Home / Pennsylvania / Ligonier
66 Carey School Road, Ligonier, PA 15658 · Westmoreland County · (724) 238-6711
76 certified beds, about 67 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1983
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395552 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 5, 2025, inspectors cited 14 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
None of its 66 health citations since September 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.67 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.72 of those hours.
43.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Concordia Lutheran Ministries, an affiliated group of 8 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 66 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, the facility's investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that fall interventions were in place for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 1), and failed to ensure that safety interventions were in place for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, clinical records, and facility investigation reports, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation to rule out abuse or neglect as the cause of a bruise for two of four residents reviewed (Residents 3 and 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews with staff as well as facility investigation documents, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice related to the call bell system being unplugged at the nursing station on one nursing unit (100 unit) placing the residents at risk for potential harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, resident clinical record, grievance investigations, reports submitted to the State, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse for one of four residents reviewed (Resident R4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications for two of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 39, Resident 40).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident and the resident's representative, in writing regarding the reason for transfer to the hospital, to ensure that a bed-hold notice was provided to the resident's responsible party and that the ombudsman was notified of the transfer to the hospital, for three of 42 residents reviewed (Residents 4, 84, 94).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete accurate Minimum Data Set assessments for four of 42 residents reviewed (Residents 5, 40, 41, 69).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, review of clinical records, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the dignity of one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 102) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 66).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 114).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident received assistance devices to prevent accidents for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 110).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate care for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 102) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an oxygen concentrator and filter was cleaned and tubing and humidification were changed per physician's orders for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 74), and failed to obtain an order for oxygen for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 97).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to respond timely to a pharmacy recommendation for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 84).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and medication package inserts, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to discard expired medical supplies/biologicals, and failed to label multi-dose containers of medications with the date they were opened in one of two medication rooms reviewed (tri west medication room).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety by failing to ensure that dietary staff wore beard coverings that completely covered their beard during food handling, and failed to ensure that food items were stored in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in one of three nursing unit pantry refrigerators (100 hall).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and facility investigations, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents' clinical records were complete and accurately documented for one of 42 residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction for previous surveys, and the results of the current survey, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to correct quality deficiencies and ensure that plans to improve the delivery of care and services effectively addressed recurring deficiencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident with pressure ulcers received the necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident 1) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food stored in the residents' refrigerators/freezers was properly dated, labeled, and secured in two of four refrigerators observed (100 and 500 hall kitchenettes).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that an assessment was completed by a professional (registered) nurse after an injury occurred for one of 10 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain clinical records that were complete and accurately documented for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident and resident representative in writing regarding the reason for transfer to hospital, and failed to notify the ombudsman for the hospitalizations for five of 32 residents reviewed (Residents 4, 7, 14, 41, 69).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that care plans were updated/revised to reflect changes in care needs for five of 32 residents reviewed (Residents 4, 29, 38, 41, 63).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain physician's orders for the care and services related to tube feedings for one of 32 residents reviewed (Resident 81).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident and/or resident representative had an opportunity to develop an advance directive or assist in formulating an advance directive for one of 32 residents reviewed (Resident 11).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a significant change Minimum Data Set assessment was completed for one of 32 residents reviewed (Resident 38).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete accurate comprehensive Minimum Data Set assessments for two of 32 residents reviewed (Residents 41, 59).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for three of 32 residents reviewed (Resident's 15, 59, 285).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, staff interviews, and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to clarify and/or obtain physician's orders for three of 32 residents reviewed (Residents 11, 59, 81).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to perform a physical assessment after an elopement for one of 32 residents reviewed (Resident 29).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical record, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that fluid restrictions were being followed and documented per physician's orders and failed to ensure that a resident's weight was obtained and documented as per physician's order for one of 32 residents reviewed (Resident 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications by failing to ensure that non-pharmacological (non-medication) behavioral interventions (individualized, non-pharmacological approaches to care) were attempted prior to the administration of as needed antianxiety medications for one of 32 residents reviewed (Residents 63).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of physican's orders, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the facility's emergency controlled medications (narcotics) were properly secured in one of one medication rooms reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, resident interviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food items at appetizing temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction for previous surveys, and the results of the current survey, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to correct quality deficiencies and ensure that plans to improve the delivery of care and services effectively addressed recurring deficiencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to clarify physician's orders for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and manufacturer's guidelines, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to monitor medication refrigerator temperatures on one of two nursing units (300/400/500 unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was served under sanitary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's policies and residents' clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident's code status was clarified for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 5).