Allied Services Center City Skilled Nursing
80 E. Northampton Street, Wilkes Barre, PA 18701 · Non profit - Corporation · 92 certified beds · (570) 826-1031 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 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 | 4 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 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.0% | 16.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 12.8% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.7% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.7% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 10.8% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.0% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.9% | 17.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.3% | 20.0% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.8% | 4.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 39.6% | 25.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.5% | 17.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 68.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.4% | 22.5% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.7% | 9.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.53 | 1.62 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.14 | 1.18 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
47.2% 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 132 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 29.0% 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 107 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 47.2%CMS range 37.8–53.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.3%CMS range 7.8–14.8 | 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 | 29.0% | 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 | 39.2% | 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 | 32.7% | 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 | 92.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 85.4% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 97.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 2.4% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.3%CMS range 4.1–9.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 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 92 beds and averages 79.3 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 13 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 4.17 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.70 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.43 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 3.85 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.31 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.80 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-14 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of select facility policy, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents had reasonable and safe access to operate their over-the-bed lighting for four residents out of 21 residents reviewed (Residents 32, 50, 9, and 41). Findings include: The facility policy titled Environment last reviewed by the facility on October 1, 2025, indicated that the facility shall provide extra lighting to provide sufficient light to assist residents with tasks such as reading, and provide lighting for residents who need to find their way from the bed to the bathroom at night. During observations conducted on November 13, 2025, at 9:45 AM, it was noted that Residents 32, 41 and 9 had over-the-bed lighting fixtures; however, each fixture had a pull cord measuring two inches in length, making the light inaccessible to residents. An interview with Resident 41during the observation revealed that she was unable to reach the over-the-bed light while in bed or while seated in the wheelchair. She stated, I would really like…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-14 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to timely identify weight loss, failed to ensure weekly weights were obtained as required by policy for prompt intervention for two of 21 sampled residents (Residents 15 and 22), and failed to implement individualized nutritional support measures based on a resident's stated preferences to maintain or improve nutritional parameters for one resident (Resident 8) out of three sampled residents for weight loss. Findings include: A review of the facility's policy titled Weighing Residents/Reporting Significant Weight Changes, last reviewed by the facility on October 1, 2025, revealed it is the facility policy to monitor weights on all residents. The policy indicated the facility will investigate, report, and appropriately intervene when a weight change occurs that may impact the residents' well-being. Further review of the policy revealed the facility will obtain residents'…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-14 · tag F0694 — patternProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide person-centered care as prescribed to meet the current clinical needs and failed to follow physician orders for the management of a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) line for three of 21 sampled residents (Residents 12, 75, and 76). Findings include: A review of the facility policy entitled Central Venous Catheter/PICC Care/Flush/Medication Administration, last reviewed October 1, 2025, indicated the facility is to provide dressing changes, medication, and flushes to residents with a PICC line access (a thin flexible tube that is inserted into a large vein to the heart to deliver medications and other therapies into the bloodstream) and that all residents with a PICC lines will have emergency care measures in place in the event of line breakage or dislodgement. Dressing changes are to be made weekly and as needed with the extension tubing, if…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-14 · 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 observation, review of select facility policy, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to implement and adhere to procedures to ensure acceptable storage for medications on one of three nursing units (Nursing Unit 3).Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Disposition of Medications: Discontinued Medications, last reviewed by the facility on October 1, 2025, revealed it is the policy of the facility that under circumstances where medications are discontinued by physician order, a resident is transferred or discharged and does not take medications with him or her, or in the event of a resident's death, the medications are marked as discontinued with a label closure. Medications can be disposed of on-site with a witness and completion of the medication disposition form or returned to the pharmacy for disposal with that document. The facility policy indicated medications awaiting disposal or return are stored in a locked secure area designated for that purpose until destroyed or picked up for destruction by the pharmacy. An observation on…
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 before2025-11-14 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to consistently implement measures planned to prevent the development of pressure sores for one resident out of 21 residents sampled (Resident 76).Findings include: According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality, the pressure ulcer best practice bundle incorporates three critical components in preventing pressure ulcers: comprehensive skin assessment, standardized pressure ulcer risk assessment, and care planning and implementation to address the areas of risk. The American College of Physicians (ACP) is a national organization of internists who specialize in the diagnosis, treatment, and care of adults. The largest medical specialty organization and second-largest physician group in the United States, Clinical Practice Guidelines indicate that the treatment of pressure ulcers should involve multiple tactics aimed at…
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 before2025-11-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, review of select facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to consistently provide restorative nursing services as planned to maintain mobility to the extent possible for one resident out of 21 residents sampled (Resident 2). Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Restorative Nursing Program, last reviewed by the facility on October 1, 2025, revealed it is the facility's policy to assist residents in maintaining or achieving the highest level of functioning through the intervention of restorative nursing. The policy indicates therapy will develop and recommend a plan of care, certified nursing aides are responsible for ensuring the program is performed per the plan of care, and the restorative nurse or designee will be responsible for overseeing the restorative aides. A clinical record review revealed that Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include chronic kidney failure (gradual…
