Home / Pennsylvania / Altoona
1020 Green Avenue, Altoona, PA 16601 · Blair County · (814) 946-2700
120 certified beds, about 96 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1996
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395985 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 15, 2026, inspectors cited 15 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 106 health citations since September 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $99,042 in the last three years; the largest was $76,811, and the latest is dated August 22, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.52 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.67 of those hours.
57.4% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Saber Healthcare Group, an affiliated group of 126 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 106 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on a 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 (MDS) assessments for six of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 5, 53, 66, 84 and 95).
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 care plans were updated to reflect changes in residents' care needs for four of 45 residents reviewed (Resident's 4, 53, 102, 116).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders regarding medication administration were followed for three of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 10, 116 and 118).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical record reviews, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement a comprehensive behavior management program for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 90).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that a resident's drug regimen was addressed timely by the physician for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 7 and 78), resulting in the residents receiving unnecessary anti-infective medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was served under sanitary conditions, in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Finding Include: The facility's policy regarding storage of refrigerated foods, dated May 21, 2026, indicated that refrigerators in the facility used to store facility purchased food for residents should be equipped with an internal thermometer, even when equipped with an external thermometer. All perishable foods will be stored in order to maximize food safety and quality. Observations in the main kitchen on July 12, 2026, at 9:10 a.m. revealed a milk cooler containing four partial crates of milk that did not have an internal temperature gage. The walk in cooler had four containers of Dannon vanilla yogurt. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, clinical record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care in a manner that maintained dignity for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 116).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure care and services were provided in accordance with professional standards for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 105).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, observations, shower schedules, as well as staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers as scheduled for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 36).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, clinical record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the resident with requested bed pan resulting in bowel incontinence for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 116).
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 two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 7 and 53).
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 label medications in accordance with currently accepted professional principles by including the expiration date on liquid medication in one of two medication carts reviewed (3rd floor long hall).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to honor food preferences for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 116).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain clinical records that were complete and accurately documented for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction 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.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of polices and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed for three of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 42, 44 and 66).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 2) who had a feeding tube.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the accountability of controlled medications (drugs with the potential to be abused) for two of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 10, 113).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that proper infection control practices were followed during medication administration for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 13), and during wound care for two of 38 residents reviewed (Residents 8, 69).
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 each resident was offered and/or received the pneumococcal immunization for four of 38 residents reviewed (Residents 2, 16, 36, 45).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to honor the resident's right to make informed choices and participate in his/her treatment for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 71).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act, [NAME] Medication Administration rights, facility policies, and observations, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to document medication administration at the time of administration for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 13).
Inspectors wroteBased clinical record reviews, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders related to midline catheters (a type of peripheral catheter inserted into a large vein in the upper arm used to deliver fluids and/or medications) for 2 of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 3 and Resident 71).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and manufacturer's instructions, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it was free from significant medication errors for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 13).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident-centered care plans were implemented for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 2) regarding nutritional interventions.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to initiate nutritional interventions to assure that residents were offered sufficient food and fluid intake to maintain proper hydration and health for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain confidentiality of residents' personal health information for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the kitchen, in one of two pantries (second floor) and one of two refrigerators (third floor pantry) observed.
Inspectors wroteBased on a 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 four of 50 residents reviewed (Residents 3, 8, 45, 82).
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 maintain compliance with nursing home regulations and ensure that plans to improve the delivery of care and services effectively addressed recurring deficiencies.
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 ensure that comprehensive admission Minimum Data Set assessments were completed in the required time frame for four of 50 residents reviewed (Residents 35, 45, 89, 117).