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a peripherally-inserted central catheter (PICC - a long, thin tube that is inserted through a vein in the arm and passed through to the larger veins near the heart) was flushed according to facility policy for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's baseline care plan included information regarding the resident's immediate care needs for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a care plan was developed for discharge planning for three of six residents reviewed (Residents 1, 4, 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that long-term intravenous catheters were flushed according to the facility's policy for two of six residents reviewed (Residents 1, 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a safety assessment to ensure that the use of a power lift chair did not create a safety hazard for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the physician was notified timely about the unavailability of a medication for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 88) and failed to ensure that the physician was notified timely about elevated blood sugar results as well as holding insulin for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 89).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were positioned appropriately while eating for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 46).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents received care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice, by failing to ensure that physician's orders were followed for three of 47 residents reviewed (Residents 31, 79, 88).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of the facility policies, as well as obervations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food stored was properly dated and labeled.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the resident's record and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to exercise the rights of the resident representative for one of 47 residents (Resident 21). A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 21, dated August 8, 2023, revealed that the resident was cognitively impaired and had a diagnosis of dementia. Physician's orders for Resident 21, dated April 21, 2023, included an order for a regular diet, pureed texture with nectar thickened consistency liquids, and was permitted mechanical soft snacks/desserts as needed. A dietary note for Resident 21, dated July 24, 2023, revealed that the resident's Power of Attorney requested the resident be evaluated again by speech therapy in order to change her diet. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that quarterly Minimum Data Set assessments were completed within the required time frame for two of 47 residents reviewed (Residents 5, 12).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to transmit Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments to the required electronic system, the Centers for Medicare, and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Improvement and Evaluation System (QIES) Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) System, within 14 days of completion for 15 of 47 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete accurate Minimum Data Set assessments for four of 47 residents reviewed (Residents 12, 46, 63, 71).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a baseline care plan was developed and implemented for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 88).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident-centered care plans were developed and implemented for three of 47 residents reviewed (Residents 5, 63, 79).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act, facility policy, and clinical record reviews, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a professional (registered) nurse assessed a resident after a change in condition for two of 47 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 63).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 80) who had an indwelling urinary catheter (a thin, hollow tube inserted through the urethra into the urinary bladder to collect and drain urine).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to monitor enteral feeding residuals for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 14).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's respiratory status was properly monitored as ordered for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 63).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical records reviews, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide medication as ordered by the physician, resulting in significant medication error for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 88).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of hospice contracts and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the designated interdisciplinary team member obtained the required information from the contracted hospice provider for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 63).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction for previous surveys, and the results of the current survey, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to ensure that corrective plans to improve and/or correct quality deficiencies effectively addressed recurring deficiencies and ensured that the facility maintained compliance with nursing home regulations.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that proper infection control practices were followed during medication administration for one of 47 residents reviewed (Resident 45).
10 fire safety citations on file: 7 on August 15, 2024, 3 on September 21, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Pennsylvania | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.67 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.72 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.41 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.98 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.97 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 43.3% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.55 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.77 on weekdays and 3.41 on weekends, 10% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.75 in April to June 2025 to 3.67 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.67 | 0.72 | 3.77 | 3.41 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 67 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.68 | 0.77 | 3.79 | 3.39 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 65 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.64 | 0.78 | 3.73 | 3.39 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 68 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.75 | 0.73 | 3.89 | 3.41 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 71 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Pennsylvania, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.69 | 0.65 | 3.82 | 3.34 | 11.3% | 0.1% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pennsylvania, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $21.44 | $18.88 to $22.52 | 67,740 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $30.74 | $29.02 to $35.01 | 38,260 |
| Registered nurses | $46.36 | $38.75 to $50.35 | 146,520 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Pennsylvania | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.7 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.6 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 30.9 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 30.1 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 7.5 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Bethlen Hm of the Hungarian Rf of America's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (71.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
71.4% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Pennsylvania: 100 better, 108 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 130 eligible stays.
10.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Pennsylvania: 3 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 144 eligible stays.
6.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Pennsylvania: 7 better, 5 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 82 eligible stays.
58.5% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania54.4% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 82 residents counted.
0.9% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 109 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania2.0% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 109 residents counted.
98.2% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 54 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: BETHLEN HOME OF THE HUNGARIAN REFORMED FEDERATION OF AMERICA. CMS links this home to Concordia Lutheran Ministries, a group of 8 nursing homes averaging 3.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concordia Care Network | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2023 |
| Frndak, Keith | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Grubesky, Erica | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Hortert, Brian | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Ingram, Misty | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| McKay, Natalie | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Trettel, Martin | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Vareha, Holly | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Young, Tammy | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Falbo, Michael | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Frndak, Keith | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Stiles, Molly | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Stiles, Molly | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Stiles, Molly | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/21/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Pennsylvania. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.