Home / Pennsylvania / Philadelphia
10400 Roosevelt Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19116 · Philadelphia County · (215) 698-5600
226 certified beds, about 218 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395182 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on November 20, 2025, inspectors cited 8 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 37 health citations since October 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $26,043 in the last three years; the largest was $26,043, and the latest is dated January 24, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.48 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.60 of those hours.
38.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to The Rosenberg Family, an affiliated group of 16 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 37 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, and review of clinical record, it was determined that facility did not ensure to develop and implement a care plan related to incontinence care and bed side rails for one of seven residents reviewed. (Resident R2)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews with staff and residents, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean home-like environment in resident-use and service areas for two of three nursing units observed. (600 and 700 nursing units)Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled, Soiled Linen, revied August 11, 2014, revealed that soiled linen is considered potentially contaminated and must be always covered with a lid. Observations conducted on January 21, 2026, at approximately 11:45 a.m. on the 600 nursing unit shower rooms revealed both shower floors were visibly soiled with dirt and muddy footprints smeared across the surfaces. The shower room bathroom trashcan was observed to be overflowing and had no hand clothes or paper towels were available for hand hygiene. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed within 14 days after the Assessment Reference Date (ARD) for four of seven sampled residents (Residents R32, R109, R16 and R164).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide evidence of a Level 1 pre-screening for mental disorders/intellectual disabilities for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident R52). Findings Include: Review of Resident R52's clinical record revealed resident admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis of Schizophrenia, Depression. Review of Resident R52's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS- federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated September 4, 2025, revealed a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 09, indicating resident cognitively impaired. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, interview with residents and review of facility provided documentation, it was determined that facility did not ensure to develop and implement a comprehensive resident centered care plan for two of 35 residents reviewed related to wound care and bedside rails (Resident R24, R29)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, observations and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that resident was appropriately assessed for risk of entrapment and did not obtain informed consent related to bedrails for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident R24).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5% during a medication administration pass. Three medication errors out of 26 medication administration opportunities observed during medication administration (Medication Error Rate of 11.54%).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of drug information reports, observations, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free of a significant medication error related to the administration of Nitroglycerin tablets, which are used to treat and prevent episodes of angina (chest pain) in individuals with coronary artery disease. The medication was administered via the wrong route for one of five residents reviewed (Resident R183).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, review of facility policy, observation, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals were stored in accordance with professional standards for 2 of 6 medication carts reviewed. (400 cart 2 and 400 split cart)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interviews, and policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure staff followed proper infection control practices by not cleaning and disinfecting a blood glucose monitor after the use for one of one observation (Employee E9)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review facility policies and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment in resident care areas and dining experience for one of five nursing units observed ([NAME] dementia Unit). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Housekeeping Safe and Sanitary Living Arrangements dated on June 1, 1996, revealed, St. [NAME] Nursing Home shall provide a safe and hygienic living arrangement for residents as designated by governmental agencies for licensure and certification purposes. In order to comply with this mandate, we require that employee within the Housekeeping Department clean resident rooms including bathrooms daily. On May 20, 2025, at 11:12 a.m. an observation was conducted on the nursing unit [NAME] in room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed Resident's R1, R2 and R3 bathroom was dirty. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, reviews of the electronic maintenance communication logs, interviews with staff and residents, policy and procedure reviews, and clinical record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure comfortable air temperature levels were provided on the 300 nursing unit placing residents at risk for developing hypothermia (condition of having a lower body temperature than normal body temperature). The cold air temperatures placed 19 of 32 cognitively impaired residents on the 300 nursing unit in an Immediate Jeopardy situation. (Residents R118, R149, R142, R85, R163, R103, R61, R145, R91, R113, R15, R164, R51, R179, R146, R27, R66, R264 and R9).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain resident care equipment in safe, operating conditions for three of seven nursing units toured (300, 400, and 700 nursing unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident with a facility-initiated transfer to the hospital was necessary and document the basis for the transfer in the residence medical record for one of three residents reviewed related to transfers.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a baseline care plan was developed for a one of 35 residents reviewed. (Resident R212.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations of care and services, clinical record reviews and interviews with responsible family members and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a consultation with an optometrist or ophthalmologist was obtained for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident R201)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide culturally competent, trauma informed care accounting for the resident's past experiences and preferences in order to eliminate and/or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for one of seven residents sampled (Resident R 191)
