Home / Pennsylvania / Flourtown
350 Haws Lane, Flourtown, PA 19031 · Montgomery County · (215) 233-0700
120 certified beds, about 109 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1989
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395791 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 23, 2026, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 66 health citations since September 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $17,113 in the last three years; the largest was $8,557, and the latest is dated June 21, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.47 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.47 of those hours.
51.4% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Complete Care, an affiliated group of 85 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 observations, clinical record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that one (1) of twenty-two (22) residents reviewed was free from physical restraint. (Resident R57).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure implementation of a fall prevention intervention for 1 of 22 resident reviewed. (Resident R52)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical records, observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care and maintain oxygen equipment for one of two sampled residents (Residents R58)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility policy, and interview with staff, it was determined the facility failed to ensure pain medication was administered in accordance with the physician's order for two of two residents reviewed for pain management. (Resident R 7 and Resident R16)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, facility documentation, and interview with resident and staff, it was determined the facility failed to ensure necessary dental services were arranged and followed up for one of six residents reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility policy, and interview with staff, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that there was an adequate emergency food supply available.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain proper food temperatures during meal service on one of two nursing units. (3rd Floor)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the confidentiality of residents' medical information on one of three nursing units reviewed (3rd Floor Medication Cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policy, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions for one of two residents reviewed who had a midline catheter and an indwelling urinary Foley catheter (Resident R4).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, homelike environment for one of five resident rooms observed. (room [ROOM NUMBER]).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, review of resident clinical records, and interview with resident and staff, it was determined the facility fail to ensure physician orders were followed related to the administration an anticoagulant medication for one of 12 residents reviewed. (Resident R1)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, observations, review of facility policy and interviews with residents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with dignity and respect during wound care for one of 12 residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, facility documentation, review of clinical records and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation related to potential resident abuse and/or neglect related to a grievance for one of 12 residents reviewed. (Resident R2)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations of the food and nutrition services department, it was determined that foods were not being stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a sanitary, clean, comfortable, homelike environment for one out the two units observed. (Third floor nursing unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and interviews with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that residents were free of misappropriation of resident property related to diversion of narcotic medication for two of 24 residents records reviewed (residents R69 and R262).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to address the care needs of a resident when answering call bells for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident R29), and did not ensure sufficient staffing was maintained on a daily basis for all nursing units. (2nd and 3rd floors)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility provided documentation and interview with staff, it was determined that facility did not ensure annual performance evaluation was completed for three nurse aides out of three nurse aides' trainings reviewed (Employee E21, E22 and E23)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations of the food and nutrition services department, reviews of policies and procedures and interviews with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that foods and drinks were being served palatable, attractive and at safe and appetizing temperatures during meal times for the residents. (Third floor, noon meal) Resident council (Residents R37, R36, R81, R84, R89, and R31)
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store bed linens in a sanitary environment, increasing the risk of infection and contamination. (Laundry room)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility policy and interviews with residents, it was determined that the facility failed to promote and maintain dignity and respect for two of 24 residents reviewed (Resident R100 and R40).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies and procedures, employee personnel records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement an abuse prohibition policy that required a thorough investigation of prospective employees' employment history for two of six newly hired employees reviewed. (Employees E26 and E29)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, facility policies and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation of one incident related to the provision of incontinence care for one of 23 residents reviewed. (Resident R 30).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for oxygen therapy (Resident 10), a safety device and elopement (Resident R73) and a repositioning program (Resident R82) for three of 23 residents reviewed (Resident R10, R73, R82).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL) assistance necessary to maintaining good grooming for one out of 4 residents reviewed. ( Resident 24)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, review of clinical record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide pressure ulcer treatment, consistent with professional standards of practice, for one of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident R106). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Pressure Ulcer Prevention dated July 1, 2024, revealed to prevent the formation of avoidable pressure injuries and to promote healing of existing pressure injuries, it is the policy of this facility to implement evidence-based interventions for all residents who are assessed at risk or who have a pressure injury present. Review of Resident R106 's clinical record revealed that Resident R106 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident R106 has right heel Stage 3 (ulcer involving full thickness of skin loss). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, interviews with staff and policy and procedure review, it was determined that the facility failed to implement nutritional interventions for one of three residents at nutritional risk related to pressure sore development and deteriation of wounds. (Resident R82)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory, tracheostomy and tracheal suctioning care and services for four of 23 residents reviewed (Resident R1, R10, R72, R51).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, review of clinical records and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure proper pain management interventions were provided for one of 23 residents reviewed (Resident R48).
