Pickering Manor Home

226 NORTH LINCOLN AVE, NEWTOWN, PA 18940 (215) 968-3878
Non profit - Corporation 47 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
90/100
#104 of 653 in PA
Last Inspection: October 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Pickering Manor Home has received a Trust Grade of A, indicating it is highly recommended and considered excellent compared to other facilities. It ranks #104 out of 653 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, placing it in the top half, and #11 out of 29 in Bucks County, with only ten local options performing better. The facility's trend is stable, with the same number of issues reported in both 2023 and 2024. Staffing is a strength, earning a 5/5 star rating, but the turnover rate is 54%, which is average for the state. Notably, the home has not incurred any fines, which is a positive sign. However, there are some concerns. Recent inspections revealed issues such as improper food storage and sanitation in the kitchen, including unwrapped food items and spilled substances. Additionally, residents have been observed eating with their hands instead of being provided with proper utensils, which compromises their dignity during meals. While the overall quality rating is strong, these specific incidents highlight areas that need improvement.

Trust Score
A
90/100
In Pennsylvania
#104/653
Top 15%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Holding Steady
1 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
54% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Pennsylvania facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 76 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
✓ Good
Only 5 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 1 issues
2024: 1 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 54%

Near Pennsylvania avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

The Ugly 5 deficiencies on record

Oct 2024 1 deficiency
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 policy review, staff interview, and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store food and maintain sanitary conditions in the main kitchen and in the rehabilitati...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on policy review, staff interview, and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to properly store food and maintain sanitary conditions in the main kitchen and in the rehabilitation unit kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled, Refrigerated Storage Checkpoints, dated September 18, 2024, revealed that foods were to be labeled, dated and used by the use-by date or discarded. An interview with the Director of Dining Services (DDS) on October 29, 2024, at 10:15 a.m., revealed all opened food products were to have an opening date noted on them. Observations during the tour of the main and rehabilitation unit kitchens on October 29, 2024, at 10:14 a.m., revealed the following: In the main kitchen walk-in cooler, there was a puddle of a red liquid substance on the floor under the shelves where meat was thawing. There was a pan of sliced ham steaks that was not dated. In the walk-in freezer, there was an unwrapped chicken patty and an ice cream sandwich on the floor under the shelves. There were two dished containers of macaroni and cheese and stewed tomatoes with a use-by date of July 27. In the dry storage area, there was a sugar packet and syrup container on the floor and an opened ketchup packet that had dried ketchup splattered on the wall behind the condiment box shelves. There was a single glove on a shelf next to a container of opened shredded coconut. In the cooks' preparation area, there was a drawer with clean whisks that had a layer of food debris along the bottom of it. In the rehabilitation unit kitchen upright cooler, there was an opened container of sour cream with a use-by date of October 11, 2024, and an uncovered broken egg. In the upright freezer, there were three undated, opened bags of a cinnamon raisin bagel, sliced angel food cake, and home fries. There was a roast pork with a use-by date of October 5, 2024. In the rehabilitation dining room serving area, in the reach-in cooler, there were three undated, opened containers of orange juice concentrate, liquid egg product, and butter packages. In the reach-in freezer, there was an opened plain bag with one onion bagel in it that was not dated. In an interview on October 29, 2024, at 11:00 a.m., the DDS confirmed these items should have been dated, expired items should have been removed, and the food items were for use in the skilled areas. 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee.
Nov 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on clinical record review and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with dining in a manner that promoted and maintained dignity to one of 13 sampled resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with dining in a manner that promoted and maintained dignity to one of 13 sampled residents. (Resident 10) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 10 had diagnoses that included dementia. According to the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated October 31, 2023, the resident was cognitively impaired and required set up assistance from staff to eat. Review of Resident 10's current care plan revealed that staff was to provide necessary assistance at meals. Observations during breakfast on November 7, 2023, and lunch on November 6 and 7, 2023, revealed the resident was eating her meals with her fingers. The resident was observed ripping pieces from a whole chicken breast and eating the pieces with her hands, scooping sliced carrots and mashed potatoes with a gravy into her mouth with her fingers, eating pancakes with syrup and slices of banana by hand, and eating whole cubes of beef in a gravy with her fingers. During the observations, the resident's fingers and hands had food and gravy or syrup on them and food was observed on her clothing protector. At no time did staff redirect or assist the resident. CFR 483.10(a) Resident Rights Previously cited 12/29/2022