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized person-centered care plan to address a resident's dementia care needs for one of 35 residents reviewed (Resident R 88). Findings Include: Review of the admission sheet of Resident R88, revealed that Resident R88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission sheet of Resident R88 indicated that, on January 30, 2023, Resident R88 was diagnosed with Dementia (Dementia is not a specific disease but is rather a general term for the impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain and report laboratory results to meet resident needs for three of 35 residents reviewed (Resident R72, R204, and R169). Findings Include: Review of Resident R72's Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated resident assessment and care screening) dated October 21, 2024, revealed the resident had a diagnosis of hyperkalemia (elevated levels of potassium in the blood because the kidneys are unable to excrete the excess potassium - severe symptoms can include muscle weakness or affect the heart). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, facility documentation and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator failed to effectively manage the facility related to air temperatures between 71 degrees Fahrenheit and 81 degrees Fahrenheit in resident rooms and common areas for 19 cognitively impaired residents. This failure to maintain comfortable and safe air temperatures for residents residing in rooms 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316 and 317 resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, review of clinical records, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to review and revise behavior health care plan for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident R1). Findings Include: Review of facility policy Interdisciplinary Care Planning Protocol reviewed February 2023 revealed problems established by the team with the resident/family must be specific and individualized. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, review of facility provided documentation and interview with staff, it was determined that facility failed to ensure that a thorough investigation was conducted related to a injury sustained by a resident for one of five residents reviewed (Resident R1)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical record review and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notice, including reason for the change, before a resident's room change for one of 11 residents reviewed (Resident R2). Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled, Room Change, revised November 27, 2023, revealed that the facility may change a resident's room when it is medically necessary or if the resident requires a different level of care. Review of clinical records for Resident R2 revealed a progress note which stated that the resident was notified that he will be changed to a semiprivate room and that the family member was also informed. Interview with the Administrator, Employee E1, and Director of Nursing, Employee E2, on April 15, 2024, at 12:54 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility policy and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and services to enhance residents' dignity related to feeding residents, serving meals on disposable paperware and providing incontinent care for four of 36 Residents reviewed. (Residents R79, R4, R21, and R18).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of documentation and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents had access to grievance forms and access to the contact information of the grievance official on five out of five nursing units. (300-700 nursing units).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of clinical records, observations, and interview with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment was free of accident hazards related to medication administration for two out of 36 residents reviewed (Resident R147 and Resident R69) , and failed to ensure that hazardous materials were not accessible to residents on one of five nursing units. (700 unit)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of clinical record, review of facility policy and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care and services for 3 of 36 residents reviewed (Residents R29, R60, and 195).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, review of clinical records, and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it was free of medication error rate of five percent or greater two of two residents observed for medication administration. (Resident R127, and Resident R13)
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy, observations, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with professional standards, including expiration dates and with appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions on three of five nursing units. (700 unit, 300 unit and All Saints unit)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and served at the proper temperature for nine of 36 residents reviewed (Residents R119, R75, R31, R182, R34, R81, R85, R10, R71).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a communication device to maintain optimal communication for one of 36 residents reviewed. (Residents R189)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the appropriate size of an indwelling urinary catheter was used for one of 36 residents reviewed (Resident R2).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of facility policy, facility wound care tracking, hospital records, clinical records, national pressure ulcer guidelines and interview with facility staff, it was revealed that the facility failed to conduct a thorough skin assessment of a resident with pressure ulcers and documented history of skin impairment, consistent with professional standards of practice for one of three residents reviewed. (Resident R1) Findings Include: Review of National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel, Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries: Clinical Practice Guidelines, 2019, revealed that Assessment of Pressure Injuries and Monitoring of Healing: Conduct a comprehensive initial assessment of the individual with a pressure injury. