57 Jackson Street, Lonaconing, MD 21539 · Allegany County · (301) 463-5451
66 certified beds, about 65 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 215307 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on October 9, 2025, inspectors cited 18 health deficiencies (the Maryland average is 17, the national average 9.2).
None of its 42 health citations since May 2019 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 3.25 hours per resident per day, against 3.87 across Maryland and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.56 of those hours.
35.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Maryland average 40.2%).
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 42 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide residents or resident representatives with written notice of transfer. This was evident for 1 (Resident #66) of 2 residents reviewed for hospital transfers.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to identify Lap Buddy as a physical restraint, assess the resident for its use, and provide ongoing monitoring and evaluation for its continued use. This was evident for 1 (Resident #26) or 1 resident reviewed for physical restraints.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident's medication regimen was free from unnecessary psychotropic medication use by failing to adequately monitor a resident for behaviors, side effects, or adverse consequences related to antianxiety medication use. This was evident for 1 (Resident #8) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin. This was evident for 1 (Resident #69) out of 1 facility-reported event (#361395) reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for residents within the regulatory time frames to facilitate appropriate care planning and maintain current and accurate assessment records. This was evident for 2 (#8, #61) of 34 residents reviewed during the recertification survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for a resident within the regulatory time frames to facilitate appropriate care planning and maintain the current assessment record. This was evident for one (Resident #61) reviewed during the recertification survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately recorded. This was evident for one (Resident #2), who was reviewed for Resident Assessments during the survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, medical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide activity programs to meet residents' needs and preferences. This was evident for 1 (#8) of 2 residents reviewed for Activities.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure injuries receive appropriate services for treatment and prevention. This was evident for 1 (Resident #43) of 2 residents reviewed for pressure injuries.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure urine collection bags were secured and off the floor. This was evident for 1 (Resident #4) of 1 resident reviewed for urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete the residents' Matrix accurately. This was evident during the recertification survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident records were accurate. This was evident for 1 resident (Resident #12) who had duplicate and contradictory active Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment forms of 2 residents reviewed for advance directives.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the required attendees participated in the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee meetings at least quarterly. This was evident in 8 out of 12 sign-in sheets reviewed during the survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review it was determined that the facility failed to properly store clean linens. This was evident for 2 of 2 soiled laundry areas observed during the recertification survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to maintain documentation of screening, education, offering, and current COVID-19 vaccination status. This was evident for 1 (Staff #16) of 2 staff reviewed for COVID-19 immunizations during the infection control task portion of the recertification survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide full visual privacy to a resident residing in a non-private room. This was evident for 1 (Resident #4) of 1 resident reviewed for privacy.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that staff were educated on abuse. This was evident for 5 (Director of Nursing [DON] and Staff #10, #11, #12, and #13) out of 5 employee training records reviewed during the Sufficient and Competent Staffing task.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides received in-service education that included dementia management and abuse prevention. This was evident for 2 (Staff #12 and #13) out of 5 staff reviewed under the Sufficient and Competent Staffing task.
Inspectors wroteBased on surveyor observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff 1) failed to properly store food items in the kitchen's walk-in refrigerator, and 2) failed to have a process in place to determine the expiration date of food procured from vendors. This was evident during the initial tour of the kitchen and had the potential to affect all residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to review and revise resident care plans after each assessment. This was evident for 1 (#39) of 7 residents reviewed for accidents, and 1 (#45) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure that the head of bed (HOB) was properly elevated for a resident during medication administration and infusion of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (peg) feeding. This was evident for 1 (#43) of 3 residents reviewed for tube feeding.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview with residents, it was determined that the facility failed to treat residents with respect and dignity as evidenced by failing to knock and request permission before entering a resident's room. This was evident for 1 (#33) of 28 residents included in the resident sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to assess a resident's cognition and mood on a comprehensive MDS assessment. This was evident for 1 (#33) of 1 residents reviewed for care planning.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within 14 days following a significant decline in a resident's condition. This was evident for 1 (#8) of 28 residents reviewed during the recertification survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately coded. This was evident for 2 (#64 and #35) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident with a limited range of motion received treatment and services as ordered by the attending provider to prevent further decline in the range of motion. This was evident for 1 (#43) of 3 residents reviewed for position and mobility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that prior to the installation of bed rails, the facility 1) failed to identify and use appropriate alternatives prior to installing or using bed rails, and 2) failed to assess a resident's risk of injury or entrapment prior to installing or using bed rails. This was found to be evident for 1 (#39) of 1 residents reviewed for side rails.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure that physician progress notes were written, signed, and dated at each visit. This was evident for 2 (#45, #29) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to keep complete and accurate medical records as evidenced by 1) failing to transcribe an accurate indication for use of antipsychotic medication, 2) failing to document a resident's wound evaluation in the medical record, and 3) failing to ensure that the a care plan meeting was documented. This was evident for 2 (#45, #35) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, 1 (#45) of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and interviews, it was determined that the facility staff failed to wear proper personal protective equipment (PPE) before giving direct care to a resident with a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (peg) feeding tube. This was evident for 1 (#43) of 3 residents reviewed for tube feeding.