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

Heinz Transitional Rehabilitation Unit

150 Mundy Street, Wilkes Barre, PA 18702 · Non profit - Corporation · 44 certified beds · (570) 830-8995 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (570) 830-8995 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
144 Mundy St · (570) 270-2013 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
441 Wilkes Barre Township Blvd · (570) 824-6712 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
500 Scott St · (570) 338-5552 · Call to confirm hours
Park
328 Scott St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
79 Laurel St · (570) 239-3939

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 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.7%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.3%68.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.8%22.5%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit9.7%9.5%12.0%better

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.

72.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 403 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

72.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
63.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.68U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.86hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.78hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 63.5% 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 208 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 1.68 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 99% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

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

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF72.1%CMS range 68.2–76.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.1%CMS range 7.6–13.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge63.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge72.6%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge76.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.4%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 4.4–10.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.661.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

1.92
RN hours/ resident / day
0.70
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.45
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.08
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.22
RN hoursweekends
26.2%
Total nursing turnover
13.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 44 beds and averages 35.5 residents a day — about 81% occupied, or roughly 8 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 5.08 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.92 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.455 is at or above 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 4.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.36 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 2.20 to 1.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-25)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-06)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of clinical records, select facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to fully implement enhanced barrier infection control procedures to prevent spread of infection for three of 14 sampled residents (Residents 13, 43, and 33). Findings include: According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) guidance focuses on gown and glove use and other important infection control measures for prevention of multi-drug-resistant organisms (MDRO type of bacteria or microorganism that has developed resistance to multiple classes of antibiotics, making infections harder to treat). EBP are recommended for residents with any of the following: infection or colonization with a MDRO, a wound, or indwelling medical device, even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO. Review of the facility Enhanced Barrier Precautions Policy last reviewed/revised November 1, 2024, indicated it is the facility policy…

    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 · D2025-09-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records, facility policy, observation, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure the resident environment was free from potential hazards for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 56).Findings included: A facility policy titled 'Self-Administration of Medications', last reviewed on November 1, 2024, revealed the organization promotes the right to self-administer drugs unless the team has determined that the practice would be unsafe. The policy indicated if it is deemed safe and appropriate for a resident to self-administer medications, self-administration of medication is documented in the medical record and the care plan. A facility policy titled 'Procedure for Medication Administration', last reviewed on November 1, 2024, indicated the purpose of the procedure is to guide safe medication administration. The policy further stated the licensed nurse will remain with the resident while he/she swallows oral medication, follow with a drink to clear the oral…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to develop person-centered care plans that included management and refusal of a Wound Vacuum (a type of therapy to help wounds heal) for one resident out of 12 sampled (Resident 16). Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed Resident 16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include acquired absence of left toes, and end stage renal disease (a chronic kidney disease that occurs when the kidneys are permanently damaged and can no longer function) which required dialysis (a procedure that removes waste products and excess fluid from the blood when the kidneys are unable to function properly). A review of the clinical record revealed a physician order dated November 18, 2024, for continuous wound vac therapy to left medial foot with settings of 120 mmHg pressure intensity. Begin at 6 and decrease to 3 if resident is unable to tolerate (i.e. pain). A review of Resident 16's progress note…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for administration of antibiotic and provide care to a PICC line as ordered for one resident out of 12 sampled. (Residents 18). Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included intraspinal abscess and granuloma (a condition where a collection of pus forms within the spinal canal, alongside the development of a small inflammatory nodule [granuloma] both occurring within the spinal column), urinary tract infection, and heart disease. Further review of the resident's clinical record revealed Resident 18 was admitted with a PICC line (peripherally inserted central catheter inserted into a vein in the arm and threaded into a large vein above the heart) for intravenous (through a vein) antibiotic therapy. A review of Resident 18's physician orders dated November 3, 2024, revealed an order for…

