WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR
For profit - Corporation
110 Beds
PRESTIGE HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Data: November 2025
1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
38/100
#378 of 653 in PA
Photo by Westgate Hills Rehabilitation & Nursing Center
Photo by Westgate Hills Rehabilitation & Nursing Center
Photo by Westgate Hills Rehabilitation & Nursing Center
1 / 5 photos
Last Inspection: November 2024
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Overview
Westgate Hills Rehabilitation and Nursing Center has a Trust Grade of F, indicating poor quality with significant concerns about care. Ranking #378 out of 653 facilities in Pennsylvania places it in the bottom half, while its county rank of #19 out of 28 suggests that only a few local options are better. The facility is reportedly improving, with issues decreasing from 10 in 2023 to 3 in 2024. However, staffing is a weakness, earning only 2 out of 5 stars and a 50% turnover rate, which is average but still concerning. The home has accrued $63,911 in fines, which is higher than 87% of Pennsylvania facilities, pointing to ongoing compliance problems. On the positive side, RN coverage is average, ensuring some level of oversight, but there are serious concerns as well. For instance, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control measures during a COVID-19 outbreak affecting 60 residents, and one resident suffered facial lacerations due to inadequate supervision, highlighting risks in resident safety. Additionally, food safety practices were not followed, with temperatures in refrigerators exceeding safe limits, which could pose health risks. Families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses carefully when considering this facility.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Pennsylvania
- #378/653
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 50% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $63,911 in fines. Lower than most Pennsylvania facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 31 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Pennsylvania. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 14 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
38/100
Bottom 43%
Review needed
10 → 3 violations
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★★☆☆
3.0
Care Quality
★★★☆☆
3.0
Inspection Score
↔
Stable
2023: 10 issues
2024: 3 issues
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
3-Star Overall Rating
Near Pennsylvania average (3.0)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Staff Turnover: 50%
Near Pennsylvania avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Federal Fines: $63,911
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Chain: PRESTIGE HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATIVE
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 14 deficiencies on record
1 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Nov 2024
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based 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 o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based 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 one of twenty-two residents reviewed (Resident 28).
Findings include:
Review of facility's policy regarding medication administration, revealed that medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Right resident, right drug, right dose, right route, and right time are applied for each medication being administered. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the prescriber.
Review of Resident 28's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (mandated assessment of a resident's abilities and care needs) dated August 31,2024, indicated that the resident was cognitively intact, required assistance from staff for her daily care needs, and had diagnoses that included Chronic Systolic (Congestive) Heart Failure (long-term condition that happens when your heart can't pump blood well enough to give your body a normal supply),and Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (irregular heartbeat).
Review of Resident 28's Physician orders, dated July 26, 2024, included an order for the resident to receive 50 milligrams (mg) of Metoprolol Succinate Extended Release ER (blood pressure medication)every 12 hours for hypertension, and to hold the medication if the resident's systolic blood pressure (top number of a blood pressure reading) was below 105 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) OR heartrate is less than 60 beats per minute.
Review of Resident 28's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the month of October 2024 indicated that Metoprolol was administered twenty-three (23) times between dates of October 1, through October 31, 2024, when the resident's heartrate was less than 60 beats per minute.
Interview with the Director of Nursing and the Nursing Home Administrator on November 07, 2024, at 12:10 p.m. confirmed that staff did not follow the physician-ordered parameters for Resident 28's Metoprolol on the above dates and times.
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing Services
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of facility's policy, clinical records review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely and appropriately address a significant weight change for one o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of facility's policy, clinical records review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to timely and appropriately address a significant weight change for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 93).
Findings include:
Review of the facility policy titled Weight Policy, dated August 29, 2023, revealed that all weights are to be documented in the electronic medical record. Weight variances will be reviewed by the dietician and the Interdisciplinary team (IDT). Confirmed re-weights will be documented in the electronic medical records. The dietitian will reassess the nutritional needs and intakes of any resident with a significant weight change. Interventions will be evaluated and documented. The resident's physician and responsible party will be notified of any significant weight changes.
Review of Resident 93's clinical records revealed resident was receiving a continuous enteral feeding via gastrotomy tube (GT- tube inserted through the abdominal wall used to give drugs and liquid food to the patient) at 1560 ml., for total calories of 1872 kcal.
Review of Resident 93's weights and vitals revealed a baseline weight of 130 pounds on September 20, 2024, and 120.2 pounds on October 16, 2024, a 9.8 pounds (7.54%) significant weight loss in less than a month.
Review of Resident 93's clinical records failed to reveal that the resident was reweighed when a significant weight change was identified on October 16, 2024.
Review of Resident 93's clinical records revealed Resident 93's significant weight change was not addressed by the dietitian until October 23, 2024, seven days after significant weight loss was identified on October 16, 2024.
