CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Carnegie Park Post Acute has received an F trust grade, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided at this facility. It ranks #541 out of 653 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, placing it in the bottom half of all facilities in the state, and #35 out of 52 in Allegheny County, suggesting limited local options that are better. The situation is worsening, with the number of reported issues increasing from 16 to 23 over the last year. Staffing is rated average at 3 out of 5 stars, but the 61% turnover rate is concerning, as it exceeds the state average. The facility has faced critical incidents, including failing to initiate CPR on an unresponsive resident and not providing adequate supervision, leading to a resident leaving the premises without staff knowledge. While there is good RN coverage, the overall quality of care is poor, highlighting significant weaknesses alongside some staffing strengths.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Pennsylvania
- #541/653
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 61% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $19,563 in fines. Higher than 65% of Pennsylvania facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 51 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Pennsylvania. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 50 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Pennsylvania average (3.0)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
15pts above Pennsylvania avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
13 points above Pennsylvania average of 48%
The Ugly 50 deficiencies on record
May 2025
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
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
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 m...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
22 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 resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility fai...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
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 maintain a homelike environment in the facility (resident dining rooms) for one of...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0680
(Tag F0680)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff interviews and review of facility provided documentation, it was determined the facility failed to provide a qualified professional to direct the activities program as required for one ...
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 policies and documents, clinical records, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility ...
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
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
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 impleme...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0919
(Tag F0919)
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 ensure that the call bell system was in full working order for one of four nursing...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a safe, functional and clean environment for two of 33 residents of the Third floor B wing nursing unit (...
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 review of facility policy, personnel in-service training records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on Prevention of Abuse and Neglect for on...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0947
(Tag F0947)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
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
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on facility policy, resident interviews, observation, 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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, facility records, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide Activity of Daily Living (ADL) assistance for 15 of 22 re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, observations, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that medications were properly stored and/or disposed of in the unused...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on a review of facility policies, the Four-week Spring Summer (SS) cycle menu diet extension sheets, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to follow a preplanned cycle ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0945
(Tag F0945)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, personnel in-service training records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on Infection Control for seven of ten sta...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0949
(Tag F0949)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, personnel in-service training records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on behavioral health for eight of ten sta...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of personnel records and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide nursing staff annual performance evaluations based on the date of hire for five of five n...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0946
(Tag F0946)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, personnel in-service training records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on Compliance and Ethics for four of ten ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0577
(Tag F0577)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Department of Health most recent survey results were readily accessible to residents and visitors, for fou...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of facility policy, posted documents, observations, resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain grievance/concern forms can be filed anony...
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, personnel in-service training records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on Effective Communication for seven of e...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0942
(Tag F0942)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of facility policy, personnel in-service training records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on Resident Rights for eight of ten staff...
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, personnel in-service training records, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide training on Quality Assurance and Performance Impr...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
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 F0865
(Tag F0865)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on a review of facility documentation, cited deficiencies from previous surveys, review of plan of correction documentation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility ' s Quality ...
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, manufacturer ' s instructions, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to consistently maintain an infection prevention and control program, which ensure...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and resident and staff interviews, it was it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that ...
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
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy and resident interviews and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure sufficient staffing to meet resident need for ten of thirteen resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
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
Deficiency F0678
(Tag F0678)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines, clinical records, facility policies, and staff interviews it...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a clean, sanitary, functional environment in the main laundry room.
Findings include:
During observation...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical and facility record review, facility submitted documents, and staff interviews, it was determined that the fac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
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 make certain that weight...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, resident group meeting and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to demonstrate a response to grievances for resident group meeti...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the facility policy and clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on the facility policy, observations, Resident group meeting and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide residents access to grievance forms, failed to provide the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, review of resident council meeting minutes, facility concern/grievance log and clinical reco...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and resident and staff interviews, it was it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policy, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) documents, observations, and staff interview, it was deter...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on facility policy, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the potential for cross-contamination ...
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 review of dish machine temperature/sanitation logs, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and temperature procedures for t...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on a review of policy, observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly clean and maintain kitchen dinnerware in a sanitary condition creating the potentia...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
9 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
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 facility policy review, clinical and facility record review, facility provided documents, and staff interviews, it was ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS-a periodic assessment of resident care needs) user's manual, clinical records and s...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of facility policies, clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one of eight residents (Resident R83) r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0696
(Tag F0696)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to follow physician orders for a resident's stump shrinker for one of two residents (Res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
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, resident interview and staff interview, it was determined that the facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0711
(Tag F0711)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record reviews and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the physician w...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on facility policy, clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a dr...
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 a review of facility policy, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to make certain medications were stored in a safe and secure manner for one of three medication rooms (Sec...
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 a review of policy, observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to properly maintain kitchen equipment in a sanitary condition creating the potential for cross...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
1 deficiency
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
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of facility policy, food temperatures, observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to make certain that foods were maintained at temperatures that prev...
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?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "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: 2 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 50 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $19,563 in fines. Above average for Pennsylvania. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade F (9/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Carnegie Park Post Acute's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Carnegie Park Post Acute Staffed?
CMS rates CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 61%, which is 15 percentage points above the Pennsylvania average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 56%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Carnegie Park Post Acute?
State health inspectors documented 50 deficiencies at CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 42 with potential for harm, and 6 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 Carnegie Park Post Acute?
CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility is operated by PACS GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 180 certified beds and approximately 127 residents (about 71% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania.
How Does Carnegie Park Post Acute Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (61%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Carnegie Park Post Acute?
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?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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 facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is Carnegie Park Post Acute Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-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 Carnegie Park Post Acute Stick Around?
Staff turnover at CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE is high. At 61%, the facility is 15 percentage points above the Pennsylvania average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 56%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Carnegie Park Post Acute Ever Fined?
CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE has been fined $19,563 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Pennsylvania average of $33,274. 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 Carnegie Park Post Acute on Any Federal Watch List?
CARNEGIE PARK POST ACUTE 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.