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walmart0.3 mi
100 S Conestoga Dr · (717) 532-2410 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Aldi0.3 mi
40 Shippensburg Shopping Ctr · (855) 955-2534 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased19.5%16.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.5%6.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.2%1.5%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%10.8%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.6%3.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened19.7%17.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.3%20.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine91.7%93.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.7%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.6%25.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.3%17.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.6%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine81.5%68.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission36.4%22.5%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.4%9.5%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.201.621.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.661.181.80typical

§ 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.

58.7% 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 118 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

58.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.22U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.6% 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 33 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 28% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF58.7%CMS range 47.0–64.351.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.7%CMS range 6.6–13.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge57.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge54.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge54.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified98.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting95.2%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 dischargenot 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 stay1.9%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 3.8–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.841.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.52
RN hours/ resident / day
0.76
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.28
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.56
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.30
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 125 beds and averages 109.8 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 15 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 3.56 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.28 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.65 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-23)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2025-05-16)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-23 · tag F0699 — pattern
    Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents who are trauma survivors receive culturally competent, trauma-informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for two of two residents reviewed (Residents 3 and 35).Findings Include: Facility policy, titled Trauma Informed Care, reviewed February 2026, read, in part, Policy: .Residents who display or are diagnosed with a mental disorder, psychosocial adjustment difficulty, and/or PTSD will be provided with appropriate treatment and services to attain the highest practicable level of mental and psychosocial wellbeing.Procedure: . 7. When a resident has experienced a traumatic event, the SW (social worder) will interview resident/resident representative regarding: Potential/actual triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident. Review of Resident 3's clinical record revealed diagnoses that included Post-Traumatic…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for two of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 6 and 35).Findings Include: Review of Resident 6's clinical record revealed diagnoses that included gastro esophageal reflux disease ([GERD] when stomach acid flows back up into the esophagus) and major depressive disorder (a serious, common mood disorder characterized by persistent sadness, loss of interest, and fatigue, lasting at least two weeks and impairing daily life). Review of Resident 6's quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set is part of federally mandated process for clinical assessment of all Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes) dated March 25, 2026, indicated in Section N0415 High-Risk Drug Classes: Use and Indication, section E, indicated that Resident 6 had taken an anticoagulant during the look-back period. Review of Resident 6's clinical record failed to reveal any evidence…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the care plan was reviewed and revised for three of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 3, 11, and 28).Findings include: Review of facility policy, titled Care Plans-Comprehensive, with a last review date of February 2026, revealed, in part, The resident's comprehensive care plan is developed within seven days of the completion of the resident's comprehensive assessment (MDS). Assessments of residents are ongoing, and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the resident's condition changes. Review of Resident 3's clinical record revealed that she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD-a disorder in which a person has difficulty recovering after experiencing or witnessing a terrifying event with triggers that can bring back memories of the trauma accompanied by intense emotional and physical…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure care and services are provided in accordance with professional standards of practice that will meet each resident's physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for two of two residents reviewed (Residents 1 and 2). Findings include:Review of facility policy, titled Administering Medications, read, in part, Policy Interpretation and Implementation: . 3. Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders, including any required time frame.8. The following information must be checked/verified for each resident prior to administering medications.b. Vital signs, if necessary.Review of Resident 1's clinical record revealed diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease (neurodegenerative disorder causing motor issues) and hypertension (high blood pressure).Review of Resident 1's physician orders revealed the following orders:Lisinopril (antihypertension medication) 2.5 milligrams (mg) one tablet in the morning for hypertension. Give if systolic blood…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-02 · tag F0559 — isolated
    Honor 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

    Based on review of facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that in preparation for a room change, each resident received written notice, including the reason for the change, before the resident's room was changed for one of three residents reviewed (Residents 1). Findings include: Review of facility policy, titled Change of Room or Roommate, stated, 4. Prior to making a room change or roommate assignment, all persons involved in the change/assignment, such as resident and their representatives, will be given advance notice of such a change as in possible. Parties can be notified either in person, via telephone or in writing.Review of Resident 1's clinical revealed diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease (neurodegenerative disorder causing motor issues) and dementia (progressive decline in memory, thinking, and behavior).Review of Resident 1's clinical record progress notes revealed a note dated January 6, 2026, at 11:01 AM, that indicated Employee 1 (Social Services Coordinator) informed Resident 1'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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-05-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, observations, review of select facility temperature logs, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store food and utilize equipment in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the main kitchen and two of two nourishment areas. Findings include: Review of facility policy, titled Food Storage last reviewed April 4, 2025, read, in part, Food will be purchased in quantities that can be stored properly and arranged in food groups for organized storage and inventory. All stock must be rotated with each new order received. Food should be dated as it is placed on the shelves if required by state regulation. All containers or storage bags must be legible and accurately labeled and dated. Scoops should be kept covered in a protected area near the containers rather than in the containers. Thermometers should be checked at least two times each day. Refrigerators/freezers on nursing units should be supplied with thermometers and monitored for appropriate temperatures. All foods should be covered, labeled and…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-16 · 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 and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement resident-directed care and treatment consistent with the resident's physician orders and care plan for one of 21 residents reviewed (Resident 76). Findings include: Review of Resident 76's clinical record revealed diagnoses that included congestive heart failure (CHF- a condition characterized by a gradual loss of kidney function), atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm), and hyperlipidemia (high blood cholesterol). Review of Resident 76's physician orders revealed an order for Daily weights. Notify doctor and give PRN (as needed) Lasix (diuretic- a medication that increases urine production and excretion of water) if weight gain > or = 2 lbs (pounds) in 1 day or 5lbs in a week, in the morning related to CHF, with a start date of September 22, 2023. Further review of Resident 76's physician orders revealed an order for Lasix Oral Tablet 40 MG, Give 0.5 tablet by mouth every 24 hours as needed for Weight gain, give for weight gain of 2 pounds in 1 day or 5 pounds in 1…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0868 — isolated
    Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on facility document review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Committee failed to meet on a quarterly basis for one quarter of four reviewed (first quarter of 2025). Findings include: Review of the facility's Quality Assurance Committee meeting signatory pages revealed that the facility's Quality Assurance Committee did not meet during the first quarter of year 2025 (January, February, and March). During a staff interview on May 15, 2025, at approximately 10:20 AM, Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that it was the facility's expectation that the Quality Assurance Committee meets at least once every quarter. 28 Pa code 201.18(b)(3) Management