Review of Resident 93's Dietitian's progress notes dated October 23, 20203 at 1:14 p.m., revealed current BMI (Body Mass Index- value derived from the mass and height of a person) 16.8, is underweight. The dietitian also documented This weight loss is a clinically significant change, therefore recommend MD/RP notification per policy. Etiology for weight loss is unclear.
Review of Resident 93's nursing progress documented on November 1, 2024, revealed physician was notified of the weight loss, two week after significant weight change was identified on October 16, 2024.
Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted on November 7, 2024. The DON reported that re-weight is done right after weight change was identified. The DON reported that nursing is responsible for notifying the physician of a significant weight changes. The DON reported that the dietitian informed her/him of the weight loss on October 30, 2024.
The above information was conveyed with the Nursing Home Administrator on November 7, 2024, at 11:30 a.m.
The facility failed to ensure Resident 93's significant weight change was timely and appropriately addressed and physician was timely notified.
28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1) Management
28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Clinical records
28 Pa. 211.12(c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based upon clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medication irregularities were acte...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based upon clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that medication irregularities were acted upon by a physician for one of five residents reviewed (Resident 67).
Findings include:
Review of Resident 67's clinical record revealed Resident 67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Review of Resident 67's clinical record revealed Resident 67 currently has a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 5, indicating severely impaired cognition.
Review of Resident 67's clinical record reveal medical diagnoses of Restlessness and Agitation, Unspecified Dementia (loss of memory, language and other thinking abilities that interfere with daily life) with Behavioral Disturbance, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Alzheimer's Disease, Unspecified Protein Calorie Malnutrition, and Nutritional Deficiency.
Review of Resident 67's clinical records revealed a physician order dated May 25, 2024, for Mirtazapine oral tablet 7.5 mg. for appetite.
Review of Resident 67's clinical records revealed a physician order dated August 13, 2024, for Lorazepam oral tablet 2 mg/ml. for Anxiety.
Further review of Resident 67's clinical records revealed a physician order dated August 13, 2024, for Quetiapine Fumarate oral tablet 25 mg. for Insomnia.
Review of Resident 67's clinical record revealed a MRR (Medication Record Review) was completed on July 10, 2024, with the recommendation, Please evaluate Mirtazapine use for Appetite without a Depression diagnoses.
Review of Resident 67's clinical record revealed that a MRR (Medication Record Review) was completed on August 8, 2024, with three recommendations, 1. Please evaluate Quetiapine use for insomnia, 2. Suggest PRN (as needed) Lorazepam order for Anxiety indicates x14 days, 3. Please evaluate Mirtazapine use for appetite without a Depression diagnoses.
Further review of Resident 67's clinical record revealed that a MRR (Medication Record Review) was completed on September 10, 2024, with the recommendation, Please evaluate Mirtazapine use for Appetite without a Depression diagnoses.
Review of Resident 67's clinical record revealed the physician was signing the pharmacy recommendation reports without any response or indication that the pharmacy recommendations were acted upon.
Interview with the Director of Nursing on November 7, 2024, at 12:03 p.m. who confirmed the above findings.
483.45 Drug Regimen Review, Report Irregular,
28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Clinical records
28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Clinical records
28 Pa. Code: 211.12(1)(3)(5) Nursing services.
Previously cited 12/14/17 and 10/03/16
28 Pa. Code: 211.9(k) Pharmacy services
Dec 2023
7 deficiencies
1 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL
(K)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, facility policy and clinical record review, and interview with staff, it was determined the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, facility policy and clinical record review, and interview with staff, it was determined the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases which resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy for 60 residents on the second floor nursing unit.
Findings include:
Review of facility policy titled COVID-19 Prevention, Response and Reporting with a revision date of December 7, 2023, revealed It is the policy of this facility to ensure that appropriate interventions are implemented to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and promptly respond to any suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infections.
Review of facility documentation revealed the facility experienced a COVID-19 outbreak beginning on December 7, 2023, and continues as of December 15, 2023, located on the second floor effecting 60 residents.
Interview conducted on December 11, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Acting IP (infection Preventionist) revealed all staff and visitors must wear full PPE (personal protective equipment) on the second floor while in a room with a resident who is positive for COVID-19 or who has been exposed to COVID-19.
Interview further revealed that staff were to remove PPE prior to leaving a COVID-19 positive resident's room and wash their hands after leaving the resident's room and before entering a resident room.
Observations conducted on December 11, 2023, at 10:15 a.m. on the second-floor nursing unit revealed Employee E1 entering a resident's room who was deemed positive with COVID 19 virus wearing only a surgical mask and not washing his/her hands. Approximately three minuets later, Employee E1 was observed exiting the resident's room without washing his/her hands. Employee E1 then proceeded to enter a resident room who was noted to be COVID-19 negative without washing his/her hands.
Additional observations conducted on December 11, 2023, at 10:15 a.m. on the second-floor nursing unit revealed housekeeping Employee E2 cleaning a room noted to have COVID-19 positive residents wearing only a surgical mask. Housekeeping Employee E2 was further observed leaving the room of COVID-19 positive residents without washing his/her hands before entering a COVID-19 negative resident's room.
