Home / Pennsylvania / Philadelphia
4001 Ford Road, Philadelphia, PA 19131 · Philadelphia County · (215) 877-5400
180 certified beds, about 50 residents a day · For profit - Partnership · Medicare and Medicaid since 2001
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 396076 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on December 11, 2025, inspectors cited 13 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 50 health citations since October 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $30,752 in the last three years; the largest was $22,350, and the latest is dated December 11, 2025.
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 50 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility policies, facility documentation and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that hot water temperatures in resident bathroom hand sinks and shower rooms were maintained at a safe temperature. This failure placed residents on three of three nursing units at risk of serious injury from a burn and resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation. (First floor East, Second floor East and West)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review facility policies and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean and homelike environment in resident care areas for two of three nursing units observed (1st floor East and 2nd floor [NAME] Nursing units). Findings Include:Review of facility policy Physical Environment: Common Areas dated January 2025, revealed, the facility will be designed, constructed, equipped, and maintained to protect the health and safety of residents, personnel and the public. On December 8, 2025, at 1:25 p.m. unit manager, Employee E8 confirmed that room [ROOM NUMBER]B had no grid on the heating unit and the cover of the heating unit was coming off. On December 9, 2025, at 12:45 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews it was determined that the facility failed to safeguard medications tor one of 29 residents reviewed (Resident R7). Findings Include: Review of Resident R7's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated September 30, 2025, revealed the resident had a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - progressive lung disease that makes it hard to breathe). Continued review of Resident R7's MDS dated [DATE], revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident R7's comprehensive care plan revised February 15, 2025, revealed the resident had the potential for inadequate respiratory function. Intervention dated July 26, 2022, indicated to provide medication as ordered. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that PRN (as needed) orders for anti-psychotic drugs are limited to 14 days and cannot be renewed unless the attending physician or prescribing practitioner evaluated the resident for the appropriateness of the medications for one of five residents reviewed. (Resident R10). Findings Include:Review of FDA (Food and Drug Administration) (The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), a federal agency within the Department of Health and Human Services, protects public health through the regulation of foods, drugs, cosmetics, and medical devices) guidance for Haldol revealed that, HALDOL (haloperidol) is indicated for use in the treatment of schizophrenia. Elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis treated with antipsychotic drugs are at an increased risk of death. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of facility discharge which occurred Against Medical Advise (AMA), attempts to provide discharge instruction, assess resident's capacity to make decision, attempts to contact the resident's representative, and notify the physician, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Residents R166).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility documents, observations, review of clinical records, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the resident's care plan was updated and revised to address a resident's diagnosis of legal blindness and required assistance with eating for one of 29 residents reviewed. (Resident R143)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews it was determined that the facility failed to implement physician orders related to high blood sugars for one of 29 residents reviewed (Resident R7).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that tracheostomy equipment was properly maintained for one of one resident receiving tracheostomy care. (Resident R127)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of facility policy and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain effective communication with a dialysis provider for one of two residents reviewed receiving hemodialysis. (Residents R82). Findings Include:Review of facility policy titled Hemodialysis, undated, states, Dialysis pre and post treatment summaries will be communicated to facility. A review of Resident R82's record revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnosis of End Stage Renal Disease. On December 9, 2025, at 2:37 p.m., an interview with the Director of Nursing, Employee E2, confirmed that dialysis communication for Resident R82 was requested by the facility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records it was determined that the facility failed to timely implement behavioral health interventions for one of five residents reviewed for behavioral/emotional health (Resident R4).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews with staff, and review of facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary storage and handling of personal food products brought in from outside sources for 1 of 29 residents. (R45). Findings Include:Review of Facility Policy: Resident Representative/Family Provided Food undated, states Food items provided and considered perishable are to be brought into the dietary department and food will be stored in the designated area which shall be temperature controlled. 3. No food will be held for more than 2 days from the provided date. 4. Food provided will be dated and labeled including use by date not to exceed 2 days. On December 8, 2025, at 1:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident R45, who had a small refrigerator next to his bed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator and the Director of Nursing failed to effectively manage the facility related to ensuring that hot water temperatures in resident bathroom hand sinks and shower rooms were maintained at a safe temperature. This failure placed residents on three of three nursing units at risk of serious injury from a burn and resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation. (First floor East, Second floor East and West)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and clinical record reviews, the facility failed to ensure staff followed infection control practices by not wearing a gown during tracheostomy care and incontinence care for one of 29 residents reviewed for tracheostomy care and incontinence care (Resident R127). Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precaution revealed that Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) are an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in nursing homes. Enhanced Barrier Precautions involve gown and glove use during high-contact resident care activities for residents known to be colonized or infected with an MDRO, as well as those at increased risk of MDRO acquisition (e.g., residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, facility policies and facility documentation, and interview with staff, it was determined the facility failed to ensure Resident R1 was free of neglect which resulted in actual harm to Resident R1 who was transferred from chair to bed without the use of a mechanical lift and sustained a left humeral fracture for one of five residents reviewed. (Resident R1)
