MOSSER NURSING HOME

1175 MOSSER ROAD, TREXLERTOWN, PA 18087 (610) 395-5661
Non profit - Corporation 60 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
95/100
#90 of 653 in PA
Last Inspection: May 2025

Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.

Overview

Mosser Nursing Home in Trexlertown, Pennsylvania, has received a Trust Grade of A+, indicating it is an elite facility with top-tier care. It ranks #90 out of 653 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, placing it in the top half of state facilities, and #5 out of 16 in Lehigh County, meaning there are only a few local options better than this home. However, the trend is concerning as the number of issues reported increased from 1 in 2023 to 4 in 2025, suggesting a decline in quality. Staffing is a strong point with a perfect 5/5 rating and only 19% turnover, significantly lower than the state average, ensuring experienced staff care for residents. There have been no fines reported, which is a positive sign, and the facility boasts more RN coverage than 80% of Pennsylvania facilities. However, the inspector found some issues that need addressing. For instance, food was not stored in sanitary conditions, with rust and chipped paint present in the kitchen cooler. Additionally, two residents had incomplete assessments and one resident did not receive medication as ordered by their physician. While the home has many strengths, these concerns highlight areas where improvements are necessary.

Trust Score
A+
95/100
In Pennsylvania
#90/653
Top 13%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Worse
1 → 4 violations
Staff Stability
✓ Good
19% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 29 points below Pennsylvania's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Pennsylvania facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 61 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
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 1 issues
2025: 4 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Low Staff Turnover (19%) · Staff stability means consistent care
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover is low (19%)

    29 points below Pennsylvania average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.

The Bad

No Significant Concerns Identified

This facility shows no red flags. Among Pennsylvania's 100 nursing homes, only 1% achieve this.

The Ugly 5 deficiencies on record

May 2025 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 staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to complete an accurate Minimum ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**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 complete an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for two of 12 sampled residents. (Residents 19 and 29) Findings include: Clinical record revealed that Resident 19 had diagnoses that included cognitive communication deficit and major depressive disorder. Review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed that Sections C (the Brief Interview for Mental Status) and D (the Mood assessment/interview) were incomplete. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 29 had diagnoses that included dementia and nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage (bleeding within the brain in the absence of trauma or surgery). On December 21, 2024, the physician ordered that the facility provide hospice services. Review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed no documentation that resident had hospice services in place during the review period. The MDS assessment inaccurately reflected that the resident was not receiving hospice services. In an interview on May 21, 2025, at 12:50 p.m., the Registered Nurse Assessment Coordinator (RNAC) confirmed that Resident 19's and 29's MDS assessments were inaccurate.
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 facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure physician's orders were implemented for one of 12 sampled residents. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure physician's orders were implemented for one of 12 sampled residents. (Resident 7) Findings include: Review of the policy entitled, Medication Administration, last reviewed January 31, 2025, revealed staff was to obtain vital signs if necessary, and document in the medical record the physician ordered medication administration information. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 7 had diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation (an irregular heartbeat), chronic kidney disease, and hypertensive retinopathy (damage to the retina caused by chronic high blood pressure). On July 15, 2024, the physician ordered staff to administer a blood pressure medicine (metoprolol tartrate) twice a day. Staff was not to administer the medication if the heart rate was less than 60 beats per minute or if the resident's systolic blood pressure (the first measurement of blood pressure when the heart beats and the pressure is at its highest) was less than 110 millimeters of mercury (mm/Hg). Review of Resident 7's April and May 2025 Medication Administration Records revealed that staff administered or held the medication 86 times with no documentation that the heart rate and blood pressure were assessed prior to medication administrating or holding of the medication per physician's order. In an interview on May 21, 2025, at 10:30 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed there was no documented evidence that the heart rate or the blood pressure were taken prior to medication administrating or holding of the medication per physician's order and they should have been there for Resident 7. 28 Pa. Code 211.10(d) Resident care policies. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(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, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement inter...

Read full inspector narrative →
**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 implement interventions to prevent further decline and/or improve range of motion for one of two sampled residents with limited range of motion. (Resident 26) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 26 had diagnoses that included dementia, muscle weakness, and other abnormalities of gait and mobility. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident had cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and dressing. Review of the physical therapy progress note dated February 11, 2025, indicated that resident had limited range of motion to his right foot. On March 3, 2025, the physician ordered that staff apply a MAFO (molded ankle foot orthosis-a custom made brace that provided support and control) in Velcro closure sneakers to be worn at all times on the right foot when Resident 26 was out of bed. Observations on May 20, 2025, at 10:30 a.m. and 12:11 pm, and on May 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m., revealed that Resident 26 was in his wheelchair without the MAFO brace on. In an interview on May 21, 2025, at 10:58 a.m., the Therapy Director confirmed that the resident was identified with a contracture (a condition of shortening and hardening of muscles, tendons, or other tissue, often leading to deformity and rigidity of joints) of his right foot, and that the MAFO brace should have been on when the resident was observed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer medications in a manner that prevents the spread of infections on one of two nursing ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to administer medications in a manner that prevents the spread of infections on one of two nursing units. (West Wing) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Infection Control Plan: Standard Precautions, last reviewed January 31, 2025, revealed that gloves should be worn whenever exposure to the mucus membranes (soft tissue that lines the body's canals and organs, such as the eye) is planned or anticipated. On May 20, 2025, at 9:11 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 was observed administering medications to Resident 33. The nurse applied Ocusoft lid scrubs to the eyes of the resident with her ungloved hands. In an interview on May 21, 2025, at 9:30 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that the nurse should have been wearing gloves to administer medications around the eyes. 28 Pa. Code 211.10(d) Resident care policies. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.
May 2023 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 facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to store food under sanitary conditions in the dietary department. Findings include: Review of...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on facility policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to store food under sanitary conditions in the dietary department. Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Storage of Food and Supplies, dated November 23, 2022, revealed that all food, non food items, and supplies used in food preparation were to be stored in such a manner as to prevent contamination to maintain the safety and wholesomeness of the food for human consumption. Observation during the initial kitchen tour on May 2, 2023, at 9:48 a.m., revealed in the cook's cooler that all ten of the wire shelves had rust and peeled and chipped paint on the bottom and top and along the length of the wire shelves. There was an unwrapped eggplant stored directly on the shelves. In an interview conducted on May 4, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., the Administrator confirmed the presence of rust and paint in the cook's cooler. 28 Pa. Code 201.18(b)(3) Management. 28 Pa. Code 211.6(c) Dietary 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+ (95/100). 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 Mosser's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns MOSSER NURSING 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 Mosser Staffed?

CMS rates MOSSER NURSING HOME's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 19%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Mosser?

State health inspectors documented 5 deficiencies at MOSSER NURSING HOME during 2023 to 2025. These included: 5 with potential for harm.

Who Owns and Operates Mosser?

MOSSER NURSING 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 60 certified beds and approximately 40 residents (about 67% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in TREXLERTOWN, Pennsylvania.

How Does Mosser Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, MOSSER NURSING HOME's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (19%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Mosser?

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 Mosser Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, MOSSER NURSING 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 Mosser Stick Around?

Staff at MOSSER NURSING HOME tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 19%, the facility is 27 percentage points below the Pennsylvania average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 10%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.

Was Mosser Ever Fined?

MOSSER NURSING 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 Mosser on Any Federal Watch List?

MOSSER NURSING 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.