Home / Pennsylvania / Wilkes Barre
1555 East End Boulevard Plains Twp, Wilkes Barre, PA 18711 · Luzerne County · (570) 826-1011
180 certified beds, about 116 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395148 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 27, 2026, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 61 health citations since September 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.50 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.45 of those hours.
61.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Imperial Healthcare Group, an affiliated group of 9 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 61 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of the facility's abuse policy, clinical records, facility-provided investigative documentation, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to protect one of five residents reviewed (Resident 1) from non-consensual sexual contact by another resident (Resident 2) despite Resident 2's known history of documented inappropriate sexual behaviors. As a result, Resident 1 experienced actual harm when Resident 2 placed his hand underneath her clothing, touched her bare breast, and twisted her nipple, constituting non-consensual sexual contact.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, select facility policy, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to accurately identify a resident's request for future health care and advance directives as evidenced by one resident (Resident 73) out of 25 residents sampled.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans that included specific and individualized interventions to address the residents' needs for communication for one of 25 residents reviewed (Resident 15).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, resident and staff interviews, and facility provided documentation, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that residents who were dependent on staff for assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) consistently received necessary care and services to maintain personal hygiene and dignity for one resident out of 25 sampled residents (Residents 119).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, select facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of quality to ensure that licensed nurses accurately administered prescribed medication for one resident out of 25 sampled residents (Resident 73).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized plan to meet the toileting needs of one of 25 sampled residents (Resident 119), including the timely provision of staff assistance with toileting and management of urinary and bowel incontinence.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, select facility policy, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure that physician ordered intravenous (giving fluids or medication directly into a vein using a needle or tube) antibiotics were administered as prescribed for one resident out of 25 sampled (Resident 73).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized person-centered plan to address dementia and dementia related behaviors displayed by one out of 25 residents reviewed. (Resident 47)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, select facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to implement procedures to maintain records of controlled drugs and ensure accurate drug administration for one out of the 30 residents sampled (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documents and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Medical Director or designee participated in the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Committee meetings on a quarterly basis for two of four quarters reviewed. (Quarter 2 and Quarter 3 of 2025).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide adaptive dining equipment as required and prescribed for three residents out of 12 sampled (Residents 1, 2, and 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide nursing services consistent with professional standards of quality to ensure that licensed nurses administered medications as prescribed to three residents out of 14 sampled (Resident 1, 2, and CR1).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, controlled drug records, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate accounting and the administration of controlled medications for one of 14 residents sampled (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, a review of select facility policies, the facility's infection control log, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to maintain and implement a comprehensive infection prevention and control program and failed to implement transmission-based precautions to mitigate the spread of infectious disease for one out of the 27 residents sampled (Resident 56).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, select facility policies, documentation provided by the facility, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that four residents out of 27 sampled (Residents 18, 104, 108, and 224) were free from abuse perpetrated by another resident (Residents 37 and 49) and failed to ensure one resident out of 27 sampled was free from neglect (Resident 57).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure respiratory care including tracheostomy (surgical procedure where a hole is created in the neck and a tube is inserted into the trachea or windpipe to help a person breathe) care was provided in accordance with physician orders for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to accurately identify a resident's request for future health care and advance directives (a written instruction such as a living will or durable power of attorney for health care for when the individual is incapacitated) as evidenced by one resident (Resident 173) out of 27 residents sampled.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy, investigative documentation, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an incident involving a fall with minor injury to determine whether neglect occurred and failed to identify that planned fall interventions were not in place for one of 27 sampled residents (Resident 57).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS - a federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care) accurately reflected the status of three residents out of 27 sampled (Residents 2, 40, and 47).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that nursing services met professional standards of quality according to the Pennsylvania Code Title 49, Professional and Vocational Standards, by failing to implement nursing practices for the administration of intravenous medication via a peripheral IV (thin, flexible plastic tube inserted into a peripheral vein to allow for the administration of fluids, medications, and other therapies into the bloodstream and used for short-term intravenous therapy) for one of 27 residents reviewed (Resident 101).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, resident, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized person-centered plan to render trauma informed care to a resident with a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for one out of 27 residents reviewed (Resident 55).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, select facility policy, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary antibiotics for one out of 27 residents sampled (Resident 47).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to show adequate monitoring of symptoms and potential adverse consequences of psychoactive drug use for one resident out of 27 residents sampled (Resident 45).