Home / Pennsylvania / Lancaster
900 East King Street, Lancaster, PA 17602 · Lancaster County · (717) 299-7850
446 certified beds, about 391 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1989
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395774 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 29, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
None of its 35 health citations since November 2023 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 3.04 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.34 of those hours.
56.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Imperial Healthcare Group, an affiliated group of 9 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 35 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that foot care needs were provided timely for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 4). Based on review of policies and clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that foot care needs were provided timely for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 4). Findings Include:Review of facility policy Podiatry Service Policy states The facility shall provide access to Podiatry services for residents based on physician or authorized practitioner orders, resident needs and applicable federal and state regulations. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of facility policy and procedure, observation and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure appropriate items were in place for a resident with a restraint for one of thirty-five residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to update the Comprehensive Care Plan for one out of thirty-five resident's reviewed. Review of clinical orders for Resident #11 finds an order placed on June 28, 2025, for a status of Full Code (medical directive where a resident requests all possible life-saving measures be utilized in the event of a cardiac arrest). Review of Resident #11's Comprehensive Care Plan reveals that the care plan was updated on May 28, 2026, to reflect the resident's change in code status to Full Code. Review of Resident #11's clinical record failed to reveal evidence that Resident #11's care plan was updated to Full Code Status on June 28, 2025, when Resident #11's physician initiated the Full Code Status order. 28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Clinical Records 28 Pa.
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that physician ordered fluid restrictions were monitored daily as ordered for two of thirty-five residents reviewed (Resident 2 and Resident 19).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to provide enteral nutrition (feeding delivered through a feeding tube) as ordered by the physician for one of four residents reviewed. (Resident 1)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and facility documentation review revealed the facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment for 3 of 7 units. (4th, 5th, and 6th floors)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical records review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's wound care order for one of two residents reviewed (Resident CL1).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide toenail care for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to protect and facilitate the resident's right to receive unopened mail for two of two residents interviewed (Resident 16 and Resident 17).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical records review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician orders regarding showers for 1 of 5 resident's reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure weights were monitored and a significant weight change was promptly addressed for five out of 15 residents reviewed (Residents 27, 74, 158, 202, and 338).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of the facility policy, review of the medication manufacturer's guidelines, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store and label medication on four of four medication carts reviewed (7th Floor South Side Cart, 7th Floor North Side Cart, 8th Floor North/South Cart and 8th Floor Southeast/Northeast Cart)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical records review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure dignity was maintained during meals for one of the 35 residents reviewed (Resident 51).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of the facility's policy, clinical records, and facility documentation, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to timely notify the physician of an unwitnessed fall with a facial bruise for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident 305).
Inspectors wroteBased on housekeeping routine schedule, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and home-like environment for one of 40 sampled residents (Resident R197).
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS) were completed accurately for two of two residents reviewed (Resident 193 and Resident 244).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for two of the 35 residents reviewed (Resident 23 and 111).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure resident call bells were answered and addressed in an appropriate amount of time for one of one resident (Resident R197). Finds include: Review of Resident R197's clinical record revealed the following diagnoses: unspecified injury at an unspecified level of the cervical spinal cord (spinal cord injury), quadriplegia (a symptom of paralysis that affects all of a person's limbs and body from the neck down), and muscle wasting and atrophy (thinning of muscle tissue). Review of Resident R197's care plan revealed the following interventions: TRANSFER: Resident is dependent on the assistance of two staff members using a mechanical lift (Hoyer lift) for all transfers; non-ambulatory. This care plan had a start date of March 4, 2019. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review and interview, it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for medication administration and fluid restrictions for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident 1, Resident 27 and Resident 371).
