Home / Pennsylvania / Montoursville
1445 Sycamore Road, Montoursville, PA 17754 · Lycoming County · (570) 601-8100
133 certified beds, about 120 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1978
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 395379 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 13, 2026, inspectors cited 27 health deficiencies (the Pennsylvania average is 10, the national average 9.2).
None of its 85 health citations since November 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
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 85 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed clinical record review, clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notice to a resident or resident's responsible party before the resident's room change for three of five residents reviewed (Residents CR1, 3, 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable, homelike environment on two of six nursing units (Sycamore Boulevard and Maple Lane; Resident 2), and provide a safe and clean environment in the common intersection between Maple Lane, [NAME] Lane, and Little League Boulevard.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan regarding denture care for one of two residents reviewed (Resident 2). Findings Include: During an interview with Resident 2 on June 26, 2026, at 11:35 AM, they indicated that they had dentures. The resident showed their mouth and revealed they had a full set of upper dentures and a lower partial in place. Clinical record review for Resident 2 revealed they had been admitted on [DATE]. Further review revealed that the resident had no care plan (an outline of an individual's health needs, specific care requirements, and the actions necessary to achieve desired health outcomes) implemented since admission relating to denture care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policies and procedures, observation, clinical record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a dependent resident with activities of daily living assistance for one of one resident reviewed (Resident 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement interventions to maintain nutritional status for one of three residents reviewed for nutritional concerns (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of facility documents, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide menu items as indicated for three of three residents reviewed (Residents 2, 3 and 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policies, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure medication availability for two of six residents reviewed (Residents 2 and 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, and family and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from physical restraint for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store food items in a safe and sanitary manner and maintain equipment in a sanitary condition, in the main kitchen of the facility, main dining room, and on one of six nursing units (Little League Nursing Unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents could make choices regarding aspects of their lives that were significant to them, such as smoking, for three of three residents reviewed for concerns related to resident choices (Residents 28, 39, and 101).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to monitor the use of psychotropic medications for three of five residents reviewed for potentially unnecessary medications (Residents 4, 14, and 15).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, review of employee personnel records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop written procedures for screening potential employees that included all necessary components, maintain documentation of potential employee employment history screening for three of five newly hired employees (Employees 5, 6, and 7), and failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 15).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of facility documentation, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practical care regarding physician ordered medications and/or devices for four of 24 residents reviewed (Residents 4, 11, and 12); and implement resident-directed care and treatment consistent with the resident's care plan for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 101).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly investigate and implement interventions to prevent falls for three of eight residents reviewed for fall concerns (Residents 14, 39, and 101).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess all potential risks for entrapment for four of 13 residents reviewed for accident hazards (Residents 5, 8, 9, and 16) and failed to conduct ongoing assessments to assure appropriate maintenance with bedrail usage for two of 13 residents reviewed (Residents 8 and 16).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff possessed the appropriate competencies and skill sets related to the care and assessment of residents with enteral tube feeding, who utilize a lift, catheter care, medication administration, donning and doffing PPE (personal protective equipment), and dressing changes for four of four employees reviewed for competencies (Employees 13,14, 10, and 16).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent (Resident 51).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of select facility policies and procedures, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an environment free from the potential spread of infection on three of five nursing units (Maple Court, Sycamore, and Little League; Residents 4, 11, 15, 37, 51).