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to report to the State Survey Agency and conduct an investigation related to an allegation of neglect for one of 9 residents reviewed. (Resident R2)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, clinical record review, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent a fall and to ensure that an air mattress was properly fastened to the bed for two out of nine residents reviewed. (Residents R1 and R8).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain complete documentation of resident's clinical records for one of 9 resident records reviewed (Resident R9).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of clinical records, review of facility policy, staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and failed to maintain an environment free of potential hazards for one resident with elopement risk (Resident R14). One of four residents reviewed. (Resident R1)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, and interview with staff and residents, it was determined that facility failed to ensure that resident were assisted out of bed as per resident's preference for nine of 69 residents observed (Resident R10, R11, R12, R13, R14, R15, R16, R17, R18)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interview with residents, it was determined that facility did not provide a clean, comfortable, homelike environment for four of 20 rooms observed (common shower room, Resident R8's room, room#225-B, room [ROOM NUMBER]-A)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews with staff, and a review of facility procedures, it was determined that the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and an interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that garbage and refuse was disposed of properly.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, review of clinical records, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of facility-initiated emergency transfers to the hospital and that a resident's representative was made aware of a facility-initiated transfer, for one of four residents reviewed. (Residents R136) Findings Include: Review of nursing notes for Resident R136 dated April 21, 2024, at 11:37 p.m. revealed that the resident had a seizure and was transferred to a local hospital for evaluation at approximately 11:25 a.m. Further review revealed a note, dated July 24, 2024, at 6:27 a.m., which indicated that Resident R136 was admitted to the local hospital for altered mental status on July 23, 2024. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed provide appropriate bed hold notice to a resident's representative of a facility-initiated transfer to the hospital for one of four residents reviewed related to transfers (Resident R136).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that resident assessments accurately reflected resident status related to restraints for two of 34 records reviewed (Residents R9, R38).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to update Pennsylvania Pre-admission Screening Resident Review (PASRR) of one resident with a new diagnosis of a serious mental disorder, out of 34 sampled residents reviewed (Residents R 103).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review and interview with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility did not develop a comprehensive care plan related to dementia, smoking, and pain management for 3 of 34 records reviewed (Residents R7, R28, R155).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that care plans were updated in a timely manner for one of 34 records reviewed related to hospice (Resident R31).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of personnel records and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility did not provide requested evidence of competency trainings for licensed nursing staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed clinical record review, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that controlled medications were disposed in a timely manner for one of 3 closed records reviewed (Resident R162).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility policies, review of facility documentation, clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program related with Transmission Based Precautions for one of 34 residents reviewed ((Resident R113).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, a review of clinical records, review of facility documentation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plans regarding preventing a reinfestation of lice for one of ten residents reviewed. (Resident R2).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations of the physical environment, reviews of the pest control operators' service, reports and contract and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was prepared appropriately for nine of nine residents on a pureed diet (Residents R52, R125, R4, R113, R445, R34, R55, R66, and R87). Findings Include: Review of undated facility documentation Dysphagia Level 1/Pureed Diet revealed the consistency of pureed foods should be smooth and thick enough to mound on the plate, and similar in consistency to that of pudding. Review of facility documentation dated April 5, 2024, revealed the following nine residents were ordered a pureed diet: Residents R52, R125, R4, R113, R445, R34, R55, R66, and R87. Observations on April 2, 2024, at 12:08 p.m. revealed Resident R52 was having lunch in the dining room. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility policies, clinical record reviews and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program related to infection surveillance, antibiotic usage and isolation precautions for four of four residents reviewed for antibiotics (Residents R45, R33, R124 and R15).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical record reviews and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols and systems for monitoring antibiotic use, for four of four residents reviewed for antibiotics (Residents R45, R33, R124 and R15).