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to conduct a regular inspection of all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails, as part of a regular maintenance program to identify areas of possible entrapment and failed to ensure the equipment was inspected and maintained according to manufacturer's recommendations and requirements and timeframes. This was evident for 1 (#39) of 7 residents reviewed for accidents and had the potential to affect all residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide full visual privacy for a resident residing in a non-private room. This was evident for 1 (Resident #268) of 25 residents reviewed during the recertification survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to keep the walk-in freezer in the kitchen in safe operating condition. This was evident during the initial tour of the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) personnel files and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to conduct yearly performance reviews at least every 12 months for 7 out of 7 personnel files reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to store and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety as evidenced by failing to discard expired food and by touching food with bare hands. This was evident during the initial tour of the kitchen, during 1 of 2 dining observations observed and during observation of 1 of 2 medication rooms.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record and facility documentation review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to timely notify the physician and dietician of a significant weight gain. This was evident for 1 (#29) of 6 residents reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to document what preparation and orientation was given to residents to ensure an orderly transfer to an acute care facility. This was evident for 2 (#59, #58) of 4 residents reviewed that were transferred to an acute care facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the physician failed to write a discharge summary that summarized a resident's stay and treatment received in the facility. In addition, the facility staff failed to reconcile pre and post discharge medications. This was evident for 1 (#65) of 2 closed records reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to 1) apply a physician's ordered splint to the right hand, 2) failed to accurately document the use of the brace and 3) failed to follow the care plan for splinting. This was evident for 1 (#29) resident reviewed for positioning.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store medications as evidenced by failing to ensure that medication properly labeled and dated. This was evident in 1 of 2 medication rooms and 1 of 3 medication carts observed during the survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and medical record review, it was determined the facility failed to keep accurate medical records as evidenced by nursing staff signing off that a splint/brace device was worn when it was observed to not be worn. This was evident for 1 resident (#29) reviewed for positioning.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to notify the resident/resident representative in writing of a transfer/discharge of a resident along with the reason for the transfer. This was evident for 2 (#59, #58) of 4 residents reviewed that were transferred to an acute care facility.
21 fire safety citations on file: 13 on October 9, 2025, 5 on May 9, 2024, 3 on May 16, 2019.
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 | Maryland | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.25 | 3.87 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.56 | 0.84 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.54 | 3.47 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.42 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.27 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 35.9% | 40.2% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 22.2% | 38.7% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.77 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 3.53 on weekdays and 2.54 on weekends, 28% 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 3.60 in April to June 2025 to 3.25 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 | 3.25 | 0.56 | 3.53 | 2.54 | 0.0% | 4 of 90 | 65 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.11 | 0.90 | 4.36 | 3.48 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 64 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.87 | 0.72 | 4.17 | 3.13 | 0.0% | 2 of 92 | 65 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.60 | 0.55 | 3.97 | 2.68 | 2.0% | 1 of 91 | 65 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Maryland, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.73 | 0.74 | 3.88 | 3.34 | 8.0% | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maryland, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.79 | $18.46 to $22.00 | 27,720 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $35.89 | $31.40 to $38.30 | 9,560 |
| Registered nurses | $47.98 | $40.26 to $51.61 | 52,910 |
| 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 | Maryland | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 48.7 | 20.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.6 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 2.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.1 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 43.6 | 22.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.3 | 5.9 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 22.9 | 13.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.9 | 21.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.5 | 9.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.6 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Egle Nursing Home's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (39.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
39.0% this home
Worse than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Maryland: 90 better, 29 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. 73 eligible stays.
10.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Maryland: 0 better, 41 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. 74 eligible stays.
8.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Maryland: 5 better, 6 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. 67 eligible stays.
47.5% this home
Median of homes: Maryland61.2% · 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. 40 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Maryland0.4% · 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. 41 residents counted.
9.7% this home
Median of homes: Maryland2.4% · 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. 41 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: Maryland98.1% · 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. 16 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: EGLE NURSING HOME MANAGEMENT INC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lauder, David | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 25% | 09/27/2000 |
| Lauder, George | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 13% | 09/27/2000 |
| Metz, Jeffery | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 25% | 09/27/2000 |
| Raines, Troy | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 25% | 09/27/2000 |
| Lauder, Barbara | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Sidhu, Harjit | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Lauder, David | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Metz, Jeffery | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Lauder, Barbara | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Lauder, David | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Metz, Jeffery | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Raines, Troy | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/27/2000 | |
| Lauder, David | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/18/2024 | |
| Metz, Jeffery | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/18/2024 | |
| Sidhu, Harjit | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/18/2024 |
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 Maryland. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.