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to maintain documentation of staff COVID-19 vaccination status, and provide evidence that staff were offered the COVID-19 vaccine or information on obtaining the COVID-19 vaccine for three of three staff reviewed. (Employees 11, 18, and 19)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accommodate resident needs, creating a homelike environment for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, review of the facility's grievance log, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to address a grievance promptly and implement effective actions to resolve the reported grievance for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 90).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and family and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide written notice of transfer that included all the necessary contents to residents' responsible parties at the time of transfer for four of eight residents reviewed for hospitalizations (Residents 4, 5, 9, and 7); failed to provide timely written notice of the facility bed-hold policy to residents' responsible parties at the time of transfer for three of eight residents reviewed for hospitalizations (Resident 5, 9, and 7); and failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman upon transfer to the hospital for three of eight residents reviewed for hospitalizations (Residents 5, 9, and 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected a resident's status for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 43).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to revise a resident's comprehensive care plan for one of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 3) and failed to invite and ensure resident and/or responsible party participation in care plan meetings for 1 of 24 residents reviewed (Resident 28).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a dependent resident with activities of daily living assistance for one of four residents reviewed (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide services to maintain a resident's range of motion for two of seven residents reviewed for ROM concerns (Resident 3 and 45).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services regarding incontinence management for one of one resident reviewed (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and family and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement interventions to maintain nutritional status for one of seven residents reviewed for nutritional concerns (Resident 9).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for one of one resident reviewed with oxygen concerns (Resident 7) and maintain respiratory related equipment supplies in a safe and sanitary manner in one of one dining room observed (main dining room).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement appropriate care and services related to dialysis care for one of one resident reviewed for dialysis concerns (Resident 28).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to identify triggers related to a resident's diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, to provide culturally, competent, trauma-informed care, and to eliminate or mitigate re-traumatization for two of two residents reviewed for mood and behaviors (Residents 12 and 43).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store resident medications on two of six nursing units reviewed (Little League Nursing Unit and Sycamore Nursing Unit).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assure essential kitchen equipment is maintained in a safe, operating condition in the facility's main kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of posted daily nurse staffing data, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately post information regarding daily nurse staffing data as required.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly contain and dispose of garbage at the observed facility trash dumpster.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select policies and procedures, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to serve food that is palatable on four of six nursing units (Nursing Units [NAME], Little League, Sycamore, and Grampian; Residents 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interview with residents and staff, it was determined the facility failed to reasonably accommodate residents who may wish to eat outside of scheduled meal service times on six of six nursing units (Residents 1, 2, and 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding neurological assessments for one of five residents reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide required notification to a resident whose payment coverage changed for three of three residents reviewed (Residents 72, 101, and CR119).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide bathing assistance for residents dependent on staff assistance for 5 of 6 residents sampled for activities of daily living (Residents 22, 92, 7, 43, and 70).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician orders, medications, and treatments for six of 22 residents reviewed (Residents 22, 33, 42, 70, 109, 112, and 114).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician ordered pain medications for two of three residents reviewed (Residents 6 and 43)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to review the risk and benefits of side rail utilization with the resident or resident representative and receive consent for the use of side rails for four of five residents reviewed for accident hazards (Residents 33, 42, 70, and 109), and properly assess all zones that pose a risk for entrapment from bed rails on two of five residents reviewed (Residents 33 and 109).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides received an annual performance review and at least 12 hours of in-service education annually for three of three nurse aides reviewed (Employees 10, 11, and 12). Findings Include: Review of available personnel documentation for Employee 10 (nurse aide) revealed that the facility hired her on September 12, 2023. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on February 20, 2025, at 2:38 PM revealed that the facility could not provide evidence of an annual performance review (due September 2024) for Employee 10. Review of available personnel documentation for Employee 11 (nurse aide) revealed that the facility hired him on November 15, 2022. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure laboratory reports were in residents clinical records for 3 of 22 residents reviewed (Residents 22, 92, and 46).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's main kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an environment free from the potential spread of infection on two of five nursing units (Grampian: Residents 109, 112, 113, and 223; and Sycamore: Resident 22).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to honor advance directive choices for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 53).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policies and procedures, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to report an allegation of misappropriation of resident property for one of three closed records reviewed (Resident 118, Employee 2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff and resident interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected a resident's status for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 113).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility documentation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities designed to meet the individual needs and interests for one of one resident reviewed for activities (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide services to maintain a resident's range of motion for one of four residents reviewed for ROM concerns (Resident 7).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess and implement individualized interventions to promote bowel and bladder continence for one of one resident reviewed for incontinence (Resident 55).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care and services for three of three residents reviewed (Residents 22, 6, and 70).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement care to prevent potential complications from a dialysis access site for one of one resident reviewed for dialysis concerns (Resident 112).