Interview conducted with Housekeeping Employee E2 on December 11, 2023, at 10:25 a.m. revealed Employee E2 knew he/she was to wear full PPE while in a COVID-19 positive room. Housekeeping Employee E2 was unable to provide surveyor with a reason why Employee E2 did not wear full PPE while cleaning the room of the COVID 19 positive resident.
Observations conducted on December 12, 2023, at 8:23 a.m. revealed Licensed Employee E3 standing at a medication cart on the second-floor nursing unit with a N95 mask positioned below the nose. Additional observation on the second-floor nursing unit at 11:16 a.m. revealed Licensed Employee E3 sitting behind the nurses station with a N95 mask again positioned below his/her nose. Licensed Employee E3 further observed speaking with nursing staff saying, This is stupid, I don't want to wear this mask, it doesn't even work. Licensed Employee E3 was further observed to wear the mask below his/her nose for the remainder of the day.
Observation conducted on December 12, 2023 at 8:26 a.m. on the second-floor nursing unit revealed Housekeeping Employee E2 cleaning a COVID-19 positive resident's room wearing only a surgical mask.
Observation conducted on December 13, 2023, at 8:25 a.m. of the second-floor nursing unit revealed Employees E4, E5, and E6 enter into COVID-19 positive rooms wearing a surgical mask and without washing hands.
Observations conducted on December 13, 2023, at 8:26 a.m. revealed Housekeeping Employee E2 cleaning a COVID-19 positive patient's room wearing a surgical mask positioned below his/her chin.
Observations conducted on December 13, 2023, at 9:35 a.m. of the second-floor nursing unit revealed the Director of Nursing educating staff on wearing appropriate PPE, required while caring for COVID-19 positive residents. The Director of Nursing was further observed educating staff how to properly wear a surgical and N95 mask, covering both the mouth and nose.
The Director of Nursing was observed exiting the second-floor nursing unit at approximately 9:45 a.m. Observations conducted after the Director of Nursing exited the unit revealed, staff were observed shaking their heads then pulling their surgical and N95 masks below the nose.
Interview conducted with the Director of Nursing on December 13, 2023, at 10:50 p.m. provided the surveyor with documentation listing all residents and staff members who tested positive for COVID-19. The list noted as follows:
On December 7, 2023: 7 residents tested positive for COVID-19; December 8, 2023: 1 resident tested positive for COVID-19; December 11, 2023: 6 residents tested positive for COVID-19; and on December 12, 2023, 1 resident tested positive for COVID-19.
Further review of COVID positive list including staff revealed COVID positive staff as follows: December 4, 2023: 2 staff tested positive for COVID-19; December 10, 2023: 1 staff member tested positive for COVID-19; and
December 11, 2023: 1 staff member tested positive for COVID-19.
Interview with the Medical Director on December 13, 2023, at 11:05 p.m. confirmed there was COVID-19 virus outbreak on the second-floor nursing unit and staff were not wearing appropriate personal protective equipment while caring for COVID-19 positive residents.
An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on December 13, 2023, at 1:51 p.m. and an immediate action plan was requested. The Immediate Jeopardy template was provided to the facility. On December 13, 2023 at 4:35 p.m. an acceptable immediate action plan was approved which included the following interventions: 1.
The facility took the following actions to address the citation and prevent any additional residents from suffering an adverse outcome (Completion Date: 12/13/23). a. ALL COVID-19 positive residents were reviewed to assure that they were on Transmission based precautions. b. The DON/designee reviewed the 24-hour report to ensure there were no residents exhibiting signs and symptoms to ensure all symptomatic residents were identified. 2. The facility took the following actions to prevent an adverse outcome from reoccurring. (Completion Date: 12/13/23). a.
COVID-19 facility policies and procedures related to PPE and hand hygiene were reviewed. b. The Infection Preventionist/Staff development/designee provided education to housekeeping, laundry. Maintenance, social services and nursing staff regarding facility policies and procedures related to COVID-19 transmission-based precautions (e.g. PPE) and hand hygiene. c. The Plant Ops director/designee provided education to all housekeeping staff on cleaning high-touch areas doorknobs, handrails to ensure sanitary conditions. d. The infection Preventionist or designee will oversee infection prevention and control education for all new hires. e.
The employee call-off log for last 24 hours were reviewed by staffing coordinator to review for any COVID-19 illness. Any staff call-offs secondary to COVID-19 illness will be reported by staffing Coordinator/HR to the Infection Preventionist to insure appropriate tracking.
f. The Infection Preventionist or designee will randomly will randomly monitor hand hygiene practices and proper PPE utilization amongst staff daily x 3 days then 3 times a week for 1 month and then weekly for 3 months.
g. The Administrator implemented a QAPI PIP as a means to gather and process information from the audits/monitoring process. Findings will be reported at the monthly QAA meeting for a minimum of 3 months.