Inspectors wroteBased on obervations, review of facility policy, review of employee personnel files and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure staff was qualified and competent to perform tracheostomy care and suctioning care for one of one resident reviewed (Resident R1). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Orientation, implemented on September 1, 2024, revealed it is the policy of this facility to develop, implement and maintain an effective orientation process for all new staff, individuals providing services under a contractual arrangement and volunteers, consistent with their expected roles. Further review of section Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines part 6., Competency evaluation form process: section e., the completed form represents initial competency in skills needed to care for residents and perform job functions. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility records and staff interviews, it was determined that facility did not ensure that the narcotic reconciliation record was complete related to missing signatures and initials on the narcotic count sheet for three of three medication carts reviewed. (2nd Floor Medication Cart, and two medication carts on 3rd Floor)
Inspectors wroteBased observations and staff interviews, it was determined that facility did not ensure that opened medications were properly labeled with the date that the medication was opened for two of three medication carts reviewed and one of one medication room reviewed. (2nd floor medication cart, 3rd floor medication cart and 2nd floor medication room).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical records review, staff interview and review of facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that clinical records wer completed for one of 23 clinical records reviewed. (Resident R82)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews with dietary and administrative staff, it was determined that essential food service equipment was not maintained in safe operating condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interviews, review of the pest control logs and the pest control operator's management program, review of policies and documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program in the kitchen and one of two nursing units. (3rd Floor Nursing Unit and Kitchen)
Inspectors wroteBased on personnel record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide abuse, neglect and exploitation training at the time of hire for four of six staff reviewed (Employee E26, E27, E28, and E29).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for one of the three residents reviewed (Resident CL1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that appropriate discharge notices were provided to the State office of the long-term care ombudsman for six of six months reviewed (April, May, June, July, August, and September 2024).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of clinical records, facility policies and procedures, resident's financial information, facility investigation and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents where free from misappropriation and exploitation of property related to the unauthorized access of Resident R1's financial information, theft of money from resident's bank account, unauthorized purchase on resident's account, and receiving monetary assistance by the facility staff. Facility staff failed to report the alleged violation in a timely manner. This failure resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation to Resident R1 who experienced financial loss, mental health decline, and psychosocial harm for one of three residents reviewed. This was identified as past non-compliance. (Resident R1) Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, clinical record review, and policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an allegation of exploitation of resident's property was reported to the facility's Nursing Home Administrator in accordance with requirements. The facility failed to protect one of three sampled residents (Resident R1) from exploitation of resident's property by three perpetrators which resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation to Resident R1 who experienced financial loss, mental health decline, and psychosocial harm. This was identified as past non-compliance. (Resident R1)
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, resident clinical record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement and enforce the facility compliance and ethics program, so that it is likely to be effective in preventing and detecting criminal, civil, and administrative violations under the Act and in promoting quality of care related to misappropriation and exploitation of resident property, unauthorized access of resident's financial information, theft of money from resident's bank account, unauthorized purchase on resident's account, and receiving monetary assistance by the facility staff. One of three residents reviewed. (Resident R1)
Inspectors wroteBased on group interview and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide access to mail delivered to the facility in a timely manner. Facility failed to ensure privacy in their use of electronic communications related to unauthorized access of resident's personal cell phone for one of three residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on a resident group interview, interviews with resident and staff, and review of a facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the rights of resident's privacy by opening residents' mail without resident consent for one of three residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of clinical records, job descriptions, facility documentation and interviews with staff, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) did not effectively manage the facility to make certain that proper procedures were followed in the facility related to the right of residents to be free misappropriation and exploitation of property, unauthorized access of Resident R1's financial information, theft of money from resident's bank account, unauthorized purchase on resident's account, and receiving monetary assistance by the facility staff. This failure resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation to Resident R1 who experienced financial loss, mental health decline, and psychosocial harm for one of three residents reviewed. (Resident R1) Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview with residents and staff and review of facility documentation, it was