Spruce Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

32.0% 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 50 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 35.5% 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 62 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 184 beds and averages 171.8 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 12 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 3.23 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.93 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.95 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.34 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.17 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 25% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

• Potential for harm · E2026-04-24 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment on four of four nursing units. (West 1, East 1, [NAME] 2, and East 2)Findings include: Observations on April 21, 2026, and April 22, 2026, between 8:40 a.m., and 12:50 p.m., revealed the following: The Hoyer lift in the [NAME] 1 shower room had rust along the length of the legs. There were two ceiling tiles with brown spots above the bed in room [ROOM NUMBER]. In room [ROOM NUMBER], the blinds on the window across from the toilet were not adjustable, exposing three inches of open window space, thereby making the toilet visible from the street across from the facility; the toilet also had worn caulking. The privacy curtain in room [ROOM NUMBER], bed 1, had a dark brown mark on it. There was peeling paint in room [ROOM NUMBER] behind bed 2. On East 1, in room [ROOM NUMBER], the privacy curtain of bed 1 had brown stains on it. On [NAME] 2, in room [ROOM NUMBER], there were various areas of the…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from potential chemical restraints for one of five sampled residents who were ordered psychotropic medications. (Resident 80)Findings include:Clinical record review revealed that Resident 80 had diagnoses that included anxiety and dementia. On March 17, 2026, a physician ordered staff to administer an anti-anxiety medication, (lorazepam), every two hours as needed for anxiety. There was no date in the order that indicated when staff were to stop administering the as needed medication. Review of Resident 80's Medication Administration Record revealed that staff had administered the lorazepam one time in March 2026 and five times in April 2026. There was no documented evidence that the physician had re-evaluated continued use beyond 14 days of the as needed anti-anxiety medication. In an interview on April 24, 2026, at 11:00 a.m., the Director of Nursing stated that there was no date that indicated when staff were to stop administering the as needed…

  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
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed to accurately reflect the current status of two of 37 sampled residents. (Residents 7 and 145)Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 7 had diagnoses that included dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and parasomnia (a disruptive sleep disorder involving abnormal behaviors such as sleepwalking, talking, or night terrors that occur while falling asleep, during sleep, or upon waking). Review of Resident 7's care plan revealed that the resident had known PTSD and night terrors. The MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed that section I (Active Diagnoses) incorrectly indicated that the resident did not have a diagnosis of PTSD during the review period. In an interview on April 24, 2026, at 11:48 a.m., the Administrator confirmed that Resident 7's MDS assessment was inaccurate. Clinical record review revealed that…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  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 staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide services consistent with professional standards, including monitoring, for one of two sampled residents receiving dialysis (the process of removing excess toxins and water from the blood). (Resident 150) Findings include:A review of the policy, Hemodialysis Care Policy, last reviewed January 23, 2026, revealed that communication between the dialysis provider and facility staff will occur before and after each hemodialysis treatment and as needed. Facility staff were to assess each resident's condition and communicate any concerns with the dialysis provider using the facility's Dialysis Communication Tool. Assessments were to include: the resident's vital signs, pre-treatment weight, medications administered before treatment, time of last meal, fluid intake, and any additional alerts. After treatment, the facility was to collect and assess information about the resident and their…

  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 · D2026-04-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP), use personal protective equipment (PPE), and perform hand hygiene to prevent the spread of infection for one of 37 sampled residents. (Resident 14)Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions Policy, last reviewed January 23, 2026, revealed that EBP were to be used with any high-risk resident with a wound or indwelling device during high contact care activities including during wound care, dressing, bathing/showering, transferring, providing hygiene, toileting, device care or use, and changing briefs and linens. EBP included the use of PPE such as protective gowns and gloves during high-risk activities. Review of the facility policy entitled Clean Dressing Change Policy, last reviewed January 23, 2026, revealed that wounds were to be dressed using clean technique which avoids direct…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop or implement a comprehensive care plan that addressed individual resident needs as identified in the comprehensive assessment for two of 36 sampled residents. (Residents 36 and 82) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 36 had diagnoses that included depression, dementia, anxiety, and hallucinations. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Care Area Assessment (CAA) summary dated August 2, 2024, noted that the resident's psychotropic medication was to be addressed in the care plan. An MDS summary dated January 20, 2025, noted that the resident's psychiatric disorders continued. There was no evidence that interventions to address Resident's 36's psychotropic medication were included in the current care plan. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 82 had dementia, depression, and partial blindness. The MDS CAA summary dated December 4, 2024, noted that the resident's psychotropic medication and vision were to be addressed in the care plan. There…

  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 · D2024-04-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and services to restore bladder continence to the extent possible for one of two sampled residents who had urine incontinence. (Resident 92) Findings include: Review of facility policy entitled, Policy Continence Management Program, last reviewed February 16, 2024, revealed that upon admission the nurse was to interview the resident and review any underlying conditions that may affect the resident's ability to participate in a continence management program. Staff was to identify candidates for a bladder incontinence program who required limited to extensive assistance in toilet use and could benefit from a prompted or scheduled toileting plan. A continence evaluation was to be conducted to determine if a 72 hour bowel and bladder tracking was indicated for the resident. If the tracking was indicated, the licensed nurse was to instruct the nursing assistants to fill…

  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 · D2024-04-12 · 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

  Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized person-centered plan to render trauma-informed care to a resident with a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder for one of 33 sampled residents. (Resident 8) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 8 had diagnoses that included post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and major depressive disorder. Review of a psychiatric consultation dated January 29, 2024, revealed that Resident 8 stated there was a history of trauma related to emotional abuse. There was no assessment or care plan in Resident 8's clinical record that identified the PTSD diagnosis, symptoms or triggers related to this diagnosis, or resident-specific interventions to meet the resident's needs for minimizing triggers and/or re-traumatization. In an interview on April 12, 2024, at 10:40 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that there was no assessment completed or care plan developed to address Resident 8's PTSD diagnosis, symptoms, or…

  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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 29 rows in the source record cover these 19 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 92% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in PA