Observations conducted on December 14, 2023 revealed staff using appropriate PPE and hand hygiene practices while caring for COVID-19 positive residents on the second-floor and first-floor nursing units, 15 staff interviews, the implementation of the action plan was confirmed on December 14, 2023, at 12:42 p.m. and the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing were informed that the Immediate Jeopardy situation was lifted.
28 Pa Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of Licensee
28 Pa Code 201.18(b)(1) Management
28 Pa Code 201.18(e)(1) Management
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, facility policy and procedure review, and staff and resident interview it was determined the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the state agency for o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review, facility policy and procedure review, and staff and resident interview it was determined the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the state agency for one of 3 residents reviewed (Resident 19)
Findings Include:
Review of facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation implemented November 1, 2022 revealed the facility will report all alleged violations to the state agency not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made. If the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury.
Interview with Resident 19 on December 12, 2023 at approximately 12:00 p.m. revealed there was an incident a few months ago where a nurse aide threw a magnifying glass at the resident when he/she became upset about the way the resident wanted to be changed.
Review of Resident 19's progress notes revealed a nursing entry dated July 26, 2023 at 5:03 p.m. stating Resident called writer to [resident] room and stated that CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) threw a magnified glass at [resident]'s face.
Review of electronic event reports sent to the state agency revealed the allegation of abuse had not been reported to the state agency.
Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on December 14, 2023 at 1:19 p.m. confirmed the event was not reported to the state agency per policy.
28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee
28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1)(3)(e)(1) Management
28 Pa. Code 201.18(e)(3) Management
28 Pa. Code 211.12(c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0661
(Tag F0661)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a discharge summary was completed in a timely manner for one of three closed records reviewed (Resident 94).
...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a discharge summary was completed in a timely manner for one of three closed records reviewed (Resident 94).
Findings include:
Review of Resident 94's clinical record revealed the resident discharged home on October 23, 2023.
Interview with the social worker Employee E8 on December 14, 2023, at 11:25 a.m. confirmed Resident 94's discharge home was a planned discharge.
Review of Resident 94's clinical record revealed the resident's discharge summary was not completed by the physician until November 15, 2023.
The above findings were confirmed with the Nursing Home Administrator on December 14, 2023, at approximately 12:15 p.m.
28 Pa Code 211.5 (f) Clinical records
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, observations, and interviews, it was determined that the facility faile...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, observations, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure proper assessments and treatments were in place for two of five residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Residents 26 and 89).
Findings include:
Review of facility policy and procedure titled Pressure Ulcers dated August 29, 2023 revealed the effectiveness of interventions will be monitored through ongoing assessment of the resident and/or wound.
Review of Resident 26's progress notes revealed a nursing entry on June 30, 2023 at 1:25 p.m. stating resident noted with DTI (deep tissue injury- injury to tissue due to prolonged exposure to pressure that is under a layer of intact skin) black color to left heel. Resident verbalizes no complaints of pain or discomfort to the area at this time heel boots was put on and treatment to the heel administered
Further review of Resident 26's clinical record revealed there was no full assessment of the wound other what was described in the nursing note above upon discovery of the wound. There were no further assessments of the wound until seen by the Wound CRNP on August 14, 2023.
Interview with the Director of Nursing on December 14, 2023 at 12:23 p.m. confirmed a complete assessment of the wound was not completed upon discovery and June 30, 2023 and wound assessments should have been completed at least weekly until healed.
Review of Resident 89's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a stage 3 pressure ulcer (wound where subcutaneous fat may be visible, but bone, tendon or muscle are not exposed) to the sacrum.
Review of Resident 89's physician's orders revealed an order dated November 24, 2023, to cleanse sacrum with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply medihoney (honey-based product used for the management of wounds) and calcium alginate (non-woven, absorbent dressing made from seaweed that promotes wound healing) and cover with bordered gauze (sterile gauze with adhesive surrounding to hold to the skin) two times a day and as needed.
Review of Resident 89's wound consult dated November 28, 2023, revealed the wound provider recommended changing the resident's treatment order from twice daily to three times daily and as needed.
Review of Resident 89's December 2023 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed the wound provider's recommendations were not implemented until December 2, 2023.
Review of Resident 89's wound consult dated December 12, 2023, revealed the wound provider recommended changing the resident's treatment order to cleanse the wound with 0.25% Dakins (antiseptic used to cleanse wounds to prevent infection) solution, apply Dakins moistened fluffed gauze to the base of the wound, and secure with bordered gauze three times daily and as needed.
Review of Resident 89's progress notes revealed a nursing progress note dated December 12, 2023, at 7:02 a.m., which stated: Resident seen on wound rounds today with [wound provider.] Plan reviewed with [medical director] and agreed with recommendations.