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 · D2025-11-14 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, select facility policy, controlled substance records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician orders, complete timely pain assessments, implement measures to reduce or alleviate pain, reassess the effectiveness of pain interventions within a reasonable time frame, and accurately document these activities in the clinical record for three of 21 sampled residents (Residents 15, 45, and 23). Findings include:A review of the facility's policy entitled Pain Management Process, last reviewed by the facility on October 1, 2025, indicated that the facility was to ensure resident comfort and that documentation of assessments, interventions, and outcomes utilized to control pain would be established. Resident pain levels are to be assessed by staff utilizing a numeric pain scale. Residents who can verbalize their degree of pain would be directed to provide a numerical number between zero and ten. Zero (0) would indicate no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 a review of clinical records, select facility policy, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier infection control procedures for three residents out of the 21 residents sampled (Residents 28, 33, and 56) and failed to properly store resident hygiene and personal products in two out of three resident shower rooms (3rd and 4th floor shower rooms). Findings include: A review of facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, last reviewed by the facility on December 30, 2024, revealed it is the facility policy to expand the use of personal protective equipment and refer to the use of gowns and gloves during high-contact resident care activities that provided opportunities for transfer of multi-drug resistant organisms (MDROs) to staff hands and clothing. The policy indicates nursing home residents with wounds and indwelling medical devices are especially high risk for both the acquisition of and colonization with MDROs. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-10 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 a review of clinical records, the Resident Assessment Instrument, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set Assessments accurately reflected the status of three residents out of 21 sampled (Residents 34, 8, and 31). Findings include: According to the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual (an assessment tool utilized to gather definitive information on a resident's strengths and needs, which must be addressed in an individualized care plan, and the RAI also assists staff to evaluate goal achievement and revise care plans accordingly by enabling the facility to track changes in the resident's status) dated October 2024, Section K0300 Weight Loss the facility is to record loss of 5% or more in the last month or loss of 10% or more in the last 6 months. A clinical record review revealed Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS- a federally mandated standardized assessment…
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 · D2025-01-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, a review of clinical records, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide person-centered care by failing to follow physician's orders for the consistent application of a prescribed therapeutic measure, compression stockings, for one resident of 21 sampled (Resident 22). Findings include: A review of Resident 22's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of cerebral infarction (a pathological process, also known as ischemic stroke, the result of disrupted blood flow to the brain) and essential hypertension (high blood pressure). A review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted periodically to plan resident care) dated December 23, 2024, revealed that Resident 22 is cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 14 (Brief Interview for Mental Status- a tool within the Cognitive Section of the MDS that is used to assess the resident'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.
Show the remaining 10 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-10 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, facility-provided manufacturers' medication information, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to demonstrate the physician timely acted upon irregularities identified by pharmacy services during drug regimen reviews for one resident out of the five sampled (Resident 56). Findings include: A clinical record review revealed Resident 56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included osteomyelitis (a bone infection) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD- a digestive disorder that occurs when stomach acid flows into the esophagus). A clinical record review revealed a pharmacy note to the attending physician or prescriber dated November 4, 2024, indicating that Resident 56 was prescribed sucralfate (an antiulcer medication) one gram every six hours for GERD. The note indicated the medication is usually administered on an empty stomach prior to meals and/or bedtimes to assure disintegration in the stomach acid and binding to…
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 · E2024-03-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, a review of clinical records, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care in a manner and environment that promotes each resident's quality of life by failing to respond timely to residents' requests for assistance, including experiences reported by three of the five residents attending a group meeting (Residents 1, 7, and 23) and two out of the 17 residents sampled (Residents 13 and 23). Findings include: A clinical record review revealed that Resident 13 had diagnoses, which included congestive heart failure (a chronic condition in which the heart does not pump enough blood). A review of the resident's annual Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted periodically to plan resident care) dated January 22, 2024, indicated that Resident 13 is moderately cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 10 (Brief Interview for Mental Status- a tool within the Cognitive Section of the MDS that is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-07 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide housekeeping and maintenance services to maintain a clean environment on one of two nursing units (Nursing Unit 2). Findings include: An observation in resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on March 5, 2024, at 10:26 AM revealed a 2-inch brown/tan stain on the wall in the resident's bathroom, near the call bell and several brown/tan substance droplets on the wall to the left of the call bell. Brown/red stains were observed on the floor to the left of the toilet. A buildup of dirt and debris was observed along the edge of the bathroom floor. An observation in resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on March 5, 2024, at 10:35 AM revealed tan discolored rings on two ceiling blocks with and a black and gray substance on one ceiling block An observation in resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on March 5, 2024, at 10:40 AM revealed tan discolored stains on nine ceiling blocks. An observation in resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on March 5, 2024, at 10:55 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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-07 · tag F0622 — patternNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records and a staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider for four transferred residents out of five sampled residents (Residents 11, 13, 36, and 45). Findings include: A review of Resident 36's clinical record revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital on September 16, 2023, and returned to the facility on September 17, 2023. A review of Resident 11's clinical record revealed that the resident was transferred and admitted to the hospital on [DATE], and returned to the facility on September 22, 2023. A review of Resident 13's clinical record revealed the resident was transferred from the facility and admitted to the hospital on [DATE], and returned to the facility on January 15, 2024. A review of Resident 45's clinical record revealed the resident was transferred from the facility and admitted to the hospital on [DATE], and returned to the facility on…
