Home / Pennsylvania / Stevens
400 Lancaster Avenue, Stevens, PA 17578 · Lancaster County · (717) 336-3878
82 certified beds, about 70 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1983
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395575 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 27, 2026, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 41 health citations since October 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $55,807 in the last three years; the largest was $55,807, and the latest is dated February 1, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.49 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.95 of those hours.
70.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Priority Healthcare Group, an affiliated group of 12 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 41 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of clinical records, and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary respiratory care and services for three of four residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2, and 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of employee personnel records, it was determined that the facility failed to complete performance reviews at least once every 12 months for five of five nurse aides reviewed (Employees 5-9).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of employee records, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides completed 12 hours of annual in-service training for five of five employee files reviewed (Employees E5-E)
Inspectors wroteBased upon observation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were properly identified with open and expiration dates and failed to ensure unopened insulin pens were kept refrigerated according to package directions for two of three medication carts observed (Second Floor Back Hall Medication Cart and First Floor Medication Cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of facility-initiated emergency transfers to the hospital for three of six hospitalizations reviewed (Resident 1, 6, 11) and one of three closed records reviewed (Resident CR75), and failed to ensure that a discharge summary, including a recapitulation of the resident's stay, was completed for one of three closed records reviewed (Resident CR8).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record and an interview with the resident and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to invite the resident and/or the resident's representative to participate in the care plan process for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 37).
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review and interviews with staff it was determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with standards of care for two of twenty-two residents reviewed (Residents 41 and 72).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly follow physician orders for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents were assisted out of bed in a timely manner to attend scheduled Sunday religious services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and review of facility records and policies, it was determined that the facility failed to implement contact precautions for a resident diagnosed with scabies (Resident R3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as family and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers as scheduled for six of 8 residents reviewed (Resident 1,4,5,6,7,8).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to provide showers as scheduled for six of 8 residents reviewed (Residents 1,4,5,6,7).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and facility investigations, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents' clinical records were complete and accurately documented for six of 8 residents reviewed (Resident 1,4,5,6,7,8), and that documentation of incident was in the clinical records for one of 8 residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a system of surveillance was in place to identify, prevent, monitor, and report potential infectious skin conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, clinical records and investigative reports, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete thorough investigations of incidents to rule out that neglect and/or abuse were involved for two of eight residents reviewed (Resident 1 and Resident 8).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act, facility policies, and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that an assessment was completed by a registered nurse (RN) after an incident occurred where a male resident was found in her bed for one of 8 residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of employee records, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that nuse aides completed 12 hours of annual inservice training for five of five employee files reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident assessments accurately reflect the residents' status for five of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 39, 45, 58 and 74).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, resident interviews, clinical record review, review of facility documentation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for residents unable to carry out activities of daily living for four of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 2, 6, 14, and 25).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of Pharmacy Medication Management Reviews (MRR), clinical record reviews, and staff interviews it was determined the facility failed to ensure the pharmacy reviewed the medication regimen of each resident monthly and failed to ensure the physician addressed all recommendations with rationales for disagreeing with recommendations timely for four of five residents reviewed (Resident 5, Resident 28, Resident 34 and Resident 59).
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review and interview, it was determined the facility failed to monitor resident's fluid restriction and complete treatments according to physician orders for two of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 4 and 45).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of facility policy and procedure and clinical record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure routine nutrition was monitored by failing to obtain re-weights and follow recommendations made by registered dietitian for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident 66).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely provide dental services for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 19).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of facility policy and procedure, observation and clinical record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure appropriate personal protective equipment was available and appropriate door notification was in place for residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions for two of five residents reviewed (Resident 4 and Resident 63).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical records review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide nail care for one of the three residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record and facility documentation review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision of a resident to prevent resident from falling from a facility window resulting in physical harm and hospitalization for Resident 1.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observations, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that one of two residents (Resident 50) reviewed for pressure ulcers was monitored, assessed and received the necessary services to prevent new ulcers from developing, resulting in actual harm of pressure ulcer development for Resident 50.