Review of Resident 89's December 2023 TAR revealed the resident's order was not updated, and the resident continued to receive the treatment of cleansing the wound with wound cleanser and applying medihoney and calcium alginate through December 14, 2023.
Observation of Resident 89's wound treatment on December 14, 2023, at 1:00 p.m. revealed licensed nurse Employee E7 cleansed the wound with wound cleanser and applied medihoney and calcium alginate.
The facility's failure to implement recommendations made by the wound provider for Resident 89 was discussed with the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing on December 14, 2023, at approximately 1:40 p.m.
28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1) Management
28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Clinical records
28 Pa. 211.12(c)(d)(1)(3)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate clinical records for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 91).
Findings incl...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate clinical records for one of 22 residents reviewed (Resident 91).
Findings include:
Interview with Resident 91 on December 12, 2023, at 10:55 a.m. revealed the resident was admitted to the facility with a foley catheter (thin, flexible tube placed in the bladder through the urethra to drain urine) but it had recently been discontinued.
Review of Resident 91's clinical record revealed a nursing progress note dated December 6, 2023, which stated that the resident's foley catheter had been discontinued.
Further review of Resident 91's clinical record revealed nursing progress notes dated December 8, 9, 10, and 11, 2023, which stated: Has Foley catheter. Urinary device is patent and draining; free from complications. Catheter care provided.
The inaccurate documentation regarding Resident 91's foley catheter was discussed and confirmed with the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing on December 14, 2023, at 1:35 p.m.
28 Pa. Code: 211.5 (f) Clinical records
28 Pa. Code: 211.12 (d)(1)(5) Nursing services
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Administration
(Tag F0835)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on a review of job descriptions it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) did not effectively manage the facility to ensure proper infection p...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on a review of job descriptions it was determined that the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) did not effectively manage the facility to ensure proper infection prevention procedures were followed to protect residents from the spread of COVID-19 in the facility.
Findings include:
Review of the job description for the Nursing Home Administrator revealed the primary purpose of the job position is to direct day-to-day functions of the Facility in accordance with current federal, state, and local standards guidelines, and regulations that govern nursing facilities to assure that the highest degree of quality care can be provided to our residents at all times.
Review of the job description for the Director of Nursing revealed the purpose of the job position is to plan, organize, develop, and direct the overall operation of our Nursing Service Department in accordance with current federal, state, and local standards, guide[lines, and regulations that govern our Facility and as may be directed by the Administrator or the Medical Director to ensure that the highest degree of quality car in maintained at all times.
The findings in this report identified the facility failed to monitor their staff to ensure they were wearing all required PPE while caring for COVID-19 positive residents which resulted in a COVID-19 outbreak on the second-floor nursing unit. The Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing failed to fulfill their essential job duties to ensure that the federal and state guidelines and regulations were followed.
Refer to F tag 880
28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee.
28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(1)(3) (e)(3) Management.
28 Pa. Code 207.2(a) Administrator's responsibility.
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe environment on one of two units. (2nd Floor)
Findings Include:
Observation on December 11, 2023 at 10:...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe environment on one of two units. (2nd Floor)
Findings Include:
Observation on December 11, 2023 at 10:30 a.m. revealed the tub room which was currently being use for storage due to renovation and was storing buckets of paint revealed the door to the room which had a keypad was unsecured and able to be opened by the surveyor without inputting the keycode.
Further observation on December 11, 2023 at 10:35 a.m. revealed an unmarked door at the end of the north hallway was able to be opened allowing access to a small room containing waterpipes and an air duct.
Observations on December 12, 2023 at 12:30 p.m. revealed the doors to the dirty utility room, clean utility closet, and a linen closet all had numerical keypads. All three doors were able to be opened by the survey without inputting the keycode.
Additional observations conducted on December 12, 2023 at 12:30 p.m. and December 14, 2023 at 10:46 a.m. revealed the unmarked door at the end of the north hallway to the small containing waterpipes and an air duct was able to be opened without keycode.
Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on December 14, 2023 at 11:00 a.m. confirmed that all the doors that were opened by the surveyor should have been secured to prevent access to those areas by the residents.
28 Pa Code: 201.18(b)(1)(3) Management
28 Pa Code: 207.2(a) Administrator's responsibility
Feb 2023
3 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and assistance resulting in harm of lacerations to face ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, clinical record reviews, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and assistance resulting in harm of lacerations to face and dental injury for one of the 26 residents reviewed (Resident 56).
Findings include:
Review of Resident 56's diagnosis list revealed Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA-damage to the brain from interruption of its blood supply), Epilepsy (disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed, causing seizures), muscle wasting, and atrophy (thinning or loss of muscle tissue).
Review of Resident 56's care plan initiated on December 7, 2017, revealed resident requires a total assistance of 1-2 staff for ADLs (activities of daily living) related to stroke, inability to communicate, and impaired functional mobility. Resident 56's care plan did not indicate which resident's ADLs required one or two assistance from the staff. The care plan indicated that the resident was dependent on staff for repositioning and turning in bed but did not indicate if it required a one or two staff assistance.