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility documentation, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff possessed the specific competencies and skill sets related to the care and assessment of residents with indwelling urinary catheters, cardiac pacemaker devices, and central venous catheters, for three of three employees reviewed for competencies (Employees 2, 8, and 9; Residents 112 and 114).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and family and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide behavior health care that was individualized to attain or maintain the highest practical physical, mental, or psychosocial well-being for one of two residents reviewed for mood and behavior concerns (Resident 221).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement individualized person-centered care plans to address dementia and cognitive loss displayed by one of three residents reviewed (Resident 91).
Inspectors wroteBased on closed clinical record review, review of select policies and procedures, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the proper disposal and documentation of controlled medications for one of three discharged residents reviewed (Resident 118).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medication labeling was in accordance with currently accepted professional standards and active physician orders for one of eight residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident 221).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assist a resident to obtain routine dental care for one of one resident reviewed for dental concerns (Resident 46).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) meeting attendance and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the committee consisted of the minimum members (medical director and Director of Nursing) at least quarterly.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a residents medical record included documentation that the residents representative was provided education regarding the risks and benefits of the influenza immunization for one of five residents reviewed for immunization concerns (Resident 92).
Inspectors wroteBased on a review of facility staffing documents and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to designate a registered nurse (RN) as the Director of Nursing on a full time basis from November 11, 2024, to December 7, 2024.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the responsible party of a resident's change in condition requiring interventions for one of six residents reviewed (Resident CR1).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice for the prevention of a pressure ulcer for one of five residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews and review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides received an annual performance review for three of three nurse aides reviewed (Employees 3, 4, and 5). Findings Include: Review of the facility's list of active nurse aide staff revealed Employee 3 had a hire date of November 15, 2022. Employee 3 should have had an annual performance review by November 15, 2023. Employee 4 had a hire date of November 15, 2022. Employee 4 should have had an annual performance review by November 15, 2023. Employee 5 had a hire date of November 15, 2022. Employee 5 should have had an annual performance review by November 15, 2023. Requests to review Employees 3, 4, and 5's performance reviews revealed no documented evidence that the facility completed the reviews at least once every 12 months. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident or resident representative received written notice of the facility's bed hold policy at the time of transfer for six of 10 residents reviewed for hospitalizations (Residents 3, 10, 44, 45, 62, and 69).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician-ordered vital signs, medications, and interventions for two of 22 residents (Residents 8 and 52) and integrated hospice care and services for two of four residents reviewed (Residents 34 and 75).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to assess and implement treatment and services to prevent development and promote healing of pressure ulcers for four of six residents reviewed for pressure ulcer concerns (Residents 15, 22, 34 and 260).
Inspectors wroteBased on the review of facility documentation, four employee files and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nursing staff possessed the appropriate competencies and skill sets related to the care and assessment of resident tracheostomy, peg tube, and catheter care.