    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 · Ecited before2024-01-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of clinical records and select facility policy and protocol, and resident and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of practice by failing to follow physician orders for the bowel protocol prescribed for three residents out of 13 sampled (Residents 21, 176 and 82) to promote normal bowel activity to the extent possible. Findings include: According to the American Academy of Family Physicians {The American Academy of Family Physicians is one of the largest medical organizations in the US founded to promote the science and art of family medicine}the primary goal of constipation management should be symptom improvement, and the secondary goal should be the passage of soft, formed stool without straining at least three times per week). A review of the facility policy titled Bowel Elimination Protocol, last reviewed by the facility on November 2, 2023, indicated that the facility will record bowel movements 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-05 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
    Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
    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 interview it was determined that the facility failed to demonstrate that a resident was afforded the right to participate in care planning to meet the resident's nutritional needs and had incorporated the resident's personal preferences for weight loss and assure the resident received items included in the plan of care, to include snacks and additional protein, for one resident out of 13 sampled (Resident 13). Findings included: Review of Resident 13's clinical record revealed admission on [DATE], with diagnoses of orthopedic aftercare, pneumonia, and diabetes. A review of an admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS- a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted at specific intervals to plan a resident's care) dated December 26, 2023, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15 (Brief Interview for Mental Status - a tool to assess cognitive function - a score of 13-15 indicates cognitively intact). 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 · D2024-01-05 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 select facility policy and clinical records and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to determine a resident's capability to self-administer medication (Lantus Insulin) for one of 13 residents reviewed (Resident 13). Findings include: A review of facility policy entitled Procedure for Medication Administration, and Self Administration of Medications, last reviewed by the facility November 2, 2023, indicated it is the policy to safely administer medications to the resident as ordered by the physician. Medications are not to be left bedside. It is the policy to promote the right of the resident to self administer drugs unless the interdisciplinary team (IDT) has determined that this practice would be unsafe. To assist in safe self administration the IDT will consider are the medications appropriate and safe for self administration, does the resident have the ability to ensure that the medications is stored safely and securely in a locked cabinet…

    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 · Dcited before2024-01-05 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop person-centered care plans that included individual resident needs and preferences for self-administration of medication and potential for pain for two residents out of 13 sampled (Resident 13 and 3). Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed Resident 3 was admitted to the facility December 11, 2023, for orthopedic aftercare. An Nursing admission Evaluation dated December 11, 2023, revealed the admission diagnosis as failure of recalled total hip arthroplasty hardware. Hospital discharge instructions dated December 11, 2023, prior to the resident's admission to the skilled nursing facility, indicated that had been hospitalized for a left hip arthroplasty because of a left hip hardware failure. A Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS-a federally mandated standardized assessment process conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) dated December 18, 2023,…

    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 · D2024-01-05 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of select facility policy and clinical records, and resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide a physician ordered nutritional supplement prescribed to one out of four sampled residents sampled (Resident 77). Findings include: Review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 77 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included left femur fracture (break in the thigh bone) with left hip hemiarthroplasty (surgical procedure similar to total hip replacement but only ball point of the hip joint is replaced). A physician order dated January 2, 2024, was noted for Juven (a powdered nutritional supplement mixed with water or juice to support wound healing and maintain lean body mass) with meals for supplement, but failed to indicate the amount of Juven to be provided to the resident at each meal. A clarification physician order dated January 4, 2024, noted an order for Juven 8 ounce with each meal. Further review of the clinical record…

    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 · D2024-01-05 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolated
    Provide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
    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 resident and staff interview, it was revealed that the facility failed to provide therapeutic social services to promote the mental and psychosocial well-being of one resident out of 13 sampled (Resident 127) Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed that Resident 127 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include left tibia fracture, diabetes, and depression. The resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 14 (Brief Interview for Mental, {BIMS} which assesses cognition, a tool to assess the resident's attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall new information). The resident's care plan indicated that she was at risk for adverse reactions and behavior problems not easily altered related to current psychoactive medication date initiated on [DATE]. The goal was that the resident will be educated to use of medication and recognition of adverse reactions, along with interventions if adverse reaction occurs through…

    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

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
JOHN HEINZ INSTITUTE OF REHABILITATION MEDICINEOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL100%since 04/01/2007
MINICH, CHRISTINEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 11/01/2017
PREBOLA, WILLIAMIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 07/01/2006
BRISLIN, JAYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
CONABOY, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2009
DAVIDOWITZ, SHERRYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2007
KROKOS, SANDRAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
MELONE, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2007
SCRANTON, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2013
WEINBERGER, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2013
AVVISATO, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2007
KEARNEY, KARENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
ALLIED HEALTH CARE SERVICESOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2007
ALLIED SERVICES FOUNDATIONOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2010

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 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.

What families pay in PA

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Pennsylvania Medicaid page for homes that do.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 396109. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-25, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next