REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
The Rehabilitation Center at Jefferson Hills has a Trust Grade of F, indicating a poor rating with significant concerns about its operations. It ranks #482 out of 653 in Pennsylvania, placing it in the bottom half of nursing homes in the state, and #29 out of 52 in Allegheny County, meaning there are only 28 local options that are better. While the facility is improving, having reduced its issues from 11 in 2024 to 4 in 2025, it still has serious shortcomings. Staffing is a positive aspect, receiving 4 out of 5 stars with 0% turnover, which is much better than the state average; this means staff are likely experienced and familiar with the residents. However, the facility has faced critical incidents, such as failing to provide adequate supervision for a resident, which risked elopement, and issues related to not having a proper water management program, which could lead to health risks like Legionnaires' disease. Overall, while there are strengths in staffing, the facility's poor trust grade and the presence of serious issues make it a concerning option for families.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Pennsylvania
- #482/653
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- Turnover data not reported for this facility.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $8,281 in fines. Higher than 84% of Pennsylvania facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 69 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Pennsylvania nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 26 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Pennsylvania average (3.0)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
The Ugly 26 deficiencies on record
May 2025
1 deficiency
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, clinical and facility record review, facility submitted documents, and staff interviews, it ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, clinical record review, observations, and resident and staff interviews it was determined th...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to assess...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents' c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
2 deficiencies
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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to notify t...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policies and clinical records and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to mak...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that each reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
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, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0809
(Tag F0809)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of facility documentation and staff and resident interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0848
(Tag F0848)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of the facility's admission agreement and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a neutral and fair arbitration process by ensuring both the resident or...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0947
(Tag F0947)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, staff education records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to conduct at least 12 hours of in-service education, within 12 months of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0847
(Tag F0847)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of facility documents, resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the residents' right to not enter into a binding arbitration agreement as a co...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of facility policy, water testing logs and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement an effective Water Management Program for the prevention and control...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0941
(Tag F0941)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of facility policy and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on effective communication to facility staff.
Findings include
Review of the pol...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0944
(Tag F0944)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of facility policy and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program to facility ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
4 deficiencies
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
Deficiency F0563
(Tag F0563)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on a review of facility documents and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the residents were aware of unrestricted visitation for one of five residents (R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of clinical records, facility documents, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, resident clinical record and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, observation and interviews it was determined that the facility failed to provide care and se...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy it was determined that the facility failed to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of facility policy, observations and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure and orderly manner for one of two ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0809
(Tag F0809)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of facility policy, meal delivery observations, resident and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that meals were served at regularly scheduled times f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0943
(Tag F0943)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff interviews and a review of employee records it was determined that the facility failed to provide resident abuse training to one out of five sampled personnel records (Agency Nurse aide...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0801
(Tag F0801)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on a review of facility documents, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to employ staff with the required skills and competencies to carry out the daily functions of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 observations, facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly restrain hair to prevent the potential for cross contamination in the Main Kitchen, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
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
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 26 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade F (36/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Pennsylvania, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The Staffed?
CMS rates REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes.
What Have Inspectors Found at Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The?
State health inspectors documented 26 deficiencies at REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 23 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The?
REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 50 certified beds and approximately 42 residents (about 84% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in JEFFERSON HILLS, Pennsylvania.
How Does Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.0 and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The?
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 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?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE 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 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 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 Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The Stick Around?
REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.
Was Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The Ever Fined?
REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE has been fined $8,281 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Pennsylvania average of $33,162. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Rehabilitation Center At Jefferson Hills, The on Any Federal Watch List?
REHABILITATION CENTER AT JEFFERSON HILLS, THE 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.