Home / Pennsylvania / Columbia
745 Old Chickies Hill Road, Columbia, PA 17512 · Lancaster County · (717) 684-7555
173 certified beds, about 166 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1978
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395400 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 17, 2026, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 36 health citations since August 2024, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 9 fines totaling $105,688 in the last three years; the largest was $48,731, and the latest is dated March 29, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.03 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.44 of those hours.
47.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Pennsylvania average 44.5%).
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 36 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review, staff interviews, and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents are provided with dignity while receiving care for one of 33 residents reviewed (Resident 156).
Inspectors wroteBased upon clinical record review and facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure notification to the State ombudsman's office occurred for hospital transfers for two of thirty-three residents reviewed. (Resident 18 and Resident 25).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to accurately assess residents for two of two residents reviewed. (Residents 24 and 149)Findings Include: Review of Resident 24's clinical record reviewed Resident 24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of chronic respiratory failure. Further review of Resident 24's clinical record revealed resident was discharged to an acute care facility on January 28, 2026. Further review of Resident 24's clinical record failed to reveal evidence that a discharge MDS (periodic assessment of resident needs) was completed upon discharged .Review of Resident 149's clinical record revealed resident was admitted [DATE], and discharged [DATE]. Further review of Resident 149's clinical revealed that a Discharge MDS (Minimum Data Set - periodic assessment of resident needs) was not completed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, review of clinical records, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to provide timely care and services for two of 33 residents reviewed (Residents 2 and 11).
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, clinical record review, and facility documentation review it was determined the facility failed to ensure that one of five residents reviewed was free from accidents and provided adequate supervision for Resident 12. Review of Resident 12's diagnosis sheet revealed diagnoses type 2 diabetes (insufficient production of insulin, causing high blood sugar), and Alzheimer's Dementia (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions). Review of Resident 12's June 2026 Medication Administration Record revealed an order for Metformin HCl Tablet 500 MG Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day. Review of facility documentation revealed that on June 12, 2026, Resident 12 was administered crushed Metformin HCL tablet 500mg in coffee by Licensed Nursing Employee E6. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on facility policy, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain and monitor weights for one of eight residents reviewed for nutrition (Resident 45). Findings Include:Review of facility policy Weight Assessment and intervention revised September 2008 revealed that .Negative trends will be evaluated by the treatment team whether or not the criteria for significant weight change has been met. Interventions for undesirable weight loss shall be based on careful consideration. Review of Resident 45's clinical record revealed recorded weights of 151.4 pounds January 7, 2026; 140.2 pounds February 2, 2026, with a reweight on February 18, 2026, of 162 pounds; 140.4 pounds March 4, 2026. Further review of Resident 45's clinical record revealed a dietary note dated March 4, 2026, indicating the resident's weight. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased upon medication insert review, observation, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure medications were labeled with open and expiration dates for three of six medication carts observed (A South Medication Cart, A South Back Medication Cart and B South Back Medication Cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident was assessed by a dentist for one of one resident. (Resident 164)
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews with residents, review of facility policy, observations, and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food that was at an appetizing temperature on one of four units (B wing - Countryside).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical record, hospital record, and facility documentation, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that one of three residents (Resident R1) were free from significant medication errors which resulted in actual harm to Resident R1 requiring transfer to hospital and in patient monitoring due to medication administration. This was identified as a past non-compliance.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to complete a performance review at least once every 12 months for five of five nurse aides (Employees E4, E5, E6, E7, and E8).
Inspectors wroteBased upon review of facility policy and procedure, observation and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure proper infection control procedures were followed during medication administration observation and pressure ulcer wound treatments for three of three residents observed (Resident 6, Resident 22 and Resident 136.)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one of 32 residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status for two of three residents reviewed (Residents 4 and 22).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice for one of one resident reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased upon observation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure adequate and competent staffing levels were maintained to promptly respond to resident call bells on one day of three days of the survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and procedures and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure medications were properly labeled with open and expiration dates and failed to ensure expired medications were not administered for one of three medication carts reviewed (B Wing Medication Cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, hospital record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care and follow the physician's orders for two of the two residents reviewed (Resident CL1 and Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the resident and resident's representative, in writing, regarding the reason for hospitalization for five of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 18, 36, 38, 77, 85).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete accurate Minimum Data Set assessments for seven of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 28, 52, 53, 91, 94, 139, 162).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan that included specific and individualized interventions to address the care needs of residents for six of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 8, 25, 27, 38, 53, 120).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physicians orders were followed for three of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 104, 112, 139).
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 two of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 109, 125) and failed to protect the safety of other residents from violence from two of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 52, 85).
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 it was free from significant medication errors for two of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 8, 56).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews with residents and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food that was palatable to residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was stored and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety and failed to effectively sanitize dishes during mechanical dishwashing.
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 residents' clinical records were complete and accurately documented for three of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 94, 98, 112).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide care in a manner that maintained dignity for one of 56 residents reviewed (Resident 48).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to determine a resident's preference for bathing for one of 56 residents reviewed (Resident 48).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and observations, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that in preparation for room changes each resident received written notice, including the reason for the change, before the resident's room or roommate was changed for one of 56 residents reviewed (Resident 139).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that comprehensive admission Minimum Data Set assessments were completed in the required time frame for nine of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 22, 82, 112, 120, 131, 136, 153, 155, 157).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessments were completed within the required timeframe for seven of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 21, 26, 64, 70, 98, 139, 148).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain physician's orders for the administration of oxygen for one of 56 residents reviewed (Resident 139).
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 three of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 36, 94, 116).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to label medications with the date they were opened in one of two medication rooms reviewed (A unit) and in two of four medication carts reviewed (A and B unit).
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 three of 56 residents reviewed (Residents 25, 77, 94).
3 fire safety citations on file: 2 on July 25, 2025, 1 on December 17, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 29, 2024 | Fine | $48,731 |
| February 20, 2024 | Fine | $4,893 |
| January 30, 2024 | Fine | $14,679 |
| January 8, 2024 | Fine | $4,893 |
| January 2, 2024 | Fine | $4,545 |
| December 11, 2023 | Fine | $4,892 |
| November 20, 2023 | Fine | $4,634 |
| November 13, 2023 | Fine | $4,643 |
| October 23, 2023 | Fine | $13,778 |
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) | 3.03 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.44 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.78 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.83 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.76 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 47.7% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 30.0% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.38 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 3.14 on weekdays and 2.78 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 5.4% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.15 in April to June 2025 to 3.03 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 | 3.03 | 0.44 | 3.14 | 2.78 | 5.4% | 0 of 90 | 166 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.17 | 0.43 | 3.23 | 3.00 | 6.6% | 0 of 92 | 163 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.17 | 0.50 | 3.28 | 2.91 | 8.2% | 0 of 92 | 163 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.15 | 0.48 | 3.27 | 2.84 | 6.7% | 0 of 91 | 163 |
| 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 | 12.2 | 16.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 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 | 2.5 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.1 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 26.8 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.8 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.4 | 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 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Susquehanna Health and Wellness Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (40.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
40.8% 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. 48 eligible stays.
10.4% 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. 63 eligible stays.
6.6% 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. 45 eligible stays.
52.4% 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. 103 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. 149 residents counted.
1.5% 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. 149 residents counted.
97.2% 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. 36 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: SUSQUEHANNA REHABILITATION & WELLNESS CENTER LLC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Snhhc LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/09/2021 |
| Sar Ft Family Tr | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/09/2021 |
| Atwood, Mark | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Mandel, Avital | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/09/2021 | |
| Atwood, Mark | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/24/2025 |
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.