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, CDC (centers for disease control) infection control guidance, facility's infection control policy and COVID-19 testing logs, and staff interview it was determined he facility failed to promptly implement infection control practices for cohorting like respiratory infections and testing for COVID-19 to prevent the spread of COVID-19 infections in the facility placing at least 12 residents (Residents 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 2, 20, 22, 24, 26 and 28) at increased risk for contracting COVID-19 and failed to implement effective interventions to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 nine out of the 11 residents during a resident group interview (Residents 6, 18, 24, 37, 41, 51, 83, 107, and 114).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, select facility policy and investigative reports, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that four residents out of 30 sampled were free from physical abuse (Residents 62, 85, 97, and 119).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and select facility policy, staff, and resident interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide written notice of the facility's bed hold policy to a resident and the resident's representative upon the resident's transfer to the hospital for eight residents out of the 27 sampled (Residents 7, 114, 101, 9, 63, 112, 2, and 106).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policy and clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide restorative nursing services planned to maintain mobility and functional abilities of four of 27 residents sampled (Residents 63, 114, 72, and 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and select facility policy, and staff and resident interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician ordered intravenous antibiotics were administered as prescribed for two residents out of 27 sampled (Resident 86 and 72).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility documents of QA meeting attendance and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Medical Director or designee attended quarterly Quality Assurance Process Improvement (QAPI) Committee meetings for two of three quarters reviewed (August 2023 through June 2024).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, a review of clinical records and select facility policy, staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the self-administration of medications was clinically appropriate for one of the 27 residents sampled (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility incident reports and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that mail was delivered unopened to one of 11 residents interviewed during a resident group interview (Resident 106).
Inspectors wroteBased on a clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider for one resident out of 27 residents sampled with facility-initiated transfers (Residents 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of the Resident Assessment Instrument Manual and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely submit Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments to the required electronic system, the CMS Quality Improvement and Evaluation System (QIES) Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) System, for one of eight sampled (Resident 72). Findings Include: The Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, which provides instructions and guidelines for completing the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], requires that discharge assessments-return anticipated (non-comprehensive) be completed no longer than the resident's discharge date + 14 calendar days. A clinical record review revealed that Resident 72 was transferred to the hospital on April 30, 2024. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of clinical records, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to address a resident's active diagnoses and treatment and individualized communication methods and needs on the resident's care plan for one resident out of 27 sampled (Resident 112).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly assess and evaluate bladder function and implement individualized interventions to restore bladder function to the extent possible for one resident (Residents 47), andprovide care and services to prevent potential complications with the use of an indwelling foley catheter (a flexible tube which is placed into the bladder to drain urine) for one resident out of two sampled with a foley catheter (Resident 101).
Inspectors wroteBasedonobservation, clinicalrecordreview, andstaffinterview itwasdeterminedthatthefacilityfailedtofailedtotimelyimplementanutritionalsupportregimentomeetthenutritionalneedsandpreventweightlossforoneresident (Resident 90) and failed toaccuratelymonitorafluidrestrictionprescribedtoaddressaresidentsclinicalconditionandmaintainfluidbalanceandadequatehydrationstatusforoneresident(Resident178) outof27 sampled.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, a review of clinical records, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the ready availability of necessary emergency supplies for one resident out of two sampled receiving hemodialysis (Resident 59).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to post nurse staffing information on a daily basis to include the resident census and the total number and actual hours worked by licensed and unlicensed staff. Findings Include: Observations in the facility lobby on June 11, 2024, at 8:45 AM and 3:10 PM, and June 12, 2024, at 9:00 AM revealed that the facility's nurse staffing information was not posted in the facility's designated area. An interview with the Director of Nursing on June 12, 2024, at 9:10 AM revealed that the nurse staffing information should be posted daily at the beginning of each shift in a prominent location. 28 Pa. Code 201.14 (a) Responsibility of licensee
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and transfer notices, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notices of facility-initiated transfers to the resident and the resident's representative for eight out of the 27 residents reviewed (Residents 7, 114, 101, 9, 63, 112, 2, and 106).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policy and grievances lodged with the facility and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to put forth timely and sufficient efforts to promptly resolve grievances for two residents out of 22 sampled. (Resident CR1 and 11)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the baseline care plan failed to fully address the resident's immediate individual needs for care and services upon admission of one of 22 residents sampled (Resident 111).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and incident reports, resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide care and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent the development of pressure ulcers for one resident out of four sampled residents (Resident 110).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to reasonably accommodate residents' need for call bell accessibility for 5 out of 7 residents sampled (Residents 86, 89, 111, 118, and 119).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, select investigative reports and facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to consistently implement sufficient measures to protect three residents (Residents 45, 55, and 82) out of 18 sampled from physical abuse perpetrated by other residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, facility investigative reports, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide therapeutic social services to assess the psychosocial status and needs of residents following incidents of abuse perpetrated by other residents to promote the psychosocial well-being of two of 18 residents sampled (Resident 45 and 82).