Review of Resident 56's Minimum Data Set (MDS- standardized assessment tool that measures health status in long-term care residents) dated March 14, 2022, June 14, 2022, and August 11, 2022, revealed that the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS's also revealed that the resident required total with two-person assistance with bed mobility.
Review of Resident 56's clinical record including Lift/Mobility Evaluation, dated June 29, 2022, revealed assessment in bed movement as follows: The resident requires assistance with moving up in bed and turning; The resident requires assistance with lateral transfers; The resident has fragile skin; The resident is a candidate for bed mobility with assistance. The assessment decision was TWO staff to turn resident and a repositioning sheet to reposition resident.
Review of the physical therapy notes dated July 26, 2022, revealed that the resident was dependent for bed mobility, rolling left and right, sitting to lying positioning, and lying to sitting on side of the bed.
Review of the facility documentation, Incident report dated August 2, 2022, at 1:10 p.m., revealed that the nurse was called by the Nurse's Aide (NA) caring for the resident to the room because the resident rolled out of bed while the aide was changing the resident's bed sheet. The resident was observed lying on the right side of the bed, and bleeding in the mouth was observed. The resident was taken to the emergency room via 911.
Review of the witness statement from non licensed, Employee E4 dated August 2, 2022, revealed I was changing [resident] bed sheets and I had him rolled over on his right side, when I went to walk around the bed to finish making it [resident] rolled over onto the floor.
Review of the facility's documentations revealed that there was only one person providing assistance to the resident during changing of the sheets and turning/repositioning the resident on his/her side on August 2, 2022, at 1:10 p.m.
Review of the nursing progress notes dated August 3, 2022, at 8:11 a.m., revealed that the resident returned to the facility at 4:00 a.m., blood work, Ct scan, and X-rays were done, with tooth injury, two left mandibular teeth were dislodged.
Review of the progress notes dated August 3, 2022, at 10:54 a.m., revealed a review of the August 2, 2022, fall was discussed, the resident rolled out of bed while being positioned on the right side of the bed as the aide was changing the bed sheets. The resident was dependent on care. The resident was observed bleeding from the mouth, first aid was applied. The resident was transferred to the hospital for evaluation and was diagnosed with a small laceration to the chin and two dislodged teeth. The resident returned to the facility after the ER visit.
Review of the hospital records dated August 2, 2022, revealed images from the fall including two lacerations on the chin, which were repaired with tissue adhesive. The resident also sustained an injury to the teeth and jaw, the oral surgeon managed it and extracted it to get to that significant injury adjacent to them. The resident's diagnosis was a fall, initial encounter, dental injury, abnormal LFT (liver function test), facial laceration, and tachycardia (increased heart rate).
Additional review of Lift/Mobility Evaluation assessments, effective date of September 23, 2022, seven weeks after the fall was conducted and revealed the following assessments: The resident requires assistance with moving up in bed and turning; The resident requires assistance with lateral transfers; The resident have fragile skin; The resident is a candidate for bed mobility with assistance. Further review of the assessment revealed that the June 29, 2022, and September 23, 2022, bed mobility assessment was the same, but the September 23, 2022 assessment was not complete, indicating the number of staff assistants for bed mobility/repositioning was left blank.
Observation conducted on February 14, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., revealed resident was laying in bed with head slightly elevated with no movement. The resident was unable to follow directions and did not answer any of the questions asked.
Interview with Rehabilitation Director Employee E6, was conducted on February 16, 2023, at 1:00 p.m. Employee E6 reported that Resident 56 was evaluated quarterly and was picked up for rehab from June 2022, until July 26, 2022. Employee E6 reported that the resident was dependent for care of all ADLs. The employee characterized the resident as locked into an extension pattern, and unable to move or change position without staff assisting.
Interview with licensed nurse Employee E5 was conducted on February 16, 2023, at 1:15 p.m. Employee E5 reported that she/he was an agency nurse but had been coming to the facility often and was familiar with Resident 56's care. Employee E5 confirmed that Resident 56 was unable to follow any directions, dependent, and always requires a two-person assistance with bed mobility.
Interview with non licensed Employee E4 was conducted on February 16, 2023, at 1:40 p.m. Employee E4 reported that she/he was the regular NA of Resident 56 and had been caring for the resident for more than a year. Employee E4 confirmed that Resident 56 was unable to follow directions and always required total care of two-person assistance with bed mobility.
The above information was conveyed to the Director of Nursing (DON) on February 17, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.
The facility failed to provide Resident 56 with two-person assistance with bed mobility while the resident was repositioned during linen/sheet change resulting in harm when the resident rolled on the floor sustaining teeth injury and chin laceration.