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 50 residents reviewed (Residents 6 and 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate accounting of controlled medications (medications with the potential to be abused) for two of 50 residents reviewed (Residents 46, 53).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to respond to a pharmacy recommendation for one of 50 residents reviewed (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications were properly stored for one of 50 residents reviewed (Resident 56).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Pennsylvania Nurse Practice Act and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were clarified when needed for two of 12 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents received care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice, by failing to ensure that physician's orders were followed for two of 12 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2), and failed to follow recommendations from the orthopedist (a medical doctor specializing in the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of musculoskeletal system disorders) for a therapy evaluation for one of 12 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow facility policy for the care and monitoring of residents receiving dialysis for one of 12 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food items that were palatable.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents who required urinary catheterization (a flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) was completed as ordered for one of 12 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and shower schedules, as well as staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers as scheduled for four of nine residents reviewed (Residents 4, 5, 6, 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food items that were palatable.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility 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 have staff wear appropriate hair restraints during food preparation and tray line service.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that clinical records were complete and accurately documented for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that dependent residents were provided with the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene by failing to provide showers as scheduled for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide timely treatment to a newly identified pressure ulcer for one of 10 residents reviewed (Resident 9).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents received oxygen as ordered by the physician for one of 10 residents reviewed (Resident 10).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from significant medication errors for one of 10 residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility polices 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 eight residents reviewed (Residents 2, 5).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility investigation documents and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that safe transfer techniques were used in accordance with their care plans for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident 1) resulting in a fall.
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow a physician's recommendations for one of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 13) resulting in a deterioration of the wound with increased size, and there was no documented evidence that physician's orders were followed for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 12, 86).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that hot foods were not served at proper and palatable temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident and/or the resident's responsible party was given the opportunity to participate timely in the development and implementation of a person-centered care plan for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 12, 77).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders and residents' requests for ophthalmology appointments for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 69, 87).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to respond timely to a pharmacy recommendation for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 30, 89).
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 a resident's call bell was within reach for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 19).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans that included specific and individualized interventions to address specific care needs for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 12, 30).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, facility policy review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers as scheduled for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 12).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and facility investigation reports, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete safety assessments for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 13, 51) who used an air mattress.
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 address a change in urine status for one of 45 residents (Resident 12), and failed to provide proper care for indwelling urinary catheters for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 67).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide aggressive hydration of 4 liters a day recommended by urology for one of 45 residents reviewed (Resident 12).
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 and document care as scheduled for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 12, 19).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that controlled medications were stored in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment in one of two medication rooms reviewed (second floor), and failed to date an insulin pen with the date it was opened (third floor long hall medication cart).
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 staff provided assistive devices to eat in accordance with the resident's care plan for two of 45 residents reviewed (Residents 12, 28).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the call bell system was adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance, by failing to ensure that the call bell system was working for one of 45 resident reviewed (Resident 34).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policy and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the call bell system was adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance, by failing to ensure that the call bell system was working. This failure put 15 of 22 residents reviewed who need to utilize their call bell for staff assistance in an Immediate Jeopardy situation.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical records, and Resident Council meeting minutes, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make ongoing efforts to resolve resident grievances presented during the resident council meetings and for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 17).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, facility policy review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers as scheduled for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 16).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that there was timely physician notification and intervention for a significant weight loss for two of 22 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 16).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's written menus, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow their planned menu for three of 22 residents reviewed (Residents 17, 18, 20).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a therapeutic diet was provided as ordered by the physician for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 19).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain clinical records that were complete and accurately documented for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to treat residents with dignity by failing to answer call bells timely for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 17).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment in residents' rooms on one of two halls toured (200 hall).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident and legal guardian, in writing, regarding the reason for hospitalization for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed issue a bed hold notice at the time of an anticipated leave of absence from the facility for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a professional (registered) nurse assessed a resident after a change in condition for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 8), and failed to clarify physician's orders for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 12).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders for three of 22 residents reviewed (Residents 2, 3, 12).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure oxygen concentrators were functioning properly for four of 22 residents reviewed (Residents 13, 14, 15, 16).
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 staff provided assistive devices to eat in accordance with the resident's care plan for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 17).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of job descriptions and the deficiencies cited during the current survey, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) failed to assume responsibility for effective management of the facility to ensure that the facility was adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system, which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area from their rooms or bathrooms.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation to rule out abuse or neglect for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and facility reports, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents' environment remained safe for two of nine residents reviewed (Residents 2, 4) and failed to conduct a thorough investigation of resident-to-resident altercations to determine if care-planned interventions were followed for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate residents' preferences regarding showers for two of nine residents reviewed (Residents 5, 8).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility polices and clinical record reviews, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a plan of care to address a resident's psychosocial well-being related to her fear and not feeling safe after a resident-to-resident incident for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident 7).
