Home / Pennsylvania / Hollidaysburg
1037 South Logan Boulevard, Hollidaysburg, PA 16648 · Blair County · (814) 695-5571
132 certified beds, about 128 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395050 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 4, 2026, inspectors cited 13 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 31 health citations since August 2024, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $40,641 in the last three years; the largest was $40,641, and the latest is dated August 1, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.49 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.60 of those hours.
60.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Carmelite Sisters for the Aged & Infirm, 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 31 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to inform the resident and/or resident representative in advance of the risks and benefits of psychotropic medications (medications that affect the persons mental state, emotions and behavior) and the treatment alternatives prior to initiating the administration of the medication for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 47).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that call bells were within reach for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 21).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the attending physician and legal representative was notified concerning a change in condition for one of 41 residents reviewed (Resident 53).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation to rule out abuse or neglect for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care needs for two of 43 residents reviewed (Residents 1 and 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 9), and failed to ensure that psychiatric recommendations for medication changes were completed timely for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 47).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the physician of a wound that progressed to a pressure ulcer, failed to ensure treatments were in place to prevent the progression of pressure ulcers, and failed to ensure that pressure ulcer treatments were completed as ordered for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that neurological checks were completed per facility policy for a resident who sustained a head injury after a fall for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 24), and failed to ensure the environment remained as free from accident hazards as possible, by not completing elopement risk assessments quarterly per facility policy for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 115).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents received proper care for an indwelling urinary catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine from the bladder) for two of 43 residents reviewed (Residents 47, 92).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain accountability for controlled medications (drugs with the potential to be abused) for one of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 6).
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 date insulin pens in one of three medication carts reviewed (C1 medication cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was stored under sanitary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of established infection control guidelines and residents' clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow infection control guidelines from the Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to reduce the spread of infections and prevent cross-contamination for two of 43 residents reviewed (Resident 1,4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and information provided by the facility, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food items at appetizing temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety by failing to ensure hair was properly covered with a hair restraint.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to keep a clean, homelike environment on the D1 wing. Observations on July 21, 2025 at 11:15 a.m., July 22, 2025 at 9:32 a.m., and July 23, 2025 at 10:18 a.m. revealed that the D1 hallway carpeting and the D1 lounge carpeting had large brown and black stains. Interview on July 23, 2025 at 11:10 a.m. with the Director of Maintenance revealed that the carpeting on D1 and in the D1 lounge needs replaced and that despite the effort of the housekeepers to keep the area clean, the carpet is stained in multiple places.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, investigation reports, clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from abuse for one of 41 residents reviewed (Resident 122). This deficiency is being cited as past non-compliance. The facility's policy dated June 20, 2025, regarding prevention of abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation states that systems are in place to prevent resident abuse, including neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of property. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and employee files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that license checks were obtained prior to hire for two of two Registered Nurses (Registered Nurses 5 and 6). The facility's policy regarding protection from abuse, dated June 20, 2025, indicated that policies and procedures were developed to aid in preventing abuse, neglect, or mistreatment of residents, and protocols for conducting employment background checks and screening of employees. The personnel file for Registered Nurse 5 revealed a start date of June 9, 2025, with a license check done on July 23, 2025. There was no documented evidence that a license check was obtained prior to the staff's start date of June 9, 2025. The personnel file for Registered Nurse 6 revealed a start date of May 27, 2025, with a license check done on June 6, 2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy, clinical record reviews, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement an individualized care plan for fall prevention for one of 41 residents reviewed (Resident 12).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and employee files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that Pennsylvania Nurse Aide Registry checks were obtained prior to hire for two of two Nurse Aides reviewed (Nurse Aides 8 and 9). The facility's policy regarding protection from abuse, dated June 20, 2025, indicated that policies and procedures were developed to aid in preventing abuse, neglect, or mistreatment of residents, and protocols for conducting employment background checks and screening of employees. The personnel file for Nurse Aide 8 revealed a start date of May 27, 2025, with a Pennsylvania Nurse Aide registry check done on June 10, 2025. There was no documented evidence that the registry check was obtained prior to the staff's start date of May 27, 2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to assess a resident for safety in a chair after a known history of falls from the chair, resulting in a fall with fracture for one of 39 residents reviewed (Resident 2), and failed to follow fall prevention interventions for one of 39 residents reviewed (Resident 5) who had a history of falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a reasonable accommodation of needs by failing to ensure that the call bell was within reach for one of 39 residents reviewed (Resident 57).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete accurate Minimum Data Set assessments for two of 39 residents reviewed (Residents 45, 89).