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, observations, and record reviewed, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure proper accommodation of needs for one of seven residents reviewed regarding appropriate wheelchair size. (Resident R47)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that advanced directives were accurately reflected in residents' records for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident R45).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe, comfortable and homelike environment on one of three nursing units reviewed (Two [NAME] unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, facility policies and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation of one incident during a resident incontinence care for one of 32 residents reviewed. (Resident R 442).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of facility policy, clinical record reviews and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide nail care for two of eight residents reviewed related to activities of daily living (Residents R45 and R70).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility documentation and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to complete performance reviews for two of two nurse aides reviewed as required (Employees E28 and E29). Findings Include: Review of undated facility documentation, Active Employees Over 1 Year, revealed that Employee E28 was hired by the facility as a nurse aide on July 12, 2022. Continued review revealed that Employee E29 was hired by the facility as a nurse aide on August 3, 2009. Annual performance reviews were requested for Employees E28 and E29. Interview on April 4, 2024, at 3:00 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator, Employee E1, revealed annual performance reviews were not completed for Nurse Aides, Employee E28 and E29. 28 Pa. Code 201.19(2) Personnel policies and procedures
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure one of two medication carts observed remained locked on a secured nursing unit. (Second floor0.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the Facility's Assessment included a risk assessment for each resident environment to remain free of accident hazards for one of one nursing units observed (Second Floor Behavioral Health Nursing Unit) and one of one resident's reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent involuntary seclusion for four of four residents reviewed (Resident R1, R2, R3, and R4).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan that included non-pharmacological interventions for a resident receiving PRN (as needed) psychotropic medications for one of four residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from unnecessary medications for one of four residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of clinical records and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident and the resident's representative(s) of the transfer to the hospital and the reasons for the transfer in a timely manner, in writing and in a language and manner they understood after a selected resident was transferred to the hospital for one of nine residents reviewed. (Resident R1) Findings Include: Review of MDS (Minimum Data Set-Assessment of resident care needs) for Resident R1 dated September 8, 2023, revealed that the resident had a BIMS score of 10 which indicated that the cognitive status was moderately impaired. Review of nursing note for Resident R1 dated October 13, 2023, revealed that the resident was transported out to the hospital related to an unwitnessed fall. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident and resident representative receive written notice of the facility bed-hold policy at the time of a facility-initiated transfer to a hospital for one of nine residents reviewed. (Resident R1)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to update and revise a resident's care plan after multiple falls one of nine residents reviewed (Resident R1).
8 fire safety citations on file: 5 on December 11, 2025, 1 on January 13, 2025, 2 on April 5, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 11, 2025 | Fine | $22,350 |
| September 4, 2025 | Fine | $8,402 |
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) | not reported | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | not reported | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | not reported | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | not reported | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | not reported | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS note on this home's staffing data: This facility did not submit staffing data.
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 July to September 2025, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.71 on weekdays and 3.20 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 16% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.5% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.48 in April to June 2025 to 3.57 in July to September 2025.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.57 | 0.30 | 3.71 | 3.20 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 157 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.48 | 0.30 | 3.60 | 3.17 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 162 |
| United States, Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.77 | 0.62 | 3.95 | 3.33 | 5.5% | 0.6% of days | |
| Pennsylvania, Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.72 | 0.65 | 3.86 | 3.35 | 12.3% | 0.3% 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 | 28.8 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 21.0 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.1 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.8 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 31.3 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.5 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Monumentalpostacutecare at Woodside Park's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (44.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
44.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Pennsylvania: 100 better, 108 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 42 eligible stays.
10.8% 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. 61 eligible stays.
7.3% 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. 28 eligible stays.
51.7% 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. 29 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 38 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. 38 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. 7 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: BALA NURSING & RET CNTR LTD PTRSHP FORD RD CORP.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miller, David | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 11/30/1989 | |
| Miller, Michael | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 11/30/1989 | |
| Miller, Philip | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 11/30/1989 | |
| Miller, Robert | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 11/30/1989 | |
| Miller-Greenburg, Stephanie | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 11/30/1989 | |
| Wells, Angela | Corporate director | Individual | 03/30/2019 | |
| Wells, Angela | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/30/2019 | |
| Miller, David | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/30/1989 |
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.