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 dementia and cognitive loss displayed by four of five residents reviewed (Residents 33, 50, 8, and 75).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident's attending physician addressed and responded appropriately to pharmacy recommendations for four of six residents reviewed (Resident 64, 33, 50, and 75) and failed to ensure that the consulting pharmacy identified potential appropriateness for psychoactive medications for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 64).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident's medication regime was free from potentially unnecessary medications for three of five residents reviewed (Residents 2, 8, and 64).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan regarding cognitive loss and psychotropic medication use with behaviors for two of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 64 and 75). Findings Include: Review of Resident 64's clinical record revealed a Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, an assessment done at specific intervals to determine care needs) dated May 12, 2023, revealed that the facility assessed Resident 64 as having cognitive loss and determined that a plan of care would be developed to address her cognitive loss. Review of Resident 64's current plan of care revealed that the facility did not develop a plan of care to address her cognitive loss until March 12, 2024. Interview with the Director of Nursing on March 15, 2024, at 9:32 AM, confirmed the above findings for Resident 64. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of select facility policies, clinical record review, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to invite and ensure resident and responsible party attendance and to hold care plan conferences for three of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 8, 62, and 66).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide services to maintain a resident's range of motion (ROM, movement of the body to maintain a resident's ability) for three of 10 residents reviewed (Residents 69, 66, and 20).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly investigate a resident elopement for one of 22 residents sampled (Resident 44)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care and services for one of two residents reviewed (Resident 8).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the highest practicable pain management for one of six residents reviewed (Resident 103).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, review of select policies and procedures, and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure accurate acquiring and dispensing of medications for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 103).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to prevent the potential spread of infection to one of five residents reviewed for infection control. (Residents 10).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to perform an assessment for possible entrapment after installation of enabler bars and/or side rails for two of two residents reviewed (Residents 22 and 66).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify a resident and/or the resident's responsible party in writing of a transfer to the hospital for seven of 10 residents reviewed (Residents 3, 34, 69, 44, 62, 45, and 10). The facility also failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of a transfer to the hospital for 3 of 10 residents reviewed (Residents 34, 44, and 69).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the highest practicable care regarding physician-ordered treatments for four of five residents reviewed (Residents 1, 2, 4, and 5).
21 fire safety citations on file: 10 on March 13, 2026, 4 on February 21, 2025, 7 on March 15, 2024.
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) | not reported | 3.89 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | not reported | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | not reported | 3.53 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | not reported | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | not reported | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 44.5% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 39.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS note on this home's staffing data: This facility did not submit staffing data.
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 October to December 2025, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.40 on weekdays and 3.09 on weekends, 9% 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 3.33 in April to June 2025 to 3.31 in October to December 2025.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.31 | 0.50 | 3.40 | 3.09 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 115 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.25 | 0.48 | 3.36 | 2.99 | 1.2% | 0 of 92 | 118 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.33 | 0.45 | 3.42 | 3.10 | 0.2% | 0 of 91 | 114 |
| United States, Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.76 | 0.62 | 3.93 | 3.34 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Pennsylvania, Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.71 | 0.65 | 3.85 | 3.36 | 10.9% | 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 | 16.5 | 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 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 3.1 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.3 | 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 | 15.1 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.4 | 22.5 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 6.8 | 9.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Wecare at Sycamore Rehabilitation and Nursing Cent's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.4% 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. 88 eligible stays.
11.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Pennsylvania: 3 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 90 eligible stays.
7.1% 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. 73 eligible stays.
54.9% 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. 71 residents counted.
1.1% 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. 95 residents counted.
3.4% 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. 95 residents counted.
96.4% 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. 28 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: LOYALSOCK OPERATING LLC. CMS links this home to Wecare Centers, a group of 13 nursing homes averaging 1.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loyalsock Operating LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 11/17/2022 |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 40% | 11/17/2022 |
| Korn, Eli | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 20% | 11/17/2022 |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 40% | 11/17/2022 |
| Creveling, Virginia | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 02/17/2025 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/17/2022 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/17/2022 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/17/2022 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/17/2022 | |
| Loyalsock Operating LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/17/2022 | |
| Wecare HCC LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/17/2022 | |
| Creveling, Virginia | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/17/2025 | |
| Goralnik, Boris | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/26/2023 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/17/2022 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/17/2022 | |
| 1445 Sycamore Realty LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/17/2022 | |
| Crestview 360 Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/17/2022 | |
| Crestview 720 Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/17/2022 | |
| Wecare HCC LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/17/2022 | |
| Creveling, Virginia | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/17/2025 | |
| Goralnik, Boris | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/26/2023 | |
| Grinspan, Aryeh | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/17/2022 | |
| Wielgus, Gedaliah | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/17/2022 |
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.
Licensed assisted living residences and personal care homes in the same town or within 5 miles, each with its Pennsylvania licence record.
These are the official offices in Pennsylvania. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.