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop an individualized care plan for diabetes mellitus and/or comfort care for two of 39 residents reviewed (Residents 69, 88).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care needs for two of 39 residents reviewed (Residents 88, 103).
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 obtain physician orders for pacemaker checks for two of 39 resident reviewed (Residents 36, 97) and failed to ensure that an assessment was completed by a professional (registered) nurse after an elopement occurred for one of 39 residents reviewed (Resident 99).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure neurological checks were completed following an unwitnessed fall for one of 39 residents reviewed (Resident 99).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that devices for pressure relief were in place as ordered by the physician for one of 39 residents reviewed (Resident 89).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed to provide tracheostomy care (care of a surgical incision in the neck that creates an opening into the windpipe) for one of 39 residents reviewed (Resident 127).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of personnel files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aide performance evaluations were completed at least annually for two of five nurse aides reviewed (Nurse Aides 5, 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction for previous surveys, and the results of the current survey, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to correct quality deficiencies and ensure that plans to improve the delivery of care and services effectively addressed recurring deficiencies.
20 fire safety citations on file: 10 on August 1, 2024, 10 on August 3, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 1, 2024 | Fine | $40,641 |
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) | 4.49 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.60 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.97 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.73 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.16 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 60.0% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 57.6% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.80 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 4.70 on weekdays and 3.97 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 7.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.48 in April to June 2025 to 4.49 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 | 4.49 | 0.60 | 4.70 | 3.97 | 7.1% | 0 of 90 | 128 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.60 | 0.61 | 4.80 | 4.07 | 7.0% | 0 of 92 | 125 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.50 | 0.62 | 4.73 | 3.93 | 6.2% | 0 of 92 | 129 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.48 | 0.54 | 4.71 | 3.90 | 11.5% | 0 of 91 | 130 |
| 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 | 19.2 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 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 | 1.2 | 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 | 17.5 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 19.1 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Garvey Manor's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (33.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
33.4% 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. 47 eligible stays.
10.0% 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. 51 eligible stays.
7.5% 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. 39 eligible stays.
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: 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. 16 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: 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. 16 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: 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. 16 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. 3 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: GARVEY MANOR NURSING HOME. CMS links this home to Carmelite Sisters for the Aged & Infirm, a group of 9 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dale, Steve | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 09/17/2018 | |
| Ferenchak, Theresa | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 01/04/2010 | |
| Hirner, Mary | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 01/04/2010 | |
| Andrews, David | Corporate director | Individual | 02/01/2017 | |
| Bell, Mary | Corporate director | Individual | 02/01/2017 | |
| Haley, Margaret | Corporate director | Individual | 06/15/2015 | |
| Karcher, Cynthia | Corporate director | Individual | 05/20/2014 | |
| Karcher, Richard | Corporate director | Individual | 01/04/2010 | |
| Mack, Diane | Corporate director | Individual | 01/04/2010 | |
| Maloy, Barbara | Corporate director | Individual | 02/01/2017 | |
| Murray, Gerald | Corporate director | Individual | 01/04/2010 | |
| Osinski, Ronald | Corporate director | Individual | 04/16/2015 | |
| Rawdon, Patricia | Corporate director | Individual | 01/04/2010 | |
| Ross, Pauline | Corporate director | Individual | 02/01/2017 | |
| Saly, Robert | Corporate director | Individual | 11/25/2013 | |
| Stever, Matthew | Corporate director | Individual | 05/20/2014 | |
| Thomas, Alan | Corporate director | Individual | 03/30/2016 | |
| Ferenchak, Theresa | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/04/2010 | |
| Hirner, Mary | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/04/2010 |
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.
Licensed assisted living residences and personal care homes in the same town or within 5 miles, each with its Pennsylvania licence record.
These are the official offices in Pennsylvania. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.