Dec 2022 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with dining in...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide assistance with dining in a manner that promoted and maintained dignity for one of 12 sampled residents. (Resident 20) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 20 had diagnoses that included dementia, depression, and dysphagia. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident had cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance from staff for activities of daily living. A physician's order dated December 5, 2022, directed staff to provide regular utensils, not plastic. On December 27, 2022, at 1:18 p.m., Resident 20 was observed in the dining room. The resident was eating food from a bowl with her fingers, there was a plastic spoon observed on Resident 20's lap. At 1:26 p.m., Nurse Aide (NA) 1 retrieved the plastic spoon from Resident 20's lap and proceeded to feed the resident while standing. NA 1 continued to feed the resident while standing until her meal was completed at 1:35 p.m. 28 Pa. Code 201.29(j) Resident rights. 28 Pa. Code 201.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to thoro...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly investigate alleged violations of abuse for one of 12 sampled residents. (Resident 10) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Resident Abuse and Neglect Prevention Policy, last reviewed July 21, 2022, revealed that all reported instances of abuse would be promptly investigated. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included dementia, depression, and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident had no cognitive impairment and exhibited behavioral symptoms not directed at others on one to three days during the review period. On May 19, 2022, a nurse documented that Resident 10 grabbed a female resident's hand and placed it over his private area. On May 19, 2022, a nurse also documented that Resident 10 was observed caressing a resident inside her thighs. On June 20, 2022, a nurse documented that Resident 10 was observed standing over a female resident who stated the resident touched her shoulder and asked her to have sex. On September 7, November 6, 7, 9 and 23, 2022, nurses documented that Resident 10 was following female residents and making sexual comments. There is no documented evidence that these incidents were thoroughly investigated. In an interview on December 29, 2022, at 10:04 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed the alleged violations of resident-to-resident abuse were received but were not investigated. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(5) Nursing services.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0688 (Tag F0688)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide treatment and services to prevent further limitations in range of motion for two of 12 sampled residents. (Resident 23, 25) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 23 had diagnoses that included unsteadiness on feet, muscle weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, and malnutrition. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Resident 23 had no cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance with transfers. Review of the care plan revealed Resident 23 received a restorative nursing program (RNP) to prevent decline in mobility. The intervention was for staff to assist her to ambulate (walk) to and from the dining room three times a day. In an interview on December 27, 2022, at 11:28 a.m., Resident 23 stated that staff does not walk her. There was no documented evidence that Resident 23 was ambulated or offered to ambulate 24 out of 26 times in December 2022. In an interview on December 29, 2022, at 1:12 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed there was no documentation that Resident 23 was ambulated or offered to ambulate. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 25 had diagnoses that included dementia, anxiety, abnormal posture, and muscle weakness. Review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed that the resident required extensive assistance from staff for activities of daily living and had limitations in range of motion to both lower extremities (hip, knee, ankle, foot). Review of the care plan revealed the resident was at risk for deterioration in functional abilities. The intervention was for staff to follow therapy recommendations. Review of a physical therapy Discharge summary dated [DATE], revealed that the therapist recommended a RNP for active and passive range of motion for Resident 25. There was no evidence that a RNP was implemented per the therapist's recommendations. In an interview on December 29, 2022, at 10:05 a.m., the DON stated the the RNP was not implemented per the therapists recommendation. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(3)(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

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Grade A (90/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Pennsylvania.
  • • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Pennsylvania facilities.
  • • Only 5 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
Concerns
  • • No significant concerns identified. This facility shows no red flags across CMS ratings, staff turnover, or federal penalties.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Pickering Manor Home's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Pickering Manor Home an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Pennsylvania, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Pickering Manor Home Staffed?

CMS rates Pickering Manor Home's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 54%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%.

What Have Inspectors Found at Pickering Manor Home?

State health inspectors documented 5 deficiencies at Pickering Manor Home during 2022 to 2024. These included: 5 with potential for harm.

Who Owns and Operates Pickering Manor Home?

Pickering Manor Home is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 47 certified beds and approximately 43 residents (about 91% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in NEWTOWN, Pennsylvania.

How Does Pickering Manor Home Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, Pickering Manor Home's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (54%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Pickering Manor Home?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"

Is Pickering Manor Home Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Pickering Manor Home has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Pickering Manor Home Stick Around?

Pickering Manor Home has a staff turnover rate of 54%, which is 8 percentage points above the Pennsylvania average of 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 Pickering Manor Home Ever Fined?

Pickering Manor Home has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Pickering Manor Home on Any Federal Watch List?

Pickering Manor Home 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.