Home / Pennsylvania / Greensburg
685 Angela Drive, Greensburg, PA 15601 · Westmoreland County · (724) 837-6070
155 certified beds, about 142 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1983
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395539 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 30, 2026, inspectors cited 17 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 64 health citations since July 2024, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $61,944 in the last three years; the largest was $26,033, and the latest is dated July 20, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.90 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.42 of those hours.
41.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Felician Services, an affiliated group of 3 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 64 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food that was palatable and at safe and appetizing temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store and prepare food under sanitary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean and home-like environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, resident clinical record, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse for one of 38 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 notify the resident and the resident's representative, in writing regarding the reason for transfer to the hospital, and to ensure that the ombudsman was notified of the transfer to the hospital, for seven of 38 residents reviewed (Residents 1, 4, 7, 12, 76, 100, 144).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and shower schedules, 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 38 residents reviewed (Resident 19).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and 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 two of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 4, 76 ).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited mobility receives appropriate services, equipment, and assistance to maintain or improve mobility for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a safe environment for three of 38 residents reviewed (Residents 4, 13, 100).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician orders were obtained for intravenous (IV) therapy and orders to flush IV catheters (small tube inserted into a vein to deliver fluids or medication) were not obtained for two of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 17, 76).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were assessed and received trauma-informed care to eliminate or mitigate triggers for residents with the diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (a mental and behavioral disorder that develops related to a terrifying event) for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
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 two of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 4, 5).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to properly label and date eye drops in one of four medication carts reviewed ( [NAME] courtyard) and failed to store and maintain medications in two of four medication carts reviewed ([NAME] courtyard and [NAME] courtyard).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain clinical records that were complete and accurately documented for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 19). Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain clinical records that were complete and accurately documented for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 19).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction for previous surveys, and the results of the current survey, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to correct quality deficiencies and ensure that plans to improve the delivery of care and services effectively addressed recurring deficiencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of residents' clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident received pneumococcal immunizations for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 83) and failed to ensure each resident received the influenza vaccine for one of 38 residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review facility policies, employee education records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides completed the required annual education for three of three nurse aides reviewed (Nurse Aides 10, 11, 12).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that each resident received assistance devices to prevent accidents for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop an individualized care plan for three of three residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2, 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food that was palatable and at proper temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, clinical records, and facility investigation information, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of medication for nine of 51 residents reviewed (Residents 3, 25, 50, 53, 54, 91, 121, 129, 200).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that care plans were updated/revised to reflect specific care needs for five of 51 residents reviewed (Resident 6, 59, 64, 104, 119)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that urinary output was measured as care planned for one of 51 residents reviewed (Resident 137) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store and prepare food under sanitary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide confidentiality of residents' personal health information during medication administration for one of 51 residents reviewed (Resident 89).
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 three of 51 residents reviewed (Residents 12, 27, 46).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain accountability for controlled medications (drugs with the potential to be abused) for one of 51 residents reviewed (Resident 89).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of manufacturer's instructions and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a medication administration error rate of less than five percent.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, manufacturer's directions for use, and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to label multi-dose containers of insulin with the date they were opened in one of four medication carts reviewed (Villa [NAME] Garden medication cart), and failed to discard an expired bottle of testing solution for one of four medication room refrigerators reviewed (Villa [NAME] Garden medication room refrigerator).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction for previous surveys, and the results of the current survey, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to correct quality deficiencies and ensure that plans to improve the delivery of care and services effectively addressed recurring deficiencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the reach-in refrigerator in proper working condition in the Main Kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from abuse for one of eights residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies, clinical records, and investigation reports, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the environment was free of accident hazards by failing to ensure that hot liquids were served at appropriate temperatures for two of five residents reviewed (Residents 2, 5) resulting in burns to the residents, and failed to ensure that temperatures of hot liquids were taken, per facility policy, prior to serving the hot liquids to the residents. The facility's failure also placed the current residents who will receive hot liquids in Immediate Jeopardy of the likelihood of serious bodily injury, harm, or death.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and information provided by the facility, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food items at appetizing temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of 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 operated in compliance with state regulations and codes by not ensuring that hot liquids were served at appropriate temperatures, without which the residents health and safety are jeopardized for two of five residents reviewed (Resident R2, R5).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and investigation documents, as well as staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from abuse and neglect for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 1) who was transferred incorrectly, resulting in a fracture.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that staff immediately reported a fall with injury for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 1). Findings Include: A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 1, dated July 9, 2024, revealed that the resident was cognitively impaired, required assistance with care needs, was dependent for transfers, and had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease and osteoporosis (condition that weakens the bones and increases risk for fracture). The current activities of daily living care plan for Resident 1 indicated that the resident required the use of a mechanical lift for transfers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care needs for seven of 48 residents reviewed (Residents 3, 7, 26, 30, 64, 66, 73).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician's orders for four of 48 residents reviewed (Residents 43, 58, 65, 125).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to determine if residents were safe to self-administer medications for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 58).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident and/or resident representative had an opportunity to develop an advance directive or assist in formulating an advance directive for three of 48 residents reviewed (Residents 3, 7, 55).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the required notice to the resident or the resident's representative following the end of their Medicare coverage or a 48-hour advanced notice for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 122).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide confidentiality of residents' personal health information during medication administration for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 137).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies 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 dietary complaints for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 5).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and investigation documents, as well as staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from abuse and neglect for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 63).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and facility investigation documents, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of medication for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 111).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the ombudsman in writing regarding the reason for transfers/discharge to hospital for five of 48 residents reviewed (Residents 11, 47, 67, 73, 108).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's care plan was created to reflect the resident's specific care needs for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 84). A facility policy dated, October 13, 2023, revealed that the purpose of the interim care plan on admission and comprehensive care plans were driven by the CAA process to address resident concerns and resident unique characteristics, strengths, weakness, preferences, and needs which require interdisciplinary intervention. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policy and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents' environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible by transporting a resident without leg rests for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 26).
