Pinecrest Manor
763 Johnsonburg Rd, St Marys, PA 15857 · Non profit - Corporation · 138 certified beds · (814) 788-8488 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- 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
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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 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.
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 | 19.8% | 16.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.7% | 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 | 0.3% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.1% | 10.8% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.8% | 3.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 25.9% | 17.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.4% | 20.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.6% | 4.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.3% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.5% | 17.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.7% | 68.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.5% | 22.5% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.8% | 9.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.82 | 1.62 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.55 | 1.18 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
37.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 69 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 46.7% 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 30 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
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 | 37.5%CMS range 28.4–49.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.0%CMS range 7.3–14.5 | 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 | 46.7% | 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 | 36.7% | 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 | 40.0% | 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 | 93.2% | 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 | 4.5% | 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 | 5.5%CMS range 2.8–10.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.16 | 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 138 beds and averages 106.1 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 32 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.82 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.98 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 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 3.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.07 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.13 to 0.61 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-30 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure 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 review of clinical records and Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care), and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that MDS assessments accurately reflected the status of five of 24 residents reviewed (Residents R94, R30, R105, R70, and R42).Findings include: MDS instructions for section J Health Conditions, Subsection J1800 Any Falls Since Admission/Entry or Reentry or Prior Assessment indicated Has the resident had any falls since admission/entry or reentry or the prior assessment whichever is more recent? MDS instructions for section K0300 indicated that if weight loss of five percent or more in the last month or loss of 10 percent or more in the last six months to code yes. The MDS instructions further indicated to calculate 10 % weight loss in 180 days, start with the resident's weight closest to 180 days ago. MDS instructions for section PO200 revealed to identify all alarms that were…
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 before2026-01-30 · 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
Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident R7).Findings include: Review of facility policy dated 11/18/25, entitled Care Plans: Interdisciplinary indicated the purpose is to provide a comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs that are identified including those identified in the comprehensive assessment. The policy further stated that care plans will be reviewed quarterly and for significant changes and hospital returns as well as staff updating as required between care plan conferences. Resident R7's clinical record revealed an admission date of 5/29/29, with diagnoses that included diabetes (a health condition caused by the body's inability to produce enough insulin), Atrial Fibrillation (A-Fib - irregular and often rapid heartbeat that can lead to stroke, heart failure, and other complications), and Schizoaffective Disorder )a mental…
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 before2026-01-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy and drug manufacturer instructions, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to appropriately date and store medications in one of four medication carts reviewed (C Hall Medication Cart). Findings include: Review of facility policy dated 11/18/25, entitled Pharmaceutical Services and Medication Storage revealed the facility must adhere to all relevant state, federal, and local regulations, included those from the Department of Health, Food and Drug Administration, and Drug Enforcement Agency and State Boards of Pharmacy regarding the storage, handling, and administration of all medications. Manufacturer's guidelines for Trelegy Ellipta (medication used to treat Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease [COPD - a condition that prevents airflow to the lungs resulting in difficulty breathing] and Asthma [a long-term inflammatory disease of the airways that cause the airways to narrow and swell causing symptoms such as wheezing, coughing, chest tightness, and shortness of breath], indicated that Trelegy should 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 · Ecited before2025-02-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store schedule II-V medications in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment in three of four medication rooms reviewed (A/B, C/D and E/F); the facility failed to prevent the opportunity for potential unauthorized access of medications on two of four medication carts observed (D and F); and the facility failed to appropriately discard outdated medications for one of four medication carts reviewed (E wing). Findings include: Review of facility policy entitled Narcotic Policy PCM dated 2/06/25, revealed Schedule II-V medications are stored in a permanently affixed, double-locked compartment separate from all other medications. Review of facility policy entitled Medication cart: Med Pass Guidelines dated 2/06/25, revealed that Multi-dose vials such as insulin must have either opened on date or used by date which should be checked prior to administration. Review of facility policy entitled Pharmaceutical Services and Medication Storage dated 2/06/25,…
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 before2025-02-13 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to initiate a baseline care plan for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident R99). Findings include: A facility policy entitled, Care Plan: Baseline (IPOC) dated 2/06/25, revealed Baseline PCM IPOC will be entered and developed for each resident within 48 hours. Resident R99 's clinical record revealed an admission date of 1/09/25, with diagnoses that included diabetes, high blood pressure, anemia, and acute kidney injury. Resident R99 's clinical record lacked evidence that a baseline care plan was initiated for Resident R99. During an interview on 2/12/25, at 1:00 p.m. the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the clinical record of Resident R99 lacked evidence that a baseline care plan was initiated. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing services