Inspectors wroteased on observations, clinical records review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow a wound treatment order for one of the four residents reviewed (Resident 111).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of consultant pharmacist's Medication Review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a pain scale as recommended by the pharmacist and agreed to by the nurse practitioner for the use of a narcotic and failed to provide Non-pharmaceutical Interventions prior to the administration of narcotic pain medication for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 371).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure infection control prevention and management was practiced during medication administration and meal set up for two 35 residents reviewed (Resident 1 and 51).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of clinical records, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide reasonable accommodation of needs for one of five residents reviewed (Resident R1). Findings Include: Review of Resident R1's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the following diagnosis: acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (not enough oxygen in the blood due to a failure in oxygen exchange in the lungs), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a lung condition caused by damage to the airways that limit airflow in and out of the lungs), anxiety disorder (characterized by excessive, persistent and uncontrollable worry and fear about everyday situations), muscle wasting and atrophy (deterioration of ones muscles), and difficulty in walking. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that [NAME] Nursing and Rehabilitation Center failed to ensure a resident was monitored for weight loss and follow physician orders for one of two residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for three of 40 residents reviewed. (Residents 67, 222, and Resident 223)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide enteral nutrition (delivery of nutrition by a feeding tube) in accordance with physician's order for four of 11 residents receiving enteral feeding (Residents 72, 244, 259, and 364).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP-infection control prevention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities) were in place for residents requiring enhanced barrier precautions for nine of nine residents reviewed (Residents 59, 67, 72, 106, 130, 152, 220, 343, and 364).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for three of 35 residents reviewed (Residents 165, 250, and 396).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident 73).
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain and monitor weights for two of 35 residents reviewed for nutrition (Residents 259 and 348).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, it was determined the facility failed to administer as needed pain medications for appropriate pain levels for one of ten residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident 97).
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure one of three residents reviewed for dialysis was free of significant medication errors (Resident 220).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure assistive devices for eating were made available for one of the 18 residents reviewed (Resident 189).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the medication manufacturer's guidelines, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure medications were properly labeled and stored on one of the medication carts observed (8th SW Floor Medication Cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews it was determined that [NAME] Nursing and Rehabilitation Center failed to ensure a clean, sanitary environment in the kitchen and/or food storage area.
22 fire safety citations on file: 4 on April 11, 2025, 7 on May 22, 2024, 11 on July 27, 2023.
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 | Pennsylvania | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.04 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.34 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.80 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.81 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.89 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 56.0% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 25.0% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.11 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 3.13 on weekdays and 2.80 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 29.6% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.09 in April to June 2025 to 3.04 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 | 3.04 | 0.34 | 3.13 | 2.80 | 29.6% | 0 of 90 | 391 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.17 | 0.34 | 3.23 | 3.00 | 29.5% | 0 of 92 | 395 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.08 | 0.32 | 3.18 | 2.81 | 26.8% | 0 of 92 | 399 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.09 | 0.33 | 3.21 | 2.81 | 21.2% | 0 of 91 | 388 |
| 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.
Trains nurse aides: this home runs a state-approved CNA program for its own hires (state list: PDE Approved NATCEP by County, as of March 1, 2026). A nursing home cannot charge aides it employs, or has offered a job, for state-approved training (42 CFR 483.152(c)). See Lancaster Nursing and Rehab CNA training on CareerFunded, our sister site for career training.
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 | 12.1 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.7 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.5 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 28.1 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.6 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 9.2 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Lancaster Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (37.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
37.0% this home
Worse than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Pennsylvania: 100 better, 108 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 161 eligible stays.
8.8% 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. 174 eligible stays.
6.0% 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. 100 eligible stays.
46.7% 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. 167 residents counted.
1.6% 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. 258 residents counted.
1.0% 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. 258 residents counted.
87.0% 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. 54 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: CONESTOGA VIEW SNF OPERATIONS LLC. CMS links this home to Imperial Healthcare Group, a group of 9 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conestoga View SNF Operations Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/30/2021 |
| Ch Pa7 SNF Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/30/2021 | |
| Chrh Equities LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Ens Holdings, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Ih Pa Operations Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/30/2021 | |
| The Ens Family Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Ymcs Equities LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/20/2021 | |
| Gottesman, Daniel | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/20/2021 | |
| Evans, Angela | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 04/30/2021 | |
| Herzka, Yisroel | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/20/2021 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Pennsylvania. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.