SCHUYLKILL CENTER
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Schuylkill Center in Pottsville, Pennsylvania, has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's quality and care. It ranks #629 out of 653 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, placing it in the bottom half of all facilities in the state, and it's the least favorable option in Schuylkill County at #12 out of 12. Unfortunately, the facility is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 9 in 2024 to 10 in 2025. Staffing is below average at 2 out of 5 stars, but the 41% turnover rate is slightly better than the state average. There have been no fines reported, which is a positive note, but there are concerns about RN coverage, as it is less than 87% of Pennsylvania facilities. Specific incidents include a critical failure to monitor hot beverages, resulting in a resident suffering a burn injury, and concerns about food safety practices that could lead to unsanitary conditions. While the facility has some strengths, such as no fines, the overall picture indicates serious areas for improvement.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Pennsylvania
- #629/653
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 41% turnover. Near Pennsylvania's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Pennsylvania facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 23 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Pennsylvania. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 27 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
-
Staff turnover below average (41%)
7 points below Pennsylvania average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Pennsylvania average (3.0)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near Pennsylvania avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
The Ugly 27 deficiencies on record
Sept 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, staff interview, and a review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to properly use adequate supervision to prevent a fall for one of f...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2025
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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a reasonable accommodation of needs for one of seven sampled resid...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physician's orders for two of seven sampled residents. (Residents 1 and 2) Findings include...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2025
6 deficiencies
1 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL
(K)
📢 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 multiple residents
Based on observation, facility policy review, staff interview, and resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that hot beverages were monitored and served at a safe tempe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, clinical record review, review of manufacturer's instructions, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than fi...
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
Deficiency F0809
(Tag F0809)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of facility documentation, the facility's meal schedule, resident and staff interview, and observation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that meals were served at r...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store and serve food in a sanitary manner in the dietary department and on one of four ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to post accurate and current nurse staffing information.
Findings include:
Observations during tours of the facility cond...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to dispose of trash and refuse properly.
Findings include:
Observation of the dumpster area on June 8, 2025, at 10:30 a.m., revealed va...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on policy review, clinical record review, staff interview, and a review of facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to keep one of three sampled residents free from neg...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 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
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 resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide service...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 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
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 resident interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide services to enhanc...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were implemented for two of nine sampled residents. (Residents 2, 4)
Fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
6 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 →
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
**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 develop a comprehensive care ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, resident interview, and results of a test tray audit, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and at appetizing temperatures on one of four ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0810
(Tag F0810)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that ada...
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 observation, facility documentation, results of a test tray, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to follow the pre-approved menus on one of four nursing units. (C ...
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 observation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store food under sanitary conditions in the kitchen.
Findings include:
In an interview on May 7, 2024, at 9:30...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2023
4 deficiencies
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 observation, review of facility policy, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store food under sanitary conditions in the kitchen.
Findings include:
Review of t...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, homelike environment on two of four ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on resident interviews, review of facility documentation, observation, and results of a test tray evaluation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and at...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0802
(Tag F0802)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain adequate staffing in the dietary department.
Findings include:
Observation of the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and resident and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean and comfortable environment on one of four nursing units. (B Wing nursing unit)
Fin...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on resident interview, review of facility documentation, observation, and results of a test tray evaluation, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food that is palatable and at a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
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
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and resident interview and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure...
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
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that physician ordered medications were obtained from the pharmacy for two of four sampled res...
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
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Pennsylvania facilities.
- • 41% turnover. Below Pennsylvania's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 27 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade F (28/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Schuylkill Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SCHUYLKILL CENTER 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 Schuylkill Center Staffed?
CMS rates SCHUYLKILL CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 41%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Schuylkill Center?
State health inspectors documented 27 deficiencies at SCHUYLKILL CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 20 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 Schuylkill Center?
SCHUYLKILL CENTER 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 190 certified beds and approximately 169 residents (about 89% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in POTTSVILLE, Pennsylvania.
How Does Schuylkill Center Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, SCHUYLKILL CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (41%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Schuylkill Center?
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 Schuylkill Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SCHUYLKILL CENTER 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 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 Schuylkill Center Stick Around?
SCHUYLKILL CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 41%, 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 Schuylkill Center Ever Fined?
SCHUYLKILL CENTER 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 Schuylkill Center on Any Federal Watch List?
SCHUYLKILL CENTER 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.