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 behavioral intervention for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident who displayed mental or psychosocial adjustment difficulties received appropriate treatment and services to correct the problem for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and facility reports, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident did not display increased angry and aggressive behaviors by not following care-planned interventions for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident 6), resulting in the resident hitting another resident, and failed to evaluate appropriate treatment and services to maintain the resident's highest practicable physical and mental well-being by failing to address a resident's fear and not feeling safe after a resident-to-resident incident for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, investigative reports, and residents' clinical records, as well as staff and family interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from neglect caused by a failure to follow a resident's care plan and transfer status for one of 10 residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, clinical records, and investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that staff reported allegations of sexual abuse by one resident (Resident 7) towards two residents (Residents 8, 9) in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation into incidents involving inappropriate sexual behavior of one resident (Resident 7) towards two other residents (Residents 8, 9).
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 residents were provided with showers as scheduled for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders for medications were followed for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain blood work as ordered by the physician for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment in residents' rooms for two of 13 residents reviewed (Residents 2, 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, as well as staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers/baths as scheduled for one of 13 residents reviewed (Resident 8).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow recommendations from a wound consultation for one of 13 residents reviewed (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food that was palatable and at proper temperatures.
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 that residents were positioned appropriately while eating for one of 13 residents reviewed (Resident 10).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a safe environment was provided for one of 13 residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies and clinical record reviews, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide timely incontinence care for one of 13 residents reviewed (Resident 10).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents were free from unnecessary medications for one of 13 residents reviewed (Resident 11).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of 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 three of 41 residents reviewed (Residents 6, 65, 76).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and grievance records, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make ongoing efforts to resolve a grievance regarding mechanical lifts.
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 each resident was assessed, offered and/or received the pneumococcal immunizations for two of 41 residents reviewed (Residents 8, 11).
2 fire safety citations on file: 2 on September 11, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 22, 2024 | Fine | $76,811 |
| June 18, 2024 | Fine | $22,231 |
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) | 3.52 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.67 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.26 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.00 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.85 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 57.4% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 52.4% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.13 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 3.63 on weekdays and 3.26 on weekends, 10% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.41 in April to June 2025 to 3.52 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 | 3.52 | 0.67 | 3.63 | 3.26 | 0.7% | 0 of 90 | 96 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.46 | 0.71 | 3.57 | 3.20 | 1.2% | 0 of 92 | 91 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.52 | 0.72 | 3.68 | 3.10 | 6.4% | 0 of 92 | 95 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.41 | 0.66 | 3.48 | 3.23 | 9.9% | 0 of 91 | 95 |
| 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 | 22.9 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.9 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.2 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.8 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 28.5 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 9.7 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Midtown Oaks Health & Rehab Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (31.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
31.1% 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. 48 eligible stays.
11.3% 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. 49 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. 36 eligible stays.
39.5% 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. 38 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. 45 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. 45 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. 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: MIDTOWN OAKS HEALTH & REHAB CENTER, LLC. CMS links this home to Saber Healthcare Group, a group of 126 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volpe, Benjamin | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Weisberg, William | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Nicoluzakis, Gregory | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Volpe, Benjamin | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Weisberg, William | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Shg Management LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Bobitski, Nicole | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/08/2024 | |
| Folckemer, Jessica | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/29/2025 | |
| Weisberg, William | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 10/03/2025 | |
| Benjamin N. Volpe Family Dynasty Trust (dated December 29, 2020) | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Bnv Dynasty LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Citrin Cooperman Advisors LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Decanted William I. Weisberg Family Dynasty Trust (dated Sept 30, 2020 | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Midtown Oaks Re Group, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/30/2023 | |
| Rkl LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Saber Governance LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Saber Healthcare Group LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Shg Management LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Western Pa Mt LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 10/06/2025 | |
| Bobitski, Nicole | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/08/2024 | |
| Folckemer, Jessica | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/29/2025 | |
| Nicoluzakis, Gregory | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Scharf, Brett | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Volpe, Benjamin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Weisberg, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2023 |
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.