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of clinical records, facility policies, hospital records and interviews with staff and resident representative, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a podiatry (a branch of medicine devoted to the study, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders of the foot and ankle) wound care recommendations from hospital was administered as recommended for one of three residents reviewed. Findings Include: Review of hospital record for Resident R1 dated December 27, 2023, revealed that the resident had anterior ankle and lateral foot wounds, pressure ulcer (Injury to skin and underlying tissue resulting from prolonged pressure on the skin.) to the left heel, which was unstageable, right heel pressure ulcer which was a Stage 1 and a sacral pressure ulcer which was a deep tissue injury (DTI- a serious form of pressure injury). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of clinical records, facility policy, hospital records and interview with staff and resident representative, it was revealed that the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services to promote healing of pressure ulcer consistent with professional standards of practice for one of three residents reviewed. (Resident R1) Findings Include: Review of hospital record for Resident R1 dated December 27, 2023, revealed that the resident had anterior ankle and lateral foot wounds, pressure ulcer (Injury to skin and underlying tissue resulting from prolonged pressure on the skin.) to the left heel, which was unstageable, right heel pressure ulcer which was a Stage 1 and a sacral pressure ulcer which was a deep tissue injury (DTI- a serious form of pressure injury). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans to meet care needs for one of nine residents reviewed. (Resident R6)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and served at the proper temperature for five of eleven residents reviewed (Residents R5, R1, R3, R2 and R6).
3 fire safety citations on file: 2 on January 24, 2025, 1 on March 8, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| January 24, 2025 | Fine | $26,043 |
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) | 3.48 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.60 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.25 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.11 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.77 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 38.1% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 18.9% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.56 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 3.58 on weekdays and 3.25 on weekends, 9% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 7.2% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.55 in April to June 2025 to 3.48 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 | 3.48 | 0.60 | 3.58 | 3.25 | 7.2% | 0 of 90 | 218 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.51 | 0.63 | 3.61 | 3.24 | 5.5% | 0 of 92 | 219 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.48 | 0.65 | 3.60 | 3.15 | 5.5% | 0 of 92 | 214 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.55 | 0.71 | 3.69 | 3.21 | 10.6% | 0 of 91 | 215 |
| 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 | 15.1 | 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 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.7 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.5 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 19.8 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 29.0 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 7.2 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for St. John Neumann Ctr for Rehab & Healthcare's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (50.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
50.8% 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. 100 eligible stays.
9.9% 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. 191 eligible stays.
7.7% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Pennsylvania: 7 better, 5 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 97 eligible stays.
70.6% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania54.4% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 85 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. 125 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. 125 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Pennsylvania100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 25 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: 10400 ROOSEVELT OPERATING LLC. CMS links this home to The Rosenberg Family, a group of 16 nursing homes averaging 2.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basch, Joel | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 8% | 11/28/2023 |
| Basch, Joshua | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 8% | 11/28/2023 |
| Basch, Moshe | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 8% | 11/28/2023 |
| Basch, Yitzi | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 8% | 11/28/2023 |
| Rosenberg, Avraham | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 10% | 11/28/2023 |
| Rosenberg, Esther | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 16% | 11/28/2023 |
| Rosenberg, Moshe | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 27% | 09/01/2014 |
| Rosenberg, Zvi | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 10% | 11/28/2023 |
| 10400 Roosevelt Realty | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 11/28/2023 | |
| Stern, Samuel | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Spector, Larry | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Varughese, Annie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/17/2023 | |
| 10400 Roosevelt Realty | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/28/2023 | |
| Rosenberg, Esther | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/28/2023 | |
| Spector, Larry | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/20/2025 | |
| Stern, Samuel | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/28/2023 | |
| Varughese, Annie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/27/1966 |
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.