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and controlled substance count records, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate accounting and administration of controlled drugs for one of three residents sampled (Resident 57).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plan of correction from the surveys of September 28, 2023 and November 7, 2023, and the findings of the survey ending December 7, 2023, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to develop and implement corrective action plans to prevent continued quality deficiencies related to abuse prevention and pharmacy services and to ensure that plans designed to improve the delivery of care and services were consistently implemented to effectively deter future quality deficiencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of resident clinical records and medication error report and staff interview it was revealed that the facility failed assure that one of three residents reviewed was free of significant medication errors (Resident 23).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide housekeeping services to maintain a clean and orderly environment in resident areas on three of three resident units (First, Second, and Third Floor Nursing Units)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide services necessary to maintain good personal hygiene and grooming of residents' requiring assistance with activities of daily living for two out of five residents reviewed. (Residents 15 and 17).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide adequate supervision and follow physician's orders for measures planned to prevent accidents and promote resident safety three of 21 sampled (Resident 5, 15, and 16)
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and select facility policy, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that licensed nursing staff possessed the skills and competencies necessary to assure resident safety and administer antibiotics via a PICC line (peripherally inserted central catheter- long thin tube that is inserted through a vein in your arm and passed through to the larger veins near the heart and is used for long-term intravenous antibiotics, nutrition, or medication, and for blood draws) as evidenced by one resident out of 21 residents reviewed (Resident CR1). Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of controlled drug shift count records and select facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate controlled medication records on two of two medication carts observed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain acceptable practices for the storage of food and supplements to prevent the potential for microbial growth in food or contamination, which increased the risk for foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide a fully functioning call system to provide direct communication from the resident to the caregivers for 4 of 21 residents sampled (15, 18, 25 and 26)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely notify the resident's interested representative of a change in condition for one resident out of 21 sampled (Resident CR1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a discharge summary, which included a recapitulation of the resident's stay, the course of illness, corresponding treatment, discharge instructions, and a post-discharge care plan for one of one discharged resident record reviewed (Resident CR1).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and select facility policy, and staff interviews it was revealed that the facility failed to accurately monitor bowel activity to ensure a physician prescribed bowel protocol was timely implemented as needed for one resident out of 22 sampled residents (Resident 22).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide services planned to maintain mobility for two of four sampled residents for mobility/range of motion (Resident 7 and 19).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services designed to prevent potential complications associated with tube feedings for one resident receiving an enteral feeding out of 21 residents sampled (Resident 17).
22 fire safety citations on file: 6 on February 27, 2026, 8 on April 25, 2025, 8 on June 14, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 14, 2024 | Payment Denial | 34 days from September 14, 2024 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
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) | 3.50 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.45 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.10 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.11 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.95 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 61.5% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 81.0% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.99 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 3.67 on weekdays and 3.10 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 14.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.99 in April to June 2025 to 3.50 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 | 3.50 | 0.45 | 3.67 | 3.10 | 14.3% | 0 of 90 | 116 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.68 | 0.43 | 3.81 | 3.35 | 18.6% | 0 of 92 | 115 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.04 | 0.40 | 4.12 | 3.83 | 28.5% | 0 of 92 | 118 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.99 | 0.49 | 4.14 | 3.64 | 31.9% | 0 of 91 | 119 |
| 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| 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 | 5.5 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.9 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.4 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.2 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 22.9 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 32.5 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.2 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Chestnut Hill Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (35.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
35.8% this home
Worse 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. 177 eligible stays.
10.6% 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. 178 eligible stays.
6.8% 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. 81 eligible stays.
65.3% 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. 49 residents counted.
2.4% 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. 82 residents counted.
1.7% 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. 82 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 10 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: TIMBER RIDGE SNF OPERATIONS LLC. CMS links this home to Imperial Healthcare Group, a group of 9 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Timber Ridge SNF Operations Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/30/2021 |
| Ch Pa7 SNF Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/30/2021 | |
| Chrh Equities LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Ens Holdings, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Ih Pa Operations Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/30/2021 | |
| The Ens Family Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Ymcs Equities LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Gottesman, Daniel | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/20/2021 | |
| Simpson, Louann | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 04/30/2021 | |
| Herzka, Yisroel | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/20/2021 |
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.