Home / Pennsylvania / Greensburg
227 Sand Hill Road, Greensburg, PA 15601 · Westmoreland County · (724) 837-6482
137 certified beds, about 129 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1981
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395500 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on November 20, 2025, inspectors cited 12 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
Of 77 health citations since October 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $18,873 in the last three years; the largest was $18,873, and the latest is dated November 20, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.15 hours per resident per day, against 3.89 across Pennsylvania and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.51 of those hours.
47.3% 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 77 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Pennsylvania's Nursing Practice Act and clinical records, as well as staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that an assessment was completed by a professional (registered) nurse after an injury occurred for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 1).
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 wound care were followed for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a safe environment for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 1). This deficiency is being cited as past non-compliance.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that staff provided assistive devices to drink in accordance with the resident's care plan for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 1). This deficiency is being cited as past non-compliance.
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 use proper infection control practices during wound care for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policy, clinical records and grievances, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make ongoing efforts to resolve a grievance for one of 7 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the stove/oven was maintained in working condition in the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that pressure ulcer care/prevention treatments were provided as ordered for two of four residents reviewed (Resident 3, 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents' environment remained free of accident hazards, and failed to ensure a safe route of egress through emergency exit doors for residents on two of three units ([NAME] and [NAME] units), which placed residents in immediate jeopardy of the likelihood of serious bodily injury, harm or death.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and employee job descriptions, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility's administration, Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing, failed to effectively use its resources to promote resident safety and maintain the highest practicable physical well being of residents in the facility by failing to ensure that emergency exit doors were accessible to residents, allowing egress to the outside during an emergency situation, placing the residents at risk for serious harm which created an Immediate Jeopardy situation.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to clarify questionable physician's orders for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 67).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food that was palatable to residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food was served under sanitary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that call bell was within reach for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 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 ensure that comprehensive admission Minimum Data Set assessments were completed in the required time frame for five of 48 residents reviewed (Residents 46, 68, 71, 83, 122).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, as well as resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement an individualized care plan for dental needs for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 89).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that care plans were updated to reflect changes in care needs for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that foot care needs were provided timely for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, investigation reports, clinical records, and staff education records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from accidents that resulted in injury for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 46). This deficiency is being cited as past non-compliance.
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 maintain accountability for controlled medications (drugs with the potential to be abused) for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 67).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide medications as ordered by the physician, resulting in a significant medication error for one of 46 residents reviewed (Resident 115).
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 facility policy and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders regarding medication administration were followed for one of eight residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of 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 four residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to notify to update the admitting facility with information about laboratory testing and results for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain laboratory studies as ordered by the physician for one of three residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews, as well as staff and resident interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers/baths as scheduled for two of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 36, 68).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate care to ensure that interventions were in place to prevent urinary tract infections for three of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 13, 80, 104) who had indwelling urinary catheters.
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 were followed for two of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 88, 109) who had a feeding tube.
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 long-term intravenous catheters were flushed per facility policy for three of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 101, 104, 136).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician visits were conducted at least every 60 days after the first 90 days of admission for three of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 8, 13, 61).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to honor the resident's right to make informed choices and participate in his/her treatment for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 84).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to determine if residents were safe to self-administer medications for three of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 19, 78, 108).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that call bells were within reach for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 59).
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 (instructions regarding the provision of health care when the resident is incapacitated) or assist in formulating an advance directive for four of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 14, 17, 59, 101).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and personnel files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete a criminal background check prior to hire for one of three nurse aides reviewed (Nurse Aide 3).
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 of the transfer and reason for hospitalization for four of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 13, 88, 109, 131). This deficiency was cited as past noncompliance.
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 61 residents reviewed (Residents 6, 13, 51, 78, 80, 88, 128).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop care plans to address individualized resident care needs for two of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 70, 80).
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 a resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care needs for two of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 51, 80).
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure care and services were provided in accordance with professional standards regarding medication administration for two of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 47, 77).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders regarding treatment administration were followed for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 80).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as resident, family, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents had proper assistive devices to maintain adequate hearing for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 14).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and clinical records, as well as 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 for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 113).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies and personnel files, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aide performance evaluations were completed annually based on hire dates for two of three nurse aides reviewed (Nurse Aides 8, 9).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the physician responded timely to pharmacy recommendations for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 61).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility policies, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a separately-locked, permanently-affixed compartment in the refrigerator for the storage of controlled drugs in one of two medication rooms reviewed (medication room on [NAME] unit), failed to discard an expired multi-dose inhaler in one of three carts reviewed ([NAME] long hall cart), failed to label an opened, multi-dose insulin vial in one of three carts reviewed ([NAME] long hall cart), and failed to ensure that medications were properly stored and labeled for two of 61 residents reviewed (Residents 78, 108).