determined that facility failed to promote an environment that enhancement residents quality of life related to fresh air brakes to be free from residents who smoke for eight of 24 residents reviewed (Residents R87, R37, R69, R47, R85, R107, and R35). The facility failed to ensure that each resident was treated with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. (Resident R2)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, resident council minutes, group interview, resident interviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed failed to demonstrate a response to residents' concerns for resident group meeting and to meet privately for seven and seven residents reviewed. (Residents R87, R37, R69, R47, R85, R107, and R35)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, homelike environment for two of two nursing units reviewed. (Second Floor Unit and Third Floor Unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on a resident group interview, resident interview, review of facility policy and procedures, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the grievance forms were available and accessible to residents on the nursing units for 7 of 24 residents (Residents R87, R37, R69, R47, R85, R107, and R35).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that appropriate respiratory care was provided related to oxygen therapy for four of four residents receiving respiratory therapy. (Residents R1, R16, R31 and R52 )
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that nurse aides received a minimum of 12-hour annual training to ensure continuing competence as required.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately display facility daily nurse staff hours as required.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a response to the consultant pharmacist's recommendation related to the potentially unnecessary medications for two of five residents reviewed. (Resident R63 and Resident R8).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the facility policy, review of planned written menus, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow approved emergency menus for two of two nursing units. (Second-floor and Third-floor). Findings Include: The facility Emergency Food Policy was reviewed, and the policy stated, Emergency Menu Guide for No Electricity, No Gas, Day one lunch menu was listed as eight ounces Beef Stew, half a cup of carrots, six crackers, half a cup of peaches, two cookies, eight ounces of milk (reconstituted), and four ounces of water. Observation during the kitchen tour on June 17, 2024 at 9:41 a.m. revealed that there was a gas leak outside of the facility by the dumpster area. Due to the leak the facility gas was turned off for the day at 9:30 a.m. Observation of the lunch meal on the Third floor in the dining room on June 17, 2024 at 12:27 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility policy, and interviews with staff, it was determined the facility failed to store food according to food service standards and failed to performed proper hand hygiene during the dining in one of two nursing units. (Second floor dining) Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Food Storage: Cold Folds dated February 2023 states, All Time/Temperature Control for Safety (TCS) foods, frozen and refrigerated, will be appropriately stored in accordance with guidelines of the FDA Food Code. Under procedures the policy states, 5. All foods will be stored wrapped or in covered containers, labeled and dated and arranged in a manner to prevent cross contamination. Review of the policy titled Food Storage: Dry Goods dated February 2023, states All dry goods will be appropriately stored in accordance with the FDA Food Code. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility documentation, facility policies, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective antibiotic stewardship program that includes a system to effectively monitor antibiotic usage for two of two months of antibiotic stewardship program data reviewed. (April 2024 and May 2024).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of facility policy, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a safe and sanitary environment related to hand sanitizers for two of two nursing units reviewed. (Second Floor and Third Floor) Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Hand Hygiene undated states, Purpose: Cleaning your hands is one of the most effective ways to prevent the spread of germs. The policy states hand hygiene should be completed, Before and after contact with the resident, Before performing an aseptic task, After contact with blood, body fluids, visibly contaminated surfaces or after, contact with objects in the resident's room, After removing personal protective equipment (e.g., gloves, gown, facemask), After using the restroom, Observation of June 17, 2024 of the third floor at 10:15 a.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that one of 24 residents reviewed was assessed for self administration of an inhaler medication. (Resident R47)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of the activities calendar and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to meet the recreational needs of one of 24 residents reviewed. (Resident 13)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure each resident received timely treatment and services to maintain visual abilities for one of one sampled residents. (Resident 16)
Inspectors wroteBased on the observations, review of clinical records, facility policies, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident with limited range of motion, received appropriate services to prevent further decline in range of motion and maintain appropriate positioning for one of 24 resident s reviewed. (Resident R1). Finding Include: Observation of Resident R1 on June17, 2024, at 10:05 a.m. revealed that the resident was laying in the bed. It was observed that both of the resident's hand's appeared to be contracted. The resident was not using any positioning devices or splints. There were 2 hand splints observed laying on top of the dresser. Observation of Resident R1 on June18, 2024, at 12:59 p.m. revealed that the resident was laying in the bed. Residents was not using any positioning devices or splints to the hands. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide culturally competent, trauma care in accordance with professional standards of practice, accounting for the resident's past experiences and preferences in order to eliminate and/or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for two of two residents sampled (Resident R57 and R63).