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 physician's orders for monitoring output were followed for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 73) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that fluid restrictions were being followed for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 58) and failed to ensure that a resident's weight was obtained and documented as per physician's order for a resident with a documented history of weight loss for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 73).
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 who were receiving tube feedings received appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 30).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that dialysis residents had an active physician's order to attend dialysis, failed to obtain physician's orders for the care and monitoring of dialysis sites, and failed to provide communication with dialysis facility for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 58).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of personnel files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aide performance evaluations were completed at least annually for two of five nurse aides reviewed (Nurse Aides 11 and 12).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services for residents with dementia-related behaviors and failed to develop and implement an individual person-centered plan to address dementia-related behavioral symptoms displayed for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 3) who had dementia.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications were properly secured in the medication cart, failed to label medications with the date they were opened in one of eight medication carts reviewed (B100 Room), and failed to ensure the narcotic box was properly affixed in the refrigerator.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide dental services to meet the needs of each resident for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 8).
Inspectors wroteBased on facility records and observations, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food items at palatable temperatures.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the designated interdisciplinary team member obtained the required information from the contracted hospice provider for two of 48 residents reviewed who were receiving hospice services (Residents 36, 45).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's plans of correction for previous surveys, and the results of the current survey, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to correct quality deficiencies and ensure that plans to improve the delivery of care and services effectively addressed recurring deficient practices.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of established infection control guidelines, facility policy, and residents' clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow infection control guidelines from the Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to reduce the spread of infections and prevent cross-contamination for one of 48 residents reviewed (Resident 5).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of employee education records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides completed the required annual education for two of five nurse aides reviewed (Nurse Aides 12, 18)
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 three of 48 residents reviewed (Residents 45, 73, 77).
5 fire safety citations on file: 1 on July 30, 2026, 3 on June 26, 2025, 1 on July 25, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 20, 2026 | Fine | $22,225 |
| November 21, 2024 | Fine | $13,686 |
| July 25, 2024 | Fine | $26,033 |
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) | 3.90 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.42 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.61 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.31 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.16 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.9% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 35.7% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.44 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.02 on weekdays and 3.61 on weekends, 10% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 5.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.89 in April to June 2025 to 3.90 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 | 3.90 | 0.42 | 4.02 | 3.61 | 5.3% | 0 of 90 | 142 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.15 | 0.36 | 4.25 | 3.91 | 11.7% | 0 of 92 | 142 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.02 | 0.40 | 4.15 | 3.68 | 14.9% | 0 of 92 | 144 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.89 | 0.38 | 4.07 | 3.43 | 18.8% | 0 of 91 | 146 |
| 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 | 34.1 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 28.9 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.7 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.6 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.7 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.2 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Saint Anne Home's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (54.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
54.0% 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. 146 eligible stays.
13.3% 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. 162 eligible stays.
4.8% 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. 87 eligible stays.
43.4% 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. 122 residents counted.
0.7% 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. 145 residents counted.
4.8% 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. 145 residents counted.
97.8% 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. 90 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: ST. ANNE HOME. CMS links this home to Felician Services, a group of 3 nursing homes averaging 3.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Felician Services Inc | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 11/09/2009 |
| S & T Bank | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 06/30/2023 | |
| Bajorek, Melanie | Corporate director | Individual | 10/17/2023 | |
| Begolly, Michael | Corporate director | Individual | 08/26/2020 | |
| Blout, Daniel | Corporate director | Individual | 08/31/2016 | |
| Brammell, Sandy | Corporate director | Individual | 08/29/2018 | |
| Burns, Helen | Corporate director | Individual | 08/26/2015 | |
| Eisaman, Karl | Corporate director | Individual | 08/26/2020 | |
| Kline, John | Corporate director | Individual | 08/26/2015 | |
| Kobuck, Shelley | Corporate director | Individual | 01/05/2026 | |
| Soltys, Frank | Corporate director | Individual | 08/30/2023 | |
| Zanotti, Marie | Corporate director | Individual | 08/31/2016 | |
| Fawley, Jenna | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/01/2025 | |
| Kobuck, Shelley | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/05/2026 | |
| The Carmelite System Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 06/01/2025 | |
| Roscoe, Brandon | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2025 | |
| Kobuck, Shelley | Trustee of the SNF | Individual | 01/06/2026 | |
| Baker Tilly Advisory Group LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/29/2024 | |
| Baker Tilly Us LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/24/2024 | |
| Cerity Partners LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/19/2024 | |
| Felician Services Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/20/2025 | |
| S & T Bank | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/19/2025 | |
| The Carmelite System Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/01/2025 | |
| Kobuck, Shelley | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/16/2026 | |
| Roscoe, Brandon | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/30/2025 |
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.