Home / Pennsylvania / Franklin
351 Causeway Drive, Franklin, PA 16323 · Venango County · (814) 437-0100
148 certified beds, about 101 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1989
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395777 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 29, 2025, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
None of its 35 health citations since October 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.09 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.48 of those hours.
46.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
CMS links it to Wecare Centers, an affiliated group of 13 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 35 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, job descriptions, clinical records, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to answer a call bell appropriately to provide care and services that are resident centered and failed to uphold professional standards of practices to promote the physical and mental well-being to meet the needs for one resident (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to have complete and accurate documentation regarding showers for four of four residents reviewed (Residents R1, R2, R3, and R4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to have complete and accurate documentation regarding physician's orders for a gastrostomy (G-tube-tube placed in the stomach for feedings and fluids) for one of three residents reviewed with a G-tube. (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policy, clinical and facility records, resident and staff interviews, and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a bath/shower as resident preference for four of 13 residents (Resident R1, R2, R3, and R4) and failed to assure residents attain or maintain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being by not serving meals in the dining room and having group activities for six of 13 residents (Residents R1, R4, R6, R7, R8, and R9).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility admission process and policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain resident dignity for one of two residents observed related to incontinence care (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and the Long Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User ' s Manual 2025 (RAI-assessment guide used to plan the provision of care for residents), observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care in accordance with professional standards for repositioning and pressure relief for two of two residents reviewed (Residents R1 and R5), and incontinence care for one of two residents observed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and records, observations, and resident and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and at an appetizing temperature for one of one test trays completed.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent the potential for cross-contamination during completion of incontinence care (care provided for someone who has lost control of their bladder and/or bowel movements) for two of two residents observed (Residents R1 and R5).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure physician's orders and resident Pennsylvania Order for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST - a legal document specifying the resident/responsible party choices regarding life-sustaining treatments) were consistent for one of 20 residents reviewed (Resident R19).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide resident privacy during medication administration for one of six residents observed (Resident R107).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide the resident and/or resident representative with a written notice of the facility bed-hold policy (explanation of how long a bed can be held during a leave of absence and the cost per day); failed to make certain that the necessary resident information was communicated to the receiving health care provider upon transfer to the hospital; and failed to complete a discharge summary for four of 20 residents reviewed (Residents R1, R2, R103, and R105).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to review and/or revise resident care plans to reflect resident's current condition for one of 20 residents reviewed (Resident R38).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent the opportunity for potential unauthorized access of medications and failed to appropriately discard outdated medications for two of three medication carts reviewed (Medication carts 400 and 600).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical records, resident council minutes, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide dental services in a timely manner for one of 20 residents reviewed (Resident R97).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Pennsylvania Code Title 49. Professional and Vocational Standards, facility job descriptions, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow nursing standards of practice to ensure physician orders were entered into point click care (PCC-a healthcare software used to track and administer healthcare operations in a long-term care facility) upon admission to ensure timely medication availability and timely medication administration for one of 17 residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to enter physician's orders timely resulting in a delay in treatment for one of 17 residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to have complete and accurate documentation regarding Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC-a thin soft flexible tube placed in the vein of the upper arm also called an IV to deliver fluids and medications) dressing changes for two of three residents reviewed with PICC lines in the treatment record. (Residents R1 and R2)
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility infection control program and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the designated Infection Preventionist (IP) was qualified with specialized training in infection prevention and control from 4/10/25 to 5/25/25.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical record, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medication was obtained and provided as ordered by the physician for one of 10 residents reviewed for medications (Resident R3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, facility documentation, and clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to review and/or revise comprehensive care plans to reflect the current necessary care and services for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania Code Title 49 and Title 55: Professional and Vocational Standards, clinical records, facility staffing, and facility policy, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to have sufficient staff with the appropriate skill sets to provide nursing services including timely medication administration, and post-fall assessments for three of eight residents reviewed (Residents R5, R7, and R8).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, facility documents and clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain residents receive appropriate treatment and services to attain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident R1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medication was obtained and provided as ordered by the physician for two of two residents reviewed for medications (Residents R1 and R2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of a facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was stored in accordance with standards for food safety in two of two unit refrigerators reviewed (East Unit and [NAME] Unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a foley catheter (tubing inserted into the bladder to help drain urine from the bladder) was emptied and the amount was documented every shift per physician's orders for one of 21 residents reviewed (Resident R21)