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility policy and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food products based on the resident's food preference and intolerance for one of 24 residents (Resident R66).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not maintain complete and accurate medical records for one of 24 records reviewed (Resident R11).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of admission packet and facility documents, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to post the results of the most recent survey results in a place readily accessible to residents on two out of two nursing units (Second Floor Nursing Unit and Third Floor Nursing Units).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews with resident and review of resident council minutes and facility policies determined with facility failed to provide a private space during the resident council meeting, failed to respond to concerns/requests from group meetings, failed to respond to concerns/requests in a timely manner, and failed to demonstrate their response and rationale for such concerns/requests for six of six residents attending resident council interviews and group meeting (Residents R8, R41, R43, R62, R75, and R90).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, review of clinical records, observations, review of diet manual and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure therapeutic diets were served per physician orders for 2 of 23 residents observed during mealtime (Resident R39, and R162)
5 fire safety citations on file: 5 on April 25, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 21, 2024 | Fine | $8,556 |
| June 21, 2024 | Fine | $8,557 |
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) | 3.47 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.47 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.22 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.03 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.96 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 51.4% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 52.9% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.41 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 3.57 on weekdays and 3.22 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 3.71 in April to June 2025 to 3.47 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 | 3.47 | 0.47 | 3.57 | 3.22 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 109 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.56 | 0.59 | 3.68 | 3.23 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 103 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.59 | 0.62 | 3.74 | 3.22 | 8.9% | 0 of 92 | 104 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.71 | 0.55 | 3.81 | 3.48 | 12.5% | 0 of 91 | 106 |
| 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 | 11.1 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.8 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.9 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.7 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.1 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Complete Care at Harston Hall LLC's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (47.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
47.4% this home
No different from 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. 32 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 47 eligible stays.
6.9% 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. 33 eligible stays.
72.2% 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. 54 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 90 residents counted.
2.5% 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. 90 residents counted.
100.0% 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. 36 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: COMPLETE CARE AT HARSTON HALL LLC. CMS links this home to Complete Care, a group of 85 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC Pa Opcos LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 05/01/2021 |
| PC Wta Opco Holdco LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Sms 2021 Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Stein, Shalom | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Welltower Inc | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Stein, Shalom | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Stein, Shalom | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Auge, Jason | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Levy, Joshua | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Schwartz, Hershel | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Shand, Jennifer | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Williams, Cameron | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Stein, Shalom | Trustee of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Aurora Guardian Holdco II Co-Borrower, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Aurora Guardian Holdco II Mezz Borrower, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Aurora Guardian Holdco II, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Aurora Guardian II Realty, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Aurora Guardian Partners II LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Harston Hall Realty, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| J & R Family Investments, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| L Friedman 2018 Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| L Friedman Family Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Landau Family Investment Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| M Friedman 2018 Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| PC Wta Acquisition LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| PC Wta Multi-State LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Peace Capital Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| R&j Family Investments LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Sms 2021 Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Welltower Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Cunningham, Jessica | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Levy, Joshua | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Schwartz, Hershel | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Shand, Jennifer | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Williams, Cameron | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 |
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.