Home / Pennsylvania / Erie
6351 West Lake Road, Erie, PA 16505 · Erie County · (814) 838-9191
78 certified beds, about 74 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1996
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395996 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 31, 2026, inspectors cited 1 health deficiency (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
None of its 14 health citations since August 2024 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 4.93 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 1.27 of those hours.
42.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Presbyterian Seniorcare Network, an affiliated group of 5 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 14 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care), and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the MDS assessments accurately reflected the status for one of 19 residents reviewed (Resident R67).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident was offered the opportunity to participate in the development, review, and/or revision of their person-centered care plan for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident R6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure physician's orders and resident Resuscitation Authorization (a legal document specifying the resident/responsible party choices regarding life-sustaining treatments) were consistent for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident R18).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident and the resident's representative, in writing regarding the reason for transfer to the hospital and to ensure that a bed-hold notice was provided to the resident's responsible party for three of 18 residents reviewed (Residents R24, R37, and R40) and failed to make certain that the necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider upon transfer to the hospital for two of 18 residents reviewed (Residents R24 and R40).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one of 18 residents reviewed (Resident R7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for hospice services for one of two hospice residents reviewed (Resident R58).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clinical rationale for the continued use of a PRN (as needed) psychotropic (affecting the mind) medication beyond 14-days and failed to provide evidence that non-pharmacological interventions (interventions attempted to calm a resident other than medication) were attempted prior to the administration of a PRN psychotropic medication for one of three residents reviewed (Resident R58).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to appropriately discard outdated medications for one of three medication carts reviewed and one of two medication rooms reviewed (Avonia Springs medication room and medication cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the most recent Department of Health Survey results were in a place readily accessible to residents and visitors for five of five neighborhoods (Eagle Ridge, [NAME], Avonia Springs, Blue [NAME], and Sandpiper).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for one of 19 residents (Resident R65) and failed to provide a resident and his/her representative with a summary of the baseline care plan for one of 19 residents (Resident R175).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of seven residents observed for medication administration (Resident R227).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure recommendations made from the consultant pharmacist were acted upon for one of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident R36).
Inspectors wroteBased upon observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications subject to abuse were stored in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment in one of five medication refrigerators (Blue [NAME]).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain sanitary food service operations for one of six kitchens (Blue [NAME] kitchen).
6 fire safety citations on file: 2 on July 31, 2026, 2 on July 2, 2025, 2 on August 8, 2024.
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) | 4.93 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 1.27 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 4.45 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.87 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.79 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 42.6% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 27.3% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.76 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 5.12 on weekdays and 4.45 on weekends, 13% 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 4.81 in April to June 2025 to 4.93 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 | 4.93 | 1.27 | 5.12 | 4.45 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 74 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 5.00 | 1.19 | 5.16 | 4.58 | 0.1% | 0 of 92 | 72 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 5.02 | 1.18 | 5.28 | 4.35 | 3.7% | 0 of 92 | 72 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.81 | 1.21 | 5.05 | 4.21 | 8.3% | 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.
| 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 | 20.2 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.1 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.8 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.7 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.4 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.9 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 6.6 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.2 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Manchester Commons of Presbyterian Seniorcare's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (58.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
58.2% this home
Better 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. 216 eligible stays.
11.0% 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. 209 eligible stays.
4.7% 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. 111 eligible stays.
60.6% 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. 99 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. 120 residents counted.
2.3% 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. 120 residents counted.
95.4% 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. 87 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: PRESBYTERIAN HOMES IN THE PRESBYTERY OF LAKE ERIE. CMS links this home to Presbyterian Seniorcare Network, a group of 5 nursing homes averaging 3.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amann, Carol | Corporate director | Individual | 05/01/2019 | |
| Bernhardt, Anita | Corporate director | Individual | 05/19/2021 | |
| Boslau, Todd | Corporate director | Individual | 09/08/2020 | |
| Feidler, Frederick | Corporate director | Individual | 05/09/2007 | |
| Ohrn, James | Corporate director | Individual | 04/17/1991 | |
| Pfadt, Ellen | Corporate director | Individual | 11/06/2013 | |
| Pieffer, James | Corporate director | Individual | 03/15/2015 | |
| Presogna, Eric | Corporate director | Individual | 09/29/2023 | |
| Seib, Gary | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/1996 | |
| Shine, Timothy | Corporate director | Individual | 09/29/2023 | |
| Boslau, Todd | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/08/2020 | |
| Seib, Gary | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/1996 | |
| Presbyterian Seniorcare | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2014 | |
| Boslau, Todd | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/08/2020 | |
| Briody, Kelly | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/10/2020 | |
| Gray, Roberta | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/10/2012 | |
| Seib, Gary | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/1996 | |
| Presbyterian Seniorcare | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2014 | |
| Boslau, Todd | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/08/2020 | |
| Briody, Kelly | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/28/2025 | |
| Seib, Gary | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/1996 |
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.