Inspectors wroteBased upon observation, it was determined the facility failed to properly label insulin pens and vials with open and expiration dates for four of four medication carts observed (First floor medication carts and Second Floor medication carts).
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review and observation, it was determined the facility failed to accurately complete an assessment prior to the placement of a wanderguard for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident 55).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents had physician orders corresponding with their end of life care wishes for two of 24 residents reviewed. (Residents 15 and 21)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interviews it was determined that a change in condition for one out of 24 residents (Resident 46) was not reported to the physician and a delay in diagnostic testing for one out of 24 residents (Resident 62) was not reported to the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to maintain clean resident care equipment for one of 24 residents (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy, clinical record review, and interviews with staff it was determined that the facility failed to investigate an injury of unknown origin for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 66).
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review and interview, it was determined the facility failed to complete an accurate Minimum Data Set assessment for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident 26).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interviews with the staff it was revealed that the facility failed to create a suicidal ideation baseline care plan for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 66).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of clinical records, it was determined the facility failed to establish a care plan for the development of a wound for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident 14).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the clinical record and interviews with staff it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician orders for one of 24 residents reviewed ( Resident 59).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that diagnostic services were provided in a timely manner to meet the needs one of 24 residents reviewed. (Resident 62).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain infection control practices to prevent spread of infection for one of 24 sampled residents. (Resident 52).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility policy review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse for one of 5 residents reviewed. (Resident 5) Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled Abuse Policy, last revised September 2022 revealed all reports of resident abuse .shall be promptly reported to local, state and federal agencies (as defined by regulations). Review of Resident 5's clinical record revealed a behavior note dated October 1, 2023 at 12:30 p.m. stating This writer observed resident playing with Resident 4's breast Resdient 5 removed hands leaving Resident 4's breast exposed. Review of facility incident report revealed there was no evidence the state agency was notified of this incident of abuse. Review of Event Report system revealed no event report for this incident of abuse. [...]
13 fire safety citations on file: 4 on March 14, 2025, 4 on February 1, 2024, 5 on March 15, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 1, 2024 | Fine | $55,807 |
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) | 3.49 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.95 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.21 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.93 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.62 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 70.1% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 66.7% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.71 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 3.61 on weekdays and 3.21 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 29.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.14 in April to June 2025 to 3.49 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 | 3.49 | 0.95 | 3.61 | 3.21 | 29.7% | 0 of 90 | 70 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.08 | 0.76 | 3.20 | 2.78 | 32.8% | 0 of 92 | 70 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.08 | 0.61 | 3.24 | 2.67 | 28.6% | 0 of 92 | 71 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.14 | 0.73 | 3.34 | 2.63 | 27.4% | 0 of 91 | 72 |
| 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 | 36.2 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.5 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 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 | 44.1 | 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 | 12.4 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.8 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.9 | 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 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Gardens at Stevens, the's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (57.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
57.9% 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. 51 eligible stays.
9.8% 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. 64 eligible stays.
6.4% 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. 45 eligible stays.
31.0% 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. 29 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. 35 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania2.0% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 35 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. 8 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: MAYBROOK-P DENVER OPCO, LLC. CMS links this home to Priority Healthcare Group, a group of 12 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maybrook-P Opco Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 08/15/2016 |
| Bl Capital Group Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 24% | 01/28/2020 |
| Fair Oaks Family Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 12% | 01/28/2020 |
| Samara Holdings Company LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10% | 01/28/2020 |
| Strawberry Hill Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10% | 01/28/2020 |
| Sebbag, Gabriel | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 5% | 08/15/2016 |
| Clinical Consulting Services LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2019 | |
| Priority Care Group LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2019 | |
| Summation Financial Services LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2019 | |
| Pearlstein, Robert | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Steranko, Joseph | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/21/2023 | |
| Clinical Consulting Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/30/2025 | |
| Maybrook-P Denver Propco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/15/2016 | |
| Summation Financial Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/30/2025 | |
| Pearlstein, Robert | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2025 | |
| Steranko, Joseph | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/14/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Pennsylvania. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.