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 provide adaptive eating equipment as ordered by the physician for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 42).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that clinical records were complete and accurately documented for one of 61 residents reviewed (Resident 130). Findings Include: A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 130, dated August 6, 2024, revealed that the resident was understood, could understand others, and had a diagnosis which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - a common lung disease that makes it difficult to breathe) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD - a chronic condition that occurs when stomach contents leak into the esophagus, causing irritation and other symptoms). [...]
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 manufacturer's directions for use and observations, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain two of three laundry dryers in safe operating condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean, homelike environment for one of 15 residents reviewed (Resident 10).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that treatments for pressure ulcers were provided as ordered by the physician for one of 15 residents reviewed (Resident 10).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that proper infection control practices were performed during care for one of 15 residents reviewed (Resident 15).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff and family interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to routinely conduct care plan meetings and invite the resident or representative to attend for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 6).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and facility assessment reports, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to complete safety assessments for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 4) who used an air mattress.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of established infection control guidelines 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 two of six residents reviewed (Residents 1, 4).
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 medications were followed for two of four residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2), and failed to ensure that verbal phone orders were written and followed for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the accountability of controlled medications for one of 10 residents reviewed (Resident 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physicians orders were followed for one of 10 residents reviewed (Resident 5).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medications were provided as ordered by the physician for three of 66 residents reviewed (Resident 7, 64, 97) and failed to ensure that physician orders were followed for one of 66 residents reviewed (Resident 90).
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 maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status by failing to ensure timely notification of the physician for one of 66 residents reviewed (Resident 65). Findings Include: The facility's policy regarding food and nutrition anthropocentric (measurements), dated January 19, 2023, indicated that any resident with a weight change of 5 percent or more since the last weight assessment will be reweighed for confirmation and that interventions would be based on several things. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of 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 66 residents reviewed (Resident 64).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies and clinical records, as well as staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that non-pharmacological (non-medication) interventions were attempted prior to the administration of anti-anxiety medications for one of 66 residents reviewed (Resident 64).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of policies, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that dietary staff wore hair coverings that completely covered their facial hair during food handling and failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety by not dating opened food items and not storing food under sanitary conditions.
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 policies and clinical records, as well as observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that proper infection control practices were followed while providing medications for one of 66 residents reviewed (Resident 79), failed to ensure that proper infection control practices were followed for urinary catheter care for one of 66 residents reviewed (Resident 109), and failed to report COVID positive residents and staff to the Department of Health.
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 and annual Minimum Data Set assessments were completed in the required timeframe for four of 66 residents reviewed (Residents 26, 60, 93, 96).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument 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 time frame for two of 66 residents reviewed (Residents 23, 60).
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 four of 66 residents reviewed (Residents 30, 51, 60, 97).
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 two of 66 residents reviewed (Residents 23, 30).
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 two of 66 residents reviewed (Residents 90, 121).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow recommendations from a wound consultation and failed to administer treatments per physician's orders for one of 66 residents reviewed (Resident 74).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical record reviews and facility policies, 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 66 residents reviewed (Resident 51).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that clinical records were complete and accurately documented for one of 66 residents reviewed (Residents 81). Findings Include: An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (a mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) for Resident 81, dated May 24, 2023, revealed that the resident was cognitively intact, was independent with daily care needs, and had diagnoses that included diabetes. Physician's orders for Resident 81, dated January 1, 2023, included an order for insulin aspart, inject 10 units subcutaneously (under the skin) each morning with breakfast. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment was maintained in a homelike manner in the hallways on the [NAME] nursing unit.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with showers as scheduled for one of nine residents reviewed (Resident 1).
16 fire safety citations on file: 1 on January 5, 2026, 1 on November 24, 2025, 5 on November 20, 2025, 3 on October 9, 2024, 6 on November 9, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| November 20, 2025 | Fine | $18,873 |
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) | 3.15 | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.51 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.96 | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.79 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.85 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 47.3% | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 52.6% | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.73 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 3.23 on weekdays and 2.96 on weekends, 8% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 3.4% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.15 in April to June 2025 to 3.15 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 | 3.15 | 0.51 | 3.23 | 2.96 | 3.4% | 0 of 90 | 129 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.29 | 0.48 | 3.41 | 3.00 | 5.6% | 0 of 92 | 129 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.32 | 0.53 | 3.43 | 3.05 | 6.9% | 0 of 92 | 127 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.15 | 0.55 | 3.24 | 2.94 | 3.2% | 0 of 91 | 128 |
| 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 | 12.5 | 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 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.9 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.4 | 17.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 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 | 21.4 | 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 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Twin Lakes Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (33.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
33.2% this home
Worse than 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. 52 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 68 eligible stays.
6.2% 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. 50 eligible stays.
54.0% 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. 76 residents counted.
1.8% 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. 111 residents counted.
1.7% 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. 111 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. 30 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: WESTMORLAND CENTER OPCO LLC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rosenzweig, Steven | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 100% | 11/01/2018 |
| Mwambu, Paul | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Rosenzweig, Steven | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2018 | |
| Mwambu, Paul | 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.