28 Pa. Code 211.10(c) Resident care policies
Previously cited 1/24/22
28 Pa. Code 211.12(c) Nursing services
Previously cited 1/24/22
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing services
Previously cited 1/24/22
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(5) Nursing services
Previously cited 1/24/22
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interviews and review of clinical records and facility policies, it was determined that the facility...
Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interviews and review of clinical records and facility policies, it was determined that the facility failed to address significant weight loss for (Resident R10).
Review of Resident R10's clinical record revealed the following weights: September 29, 2022, a weight of 215.0 lbs, December 22, 2022, a weight of 147.2 lbs, January 5, 2023, a weight of 165.2.
Review of Resident R10's clinical record failed to find any documentation addressing the 31.53% decrease in weight over a 3-month period.
Interview conducted with the Registered Dietitian on February 16, 2022, at 1:23 p.m. produced a dietary note dated January 4, 2023, at 3:33 p.m. stating Weight as of12/22/2022 147.2# indicating a -67.8#,(-31.5%) weight loss since admission in September 2022, over 3 month period indicating a significant change. Question weight obtained from hospital on admission.
Interview conducted with the Registered Dietitian revealed Resident R10 refuses to be weighed and that's why a reweight was never conducted.
Review of facility's Nutrition policy revealed If a resident refuses to be weighed, refusal will be noted in the electronic medical record. Review of Resident R10's clinical record failed to find any documentation stating the resident refused to be weighed.
Further interviews conducted with the Registered Dietitian on February 16, 2023, at 1:50 p.m. confirmed that there was no documentation related to the resident refusing to be weighed. Registered Dietitian also confirmed Resident R10's refusal to be weighed should have been documented.
28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Clinical Records
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing Services
28 Pa Code: 211.10(c) Resident care policies
Based on review of facility policy and clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to monitor and address weight loss in a timely manner for five of 14 residents reviewed for nutrition (Residents 10, 51, 54, 67, 99).
Findings include:
Review of facility policy, Nutrition, effective date January 3, 2023, revealed: Each resident will be weighed upon admission and re-admission weekly for 4 weeks during the resident's stay . Weight variances will be reviewed by dietician and [interdisciplinary team] .The Dietitian/designee will reassess the nutritional needs and intakes of any resident with a significant weight change .Interventions will be evaluated, documentation made in the electronic medical record, and the resident's plan of care updated.
Review of Resident 51's weights revealed that on September 13, 2022, the resident weighed 121.2 pounds (lbs.) On October 21, 2022, the resident weighed 112.8 pounds which is a -6.93 % loss in one month.
Review of Resident 51's progress notes revealed the weight loss was not addressed by the dietitian, Employee E7, until November 7, 2022, 17 days after the weight loss was identified.
Interview with Employee E7 on February 16, 2023, at 1:30 p.m. confirmed there was a delay in addressing Resident 51's weight loss.
Review of Resident 54's weights revealed a weight on July 23, 2022, of 162.8 pounds. Resident 54 was not weighed again until October 6, 2022, with a weight of 146.2 pounds indicating a significant weight loss of 16.6 pounds. Further review of Resident 54's weights revealed there was no re-weight to determine if this was an accurate weight.
Review of Resident 54's clinical record revealed there was no documented evidence this weight loss was addressed by the physician or the dietitian until January 2, 2023.
Interview with Director of Nursing on February 17, 2023, at 11:33 a.m. confirmed there were no weights for resident 54 for the months of August and September 2022 and when weighed in October 6, 2022 the weight was not completed again to confirm accuracy and was not addressed by the facility until January 5, 2023.
Review of Resident 67's clinical record revealed the resident was readmitted from the hospital on February 4, 2023.
Review of Resident 67's weights revealed a readmission weight on February 4, 2023. Further review of Resident 67's weights failed to reveal any additional weights since the resident's readmission.
Interview with Employee E7 on February 16, 2023, at 1:35 p.m. confirmed the facility failed to obtain weekly weights for Resident 67 since the resident's readmission.
Review of Resident 99's clinical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a weight of 193.0 pounds.
Further review of Resident 99's clinical record revealed the resident was re-admitted from the hospital on January 6, 2023, with a weight of 193 pounds documented on the resident Medication Administration Record. There were no other weights for Resident 99.
Interview with Director of Nursing on February 17, 2023, at 11:33 a.m. confirmed the weekly weights upon admission and readmission were not completed as per policy for Resident 99.
28 Pa. Code 211.5(f) Clinical Records
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing Services
28 Pa Code: 211.10(c) Resident care policies
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on facility policy and procedure review, facility documentation review, observations and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to store and prepare food in a safe manner in the m...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on facility policy and procedure review, facility documentation review, observations and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to store and prepare food in a safe manner in the main kitchen.
Findings Include:
Review of facility policy and procedure titled Food Temperatures, undated, revealed all cold food items must be stored and served at a temperature of 41 degrees Fahrenheit or below.
Observation of the three reach-in refrigerators in the main kitchen on February 14, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. revealed all three reading of the external electronic thermometer and of the internal temperature gauge were reading above 41 degrees Fahrenheit.