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 · E2024-03-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 select facility policy and controlled drug records, observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate medication administration, and records accounting for controlled drugs for one of three residents sampled (Resident 57), and reconciliation of controlled drugs on three of three medication carts (4th, 2 east, and 2 west). Finding include: A review of the facility policy Medication storage, controlled medication last reviewed by the facility [DATE], indicated that at each shift change, a physical inventory of all controlled medications is conducted by two licensed nurses and is documented on the controlled substances accountability record. Observation of the medication administration pass, on [DATE], at approximately 9:50 AM, revealed Employee 1, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), on the 4th floor medication cart. A review of the shift-to-shift accountability forms, titled controlled substance signature sheet, for the 4th floor,…
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 before2024-03-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of clinical records and select incident reports and resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to timely and effectively monitor a resident's use of a therapeutic device to preserve skin integrity and prevent pressure sore development, which resulted in the development of an avoidable pressure sore by one resident out of three reviewed (Resident 53). Findings: According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality, the pressure ulcer best practice bundle incorporates three critical components in preventing pressure ulcers: Comprehensive skin assessment, Standardized pressure ulcer risk assessment and care planning and implementation to address the areas of risk. The American College of Physicians (ACP) is a national organization of internists, who specialize in the diagnosis, treatment, and care of adults. The largest medical-specialty organization and second-largest physician group in the United States)…
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 before2024-03-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide restorative nursing services to maintain the mobility and functional abilities of one of the 17 residents sampled (Resident 15). Findings included: A clinical record review revealed that Resident 15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include encephalopathy (dysfunction in brain processes including attention, cognition, and consciousness) and pneumonia. A review of an admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted periodically to plan resident care, dated January 25, 2024, revealed that Resident 15 is severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 7 (Brief Interview for Mental Status- a tool within the Cognitive Section of the MDS that is used to assess the resident's attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall new information; a score of 0-7 severe cognitive impairment. During an interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-07 · tag F0914 — isolatedProvide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure each resident room is designed and equipped to assure full visual privacy for two out of the 17 residents sampled (Resident 15; Resident room [ROOM NUMBER], Resident 13 room [ROOM NUMBER]). Findings include: A clinical record review revealed that Resident 15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include encephalopathy (dysfunction in brain processes including attention, cognition, and consciousness) and pneumonia. A review of an admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted periodically to plan resident care) dated January 25, 2024, revealed that Resident 15 is severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 7 (Brief Interview for Mental Status- a tool within the Cognitive Section of the MDS that is used to assess the resident's attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall new…
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.
- No harm found · B2024-03-07 · tag F0851 — patternElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to submit accurate staffing information in the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system for two of the four quarters reviewed (October 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023, and July 1, 2023, through September 30, 2023). Findings include: A review of the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reports (CASPER) Report 1705D for fiscal year quarter 4 2023 (July 1 - September 30) revealed that the facility's data triggered for no registered nurse (RN) hours on August, 5, 2023, August 6, 2023, August 27, 2023, September 2, 2023 and September 4. 2023. A review of the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reports (CASPER) Report 1705D for fiscal year quarter 1 2024 (October 1 - December 31) revealed that the facility's data triggered for no registered nurse (RN) hours on October 1, 2023, October 14, 2023, November 18, 2023, November 19, 2023, November 23, 2023, and November 25, 2023. A review of staffing time…
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.
- No harm found · B2023-08-31 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on a review of clinical records and the facility's bed hold policy and staff and family interview it was determined the facility failed to provide written notice of the specifics of the facility's bed hold policy, to include the duration and reserve bed payment, to a resident's resident's representative upon the resident's transfer to the hospital for one resident out of six sampled (Resident CR1). Findings include: A review Resident CR1's clinical record revealed admission to the facility on July 20, 2023. The resident was severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 4 (brief interview for mental status, a tool to assess the resident's attention, orientation and ability to register and recall new information) and a diagnosed intellectual disability. Resident CR1 was transferred to the hospital on August 24, 2023. Interview with the resident's representative on September 11, 2023, that upon the resident's admission to the facility he was provided a copy of the facility's bed hold policy, but he was not provided a second notice at the time of Resident CR1's transfer, 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.
“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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALLIED SERVICES PERSONAL CARE, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 10/01/2019 |
| ALLIED HEALTH CARE SERVICES | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 10/01/2019 |
| ALLIED SERVICES FOUNDATION | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 10% | since 10/01/2019 |
| ARONICA, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| BOYLE, DOUGLAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| CONABOY, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| DENAPLES, LOUIS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| FRANCESKI, GERALD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| KROGULSKI, KENNETH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| MELONE, THOMAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| SCRANTON, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| SPEICHER, THOMAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| AVVISATO, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2018 |
| COONEY, JAMES | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 10/01/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 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.
This home reported $1.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in PA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Pennsylvania Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 395581. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-14, 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.