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-13 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolatedProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on reveiew of clinical records, observations and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to promote the physical and mental well-being and meet the needs of seven of 23 residents interviewed (Residents R80, R12, R34, R37, R93, R79, and R51). Findings include: Independent interview on 2/10/25, at 4:13 p.m. revealed that Resident R51 disclosed that he/she cannot walk, uses an electric wheelchair for mobility, and requires a mechanical lift to transfer. Resident R51 shared that there are times (especially on off shifts and weekends) when he/she waits on the toilet for an hour to get help, and that he/she has waited so long to get to the bathroom, he/she soiled his/her clothing. Resident R51 also stated that staff will come in and turn off the bell, and not return. Interviews during the Resident Council meeting on 2/11/25, between 1:00 p.m. and 2:15 p.m. revealed that six out of six alert and oriented residents were in attendance (Residents R80, R12, R34, R37, R93, and R79) and reported concerns related to staff…
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 · D2025-02-13 · 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 observations, review of clinical records and facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent the potential for cross contamination (the spreading of germs/microorganisms from one surface to another) during wound care for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident R13). Findings include: A facility policy entitled, Handwashing and Hand Hygiene dated 2/06/25, revealed that hand hygiene be performed after handling soiled equipment and after removing gloves. Resident R13's clinical record revealed an admission date of 3/15/22, with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Disease (brain condition that causes a progressive decline in memory, thinking, learning and organizing skills), Venous stasis (a condition that occurs when blood doesn't flow properly from the legs back to the heart), and congestive heart failure (CHF- long-term condition that happens when your heart can't pump blood well enough to give your body a normal supply). Observation of wound care on 2/12/25, at 9:27 a.m. revealed the following: Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)…
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 before2024-03-14 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to initiate a baseline care plan for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident R201) and failed to provide a written summary of the baseline care plan and order summary to the resident and/or representative for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident R99). Findings include: A facility policy entitled, Care Plan: Baseline (IPOC) dated 2/21/24, stated Baseline PCM IPOC will be entered and developed for each resident within 48 hours. Resident R201 's clinical record revealed an admission date of 2/27/24, with diagnoses that included diabetes, high blood pressure, and peripheral arterial disease (narrowing of arteries, usually in the leg that result in reduced blood flow). Resident R201 's clinical record lacked evidence that a baseline care plan was initiated for Resident R201. During an interview on 3/13/24, at 1:23 p.m. the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the clinical record of Resident R201 lacked evidence that a baseline care plan was initiated. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-14 · 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
Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident R7). Findings include: Review of facility policy entitled Care Plan: Interdisciplinary dated 2/21/24, stated the purpose is to Provide a comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs that are identified including those identified in the comprehensive assessment, and formulate individualized treatment plans that promote maximum functioning and well-being and Nursing staff must notify RNAC (Registered Nurse Assessment Coordinator) of changes that could initiate new or additional care plans. Resident R7's clinical record revealed an admission date of 3/15/21, with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Dementia (a group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking, and social abilities), Seizures, and High Blood Pressure. Resident R7's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 5/30/23 indicating…
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 before2024-03-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy and manufacturer's instructions, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications were properly dated when opened and discarded in a timely manner for one of two medication rooms observed (Unit A/B medication room). Findings include: Review of facility policy entitled PPD [solution used for tuberculosis testing upon admission and for employment], Administration dated 2/21/24, revealed Discard bottle 30 days after opened. Review of manufacturer's recommendations for Tubersol PPD indicated that vials which are entered and in use for 30 days should be discarded. Observation of drug storage on 3/13/24, at approximately 11:12 a.m. in Unit A/B medication storage room refrigerator revealed and an opened vial of Tubersol PPD without an open date, therefore the staff were unable to determine the discard date. During an interview at that time, Licensed Practical Nurse Employee E2 confirmed that the opened Tubersol PPD vial lacked an open date and staff were unable to determine the discard date. 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.
“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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOLDEN, MEGAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 08/01/2015 |
| STRISHOCK, JOURDAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 08/01/2021 |
| SCHNEIDER, HEATHER | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2020 |
| BASSI, BRADLEY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 10/01/2021 |
| BELCZYK, CARLYN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 10/01/2021 |
| CARNEVALE, THOMAS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2021 |
| CONRAD, DONALD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2021 |
| DEVLIN, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| ELKASSAS, HAZEM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2020 |
| FORADORA, SCOTT | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2020 |
| KIEFER, LAWRENCE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| LEWIS, SAMUEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 02/01/2021 |
| LEZZER, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2021 |
| MCGINLEY, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 10/01/2021 |
| O'LEARY, ROBERT | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2021 |
| ORDIWAY, ROBERT | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2019 |
| PFINGSTLER, RICHARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2021 |
| PRICE, FRED | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| RYAN, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2020 |
| RYAN, JOANNE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| STOLTZ, TODD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| YOUNG, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2021 |
| PENN HIGHLANDS HEALTHCARE, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 10/01/2013 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 24 rows in the source record cover these 23 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner 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.
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 395279. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-30, 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.