Observation of the three reach-in refrigerators in the main kitchen on February 17, 2023 at 9:15 a.m. revealed reach in refrigerator three was reading a temperature of the external electronic thermometer of 50 degrees Fahrenheit and the internal gauge thermometer was reading 45 degrees Fahrenheit. Interview with Dietary Employee E3 at the time of this finding confirmed that those were the temperature reading for the reach in refrigerator. Observation of the internal gauge thermometer of the walk-in freezer revealed a temperature of 8 degrees Fahrenheit.
Review of the Refrigeration Temperature log for reach in refrigerator logs for February 2023 revealed temperatures are being documented twice a day and temperatures must be maintained at or below 41 degrees Fahrenheit. For reach-in refrigerator number one 13 of 32 temperatures were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit. For reach-in refrigerator number two 6 of 32 temperatures recorded were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit. For reach-in refrigerator number three 15 of 32 temperatures were above 41 degrees Fahrenheit.
Review of the Freezer Temperature Log for February 2023 revealed temperature must be maintained at or below 0 degrees Fahrenheit and 10 of 32 temperatures were above 0 degrees Fahrenheit.
Interview with the Dietary Director on February 17, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. revealed there was no maintenance completed on the reach-in refrigerators or the walk-in freezer due to high temperatures.
Interview with the Director of Dietary on February 17. 2023 confirmed that the temperatures of the reach-in refrigerators and the walk-in freezer were out of safe range and there were multiple days for each unit documented for the month as out of range.
28 Pa. Code 201.18 (b)(1)(e)(1) Management
Dec 2022
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical records review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow a specialist (Dermatologist -medical doctor specializing with conditions that affect the skin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical records review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow a specialist (Dermatologist -medical doctor specializing with conditions that affect the skin, hair, and nails) consult recommendations regarding a skin treatment timely for one of seven residents reviewed (Resident 1).
Findings include.
Clinical records review revealed Resident 1 had an order for a Dermatology consult on December 15, 2022, for a rash.
Review of the nursing progress notes dated December 15, 2022, at 2:06 p.m., revealed resident had a Dermatology consult. The same note revealed that the resident was diagnosed with Eczematous Dermatitis (A condition that causes the skin to become dry, itchy, and bumpy), with recommendation for a topical steroid twice daily for three weeks, and to apply dry skin with Aquaphor (A moisturizer to treat or prevent dry, rough, scaly, itchy skin) twice a day.
Review of the Dermatology consult report dated December 15, 2022, revealed, resident was tested for Scabies but was negative, likely to be Eczematous Dermatitis. The same note revealed medication management as follows: Triamcinolone 0.1%ointment, apply twice a day to the affected areas, obtain 450 gram tube, do not use on face, groin, or armpit; and Aquaphor or Vaseline twice a day for moisturizing. Follow up in three weeks.
Review of Resident 1's December 2022 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed medication Triamcinolone was not started until December 20, 2022, five days after the medication was recommended by the Dermatologist.
Interview with the Director of Nursing was conducted on December 22, 2022, at 1:00 p.m. The Director of Nursing indicated the nurse on duty is responsible for notifying the primary physician of the recommendation from a consulting doctor for approval. The Director of Nursing stated the nurse assigned to Resident 1 documented the Dermatologist recommendation on December 15, 2022, but became distracted therefore did not notify the primary physician, thus medication was not ordered. The Director of Nursing further reported that, the nursing supervisor discovered that the
Dermatologist recommendation was not ordered, primary physician was notified and approved the recommendation, order was written. Medication Triamcinolone was applied to Resident 1 on December 20, 2022.
The facility failed to ensure specialist recommendation for Resident 1's skin medication treatment was followed timely.
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1) Nursing services
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(3) Nursing services
28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(5) Nursing services
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated
K - Pattern
L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated
H - Pattern
I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated
E - Pattern
F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated
B - Pattern
C - Widespread
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
Strengths
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $63,911 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 14 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $63,911 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Pennsylvania. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (38/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 38/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.
✓ Report will be sent to your email
About This Facility
What is Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Pennsylvania, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr Staffed?
CMS rates WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 50%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%. RN turnover specifically is 58%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr?
State health inspectors documented 14 deficiencies at WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 12 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr?
WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by PRESTIGE HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 110 certified beds and approximately 102 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in HAVERTOWN, Pennsylvania.
How Does Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR's overall rating (3 stars) matches the state average, staff turnover (50%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr Stick Around?
WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR has a staff turnover rate of 50%, which is about average for Pennsylvania nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr Ever Fined?
WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR has been fined $63,911 across 5 penalty actions. This is above the Pennsylvania average of $33,718. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is Westgate Hills Rehabilitation And Nursing Ctr on Any Federal Watch List?
WESTGATE HILLS REHABILITATION AND NURSING CTR is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.