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to promote accurate tracking and safe disposition of controlled medications for one of three closed records reviewed (Closed Record Resident CR87).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it was free from significant medication errors for one of 21 residents reviewed (Resident R75).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store Schedule II-V medications in a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment in one of two medication rooms reviewed (West medication room) and failed to appropriately discard outdated medications for one of two medication rooms reviewed (West medication room).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and Title 49. Professional and Vocational Standards, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assure that a Registered Nurse (RN) conducted initial and/or follow up resident wound assessments for two of two residents with wounds (Residents R33 and R92).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documents and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to fully complete the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) letter for one of four residents reviewed (Closed Record Resident CR1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the resident and resident representative with a written notice of the facility bed-hold policy (explanation of how long a bed can be held during a leave of absence and the cost per day) upon transfer for one of 21 residents reviewed (Resident R78).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and Minimum Data Set (MDS - federally mandated standardized assessment conducted at specific intervals to plan resident care), and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the MDS assessment accurately reflected the status for one of 21 residents reviewed (Resident R54).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to demonstrate the necessary clinical condition for the use of urinary catheter (tubing inserted into the bladder to drain urine into a bag) for one of 21 residents (Resident R8).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a PRN (as needed) anti-anxiety psychotropic (any drug that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior) medication had clinical rationale identified for the use beyond the limitation of fourteen days for two of 19 residents reviewed (Residents R31 and R50).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to display the Department of Health (DOH) Hotline (toll-free telephone number) number in a prominent/accessible location for residents, resident representatives, and other visitors to observe and access in the facility.
10 fire safety citations on file: 3 on August 29, 2025, 5 on September 20, 2024, 2 on October 20, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Pennsylvania | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.09 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.48 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.78 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.87 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.74 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 46.9% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 66.7% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.66 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 3.22 on weekdays and 2.78 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.57 in April to June 2025 to 3.09 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 | 3.09 | 0.48 | 3.22 | 2.78 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 101 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.15 | 0.52 | 3.28 | 2.82 | 0.3% | 0 of 92 | 99 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.17 | 0.56 | 3.30 | 2.83 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 99 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.57 | 0.61 | 3.70 | 3.24 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 93 |
| 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.
Trains nurse aides: this home runs a state-approved CNA program for its own hires (state list: PDE Approved NATCEP by County, as of March 1, 2026). A nursing home cannot charge aides it employs, or has offered a job, for state-approved training (42 CFR 483.152(c)). See Sugar Creek Care Center CNA training on CareerFunded, our sister site for career training.
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 | 13.0 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.8 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.1 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.2 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 26.1 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.3 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 15.5 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Sugar Creek Care Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (50.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
50.6% 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. 51 eligible stays.
11.5% 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. 70 eligible stays.
6.7% 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. 35 eligible stays.
71.2% 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. 52 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. 68 residents counted.
3.2% 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. 68 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. 17 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: SCS OPCO LLC. CMS links this home to Wecare Centers, a group of 13 nursing homes averaging 1.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scs Holdco LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 05/01/2024 |
| Emsir LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Kja Upmc4 LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Korn, Eli | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Rodgers, Catherine | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Schwartz, Alan | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Wecare HCC LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Bush, Todd | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Rodgers, Catherine | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| 3sss 3 Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Brossier Companies LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/14/2025 | |
| Crestview 360 Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Crestview 720 Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Kja Upmc4 Propco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Legacy 360 Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Pa 4 Holdco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Pa 4 Prop 1 LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Pen Med LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| S C Prop 1 LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Schwartz Family Dynasty Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Wecare HCC LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/01/2024 | |
| Bush, Todd | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Korn, Eli | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Krutowsky, Stephen | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Rodgers, Catherine | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Stewart, Trevor | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/14/2025 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 |
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.