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for two of 26 residents reviewed (Resident 9 and 26). Findings Include: Review of Resident 9's clinical record revealed diagnoses that included obstructive sleep apnea (characterized by episodes of a complete [apnea] or partial collapse [hypopnea] of the upper airway with an associated decrease in oxygen saturation or arousal from sleep) and seizures (a burst of uncontrolled electrical activity between brain cells). Review of Resident 9's quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set is part of federally mandated process for clinical assessment of all Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes) dated April 4, 2024, revealed in Section O0110. Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs, G1. Non-invasive Mechanical Ventilator, that Resident 9 did not use a non-invasive mechanical ventilator during the previous 14 days. 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy review, observation, clinical record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the care plan was reviewed and revised for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident 8). Findings include: Based on facility policy, titled Care Plan Policy, not dated, read, in part, Changes in the resident's condition must be reported to the MDS Assessment Coordinator (Minimum Data Set - an assessment tool to review all care areas specific to the resident such as a resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial needs) so that a review of the resident assessment and care plan should be made. Review of Resident 8's clinical record revealed diagnoses that included difficulty in walking and muscle weakness. Review of Resident 8's clinical record on June 11, 2024, at 9:28 AM, revealed she was discharged to the hospital on May 1, 2024, and returned to the facility on May 2, 2024. Observation of Resident 8 on June 11, 2024, at 09:49 AM, revealed her face was heavily bruised. Interview with Resident 8 on June 11, 2024, at 09:52 AM,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure care and services are provided in accordance with professional standards of practice that will meet each resident's physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident 100). Findings include: Review of Resident 100's clinical record revealed that they were admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included hypertension (high blood pressure), dementia (a chronic disorder of the mental processes caused by brain disease, and marked by memory disorders, personality changes, and impaired reasoning), and presence of cardiac pacemaker (an artificial device for stimulating the heart muscle and regulating its contractions). Observation of Resident 100 on June 10, 2024, at 10:19 AM, revealed a pacemaker monitoring device (a device used by a cardiologist [heart specialist] to perform an electronic periodic pacemaker function test) that was noted to be plugged…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0699 — isolated
    Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, clinical record review, and Resident Responsible Party and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents who are trauma survivors received culturally competent, trauma-informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for one of two residents reviewed (Resident 91). Findings include: Review of facility policy, titled Policy and Procedure Trauma Informed Care, last revised April 15, 2024, read, in part: Residents who display or are diagnosed with a mental disorder, psychosocial adjustment difficulty, and/or PTSD [Post Traumatic Stress Disorder] will be provided with appropriate treatment and services to attain the highest practicable level of mental and psychosocial wellbeing. Procedure . 7. When a Resident has experienced a traumatic event, The Social worker will interview the resident/resident representative regarding…

    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 · E2023-08-17 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on personnel file review, facility policy review, job descriptions, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures by not completing criminal background checks prior to hire for five of five personnel records reviewed (Employees 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8); and verifying professional licensure for three of three personnel records reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility's current policy, titled Abuse Prevention & Reporting Policy revealed in the section, titled Policy Statement that the facility will comply with all Federal, State, and local regulations regarding the prevention, recognition, and reporting of abuse, neglect, and/or misappropriation of property. Review of section of the policy, titled Procedure indicated 1) Individuals functioning in an 'employee' status .will have a State Criminal Background Check completed at the time of employment; and 2) [in part] Persons hired as part of the professional staff .are required to have and maintain a valid current license or certification .and must submit a copy 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
SHIPPENSBURG OPCO HOLDCO, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/01/2022
BL PANHO TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/01/2022
MLSPA LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/01/2022
MLSPA TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/01/2022
MVRK I LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/01/2022
PANHO CAPITAL GROUP LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/01/2022
GOTTESMAN, DANIELIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/01/2022
KOLMAN, ROBERTIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICERNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/01/2022
COTTLE, LARRYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 06/01/2022
PREMIER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$13.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.2M
Related-party expense9% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 79%Medicare 7%Other / private 14%

About 79% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$312per resident / day
operating cost
$9,487per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$307per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Pennsylvania
$11,954/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$13,688/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,480/mo
Assisted living

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 395964. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-23, 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.

What to do next