SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE CENTER
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Shippensburg Rehabilitation and Health Care Center has a Trust Grade of B, which indicates it is a good choice, positioned solidly among nursing homes. It ranks #229 out of 653 facilities in Pennsylvania, placing it in the top half, and #7 out of 17 in Cumberland County, meaning only a few local options are better. The facility is improving, as the number of reported issues decreased from four in 2024 to three in 2025. Staffing is rated at 4 out of 5 stars, but the turnover rate is 54%, which is average for Pennsylvania, indicating some staff stability but also areas for improvement. Notably, there have been no fines, which is a positive sign, but the facility has less RN coverage than 76% of state facilities, potentially impacting care. Recent inspections revealed concerns such as inadequate food storage practices and failure to maintain a clean and inviting dining environment, as well as lapses in background checks for new hires, highlighting areas that need attention alongside the facility's strengths.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Pennsylvania
- #229/653
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- 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 ○ 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
- 18 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
Near Pennsylvania avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
May 2025
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 clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement resident-directed care and treatment consistent with the resident's physician orders and ca...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on facility document review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility's Quality Assurance Committee failed to meet on a quarterly basis for one quarter of four reviewed (first qua...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on facility policy review, observations, review of select facility temperature logs, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to store food and utilize equipment in accor...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
4 deficiencies
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 clinical record review and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on facility policy review, observation, clinical record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the care plan was reviewed and revised for...
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 clinical record review, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure care an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0699
(Tag F0699)
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 Resident Responsible Party and staff interviews, it was determin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that resident needs were accommodated regarding call bell accessibility for one...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of clinical records and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident's care plan was updated/revised to reflect the resident's specific care...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
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 ensure residents receive appr...
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 observations, clinical record review, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that it was free from a medication error rate of five percent or greater based...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on facility policy review, observations, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and home-like environment for 2 of 63 residents reviewed (Resident...
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
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on personnel file review, facility policy review, job descriptions, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures by not completin...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the resident assessment accurately reflected the resident status for four of 26 residents rev...
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
Based on clinical record review, observations, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure care and services were provided, in accordance with professional ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on review of select facility documentation and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that nurse aide performance evaluations were completed at least annually, and...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on facility policy reviews, observations, completion of a meal test tray, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide food and beverages that were at...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2023
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 F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on resident and staff interviews, state regulations, record review, scope of practice, and facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to follow professional standards of practic...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
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
- • 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.
- • 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE CENTER an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health Staffed?
CMS rates SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 54%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 18 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health?
SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE 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 125 certified beds and approximately 94 residents (about 75% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SHIPPENSBURG, Pennsylvania.
How Does Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE CENTER's overall rating (4 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 Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health?
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 Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE CENTER 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 4-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 Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health Stick Around?
SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE CENTER 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 Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health Ever Fined?
SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE 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 Shippensburg Rehabilitation And Health on Any Federal Watch List?
SHIPPENSBURG REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CARE 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.