MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER

850 NORRISTOWN ROAD, WARMINSTER, PA 18974 (215) 672-2500
Non profit - Corporation 43 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
90/100
#81 of 653 in PA
Last Inspection: July 2025

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

Overview

Masonic Village at Warminster has an excellent Trust Grade of A, indicating it is highly recommended and performs well compared to other facilities. It ranks #81 out of 653 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, placing it in the top half of all facilities in the state, and #7 out of 29 in Bucks County, meaning only six local options are better. The facility is improving, having reduced issues from three in 2022 to none in 2025. Staffing is a strong point, with a 5/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 40%, which is below the Pennsylvania average, suggesting a stable and experienced team. However, there have been some concerns, such as a failure to thoroughly investigate an unexplained injury for one resident and not properly documenting the need for an anti-anxiety medication for another. Additionally, there were issues with food safety practices, as staff did not perform proper hand hygiene while serving meals. Overall, this facility has notable strengths but also areas that need attention.

Trust Score
A
90/100
In Pennsylvania
#81/653
Top 12%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Better
3 → 0 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
40% 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
✓ Good
Each resident gets 53 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Pennsylvania. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 3 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2022: 3 issues
2025: 0 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (40%)

    8 points below Pennsylvania average of 48%

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

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 40%

Near Pennsylvania avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

The Ugly 3 deficiencies on record

Aug 2022 3 deficiencies
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 clinical record review, facility policy review, incident report review, and staff interview, it was determined that the...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, facility policy review, incident report review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin for one of 12 sampled residents. (Resident 14) Findings include: Review of the facility policy entitled, Abuse Prevention, dated June 15, 2022, revealed that procedures were in place to assure adequate review of all incidents, accidents, and suspicious bruising or injuries of unknown origin. Occurrences were reviewed for trends or patterns that might constitute abuse. An investigation was to begin immediately by interviewing the resident who was suspected of being abused and any witnesses. Clinical record review revealed that Resident 14 had diagnoses that included arthritis, dementia, anxiety, and depression. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident had cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance from staff for activities of daily living. On August 13, 2022, a nurse noted that staff observed an abrasion to the resident's ribs on the right side of her body, as well as petechiae (small red or purple spots caused by bleeding into the skin) to the resident's right hip. It was noted that the resident was unable to describe how this injury occurred due to her diagnosis of dementia. On August 13, 2022, the physician ordered duoderm dressing bandage to be applied to the mid-lateral right rib area for five days. Review of the incident report dated August 13, 2022, confirmed that the resident had an abrasion to the right lateral ribs and petechiae to her right hip and that the resident was unable to give a description of how the injury happened. There was no evidence that the facility conducted a thorough investigation that included interviews with all witnesses of the injury identified on August 13, 2022, to rule out abuse. In an interview on August 25, 2022, at 10:14 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that there was no evidence that the facility conducted a thorough investigation of the injury of unknown origin identified on August 13, 2022. 28 Pa. Code 201.29(i) Resident rights. 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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on clinical record review, review of consultant pharmacist reports, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to document the rationale for the continued use of an as neede...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review, review of consultant pharmacist reports, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to document the rationale for the continued use of an as needed (PRN) anti-anxiety medication for one of 12 sampled residents. (Resident 1) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 1 had diagnoses that included anxiety. The physician ordered an anti-anxiety medication (Alprazolam) every 12 hours PRN for anxiety January 19, 2022, through June 15, 2022, and June 15, 2022, through July 19, 2022. Review of Resident 1's medication administration record revealed that staff adminstered the PRN anti-anxiety medication on April 2 and 10, May 6 and 25, and June 29, 2022. On April 14, 2022, a consultant pharmacist completed a review and requested documentation of the rationale for the continued use of the PRN anti-anxiety medication beyond 14 days and that a specific duration be documented in the physician order. On May 10, 2022, the physician signed the pharmacist's recommendation and indicated he was in agreement with the request. On May 10, 2022, the consultant pharmacist again requested justification for the continued use of the PRN anti-anxiety medication. On June 20, 2022, the physician again acknowledged the pharmacist's recommendation and indicated he was in agreement however no further action was taken. There was no evidence that the order for the PRN anti-anxiety medication was adjusted with a specific duration or that the physician provided rationale for the ongoing use of the PRN anti-anxiety medication beyond 14 days, following the pharmacist's recommendations on April 14, 2022, and May 10, 2022. In an interview on August 25, 2022, at 11:40 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that the order for the PRN anti-anxiety medication was not revised and that there was no evidence that the physician provided rationale for its continued use past 14 days from the original order dates. 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.
CONCERN (D)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to serve and store food items in a safe and sanitary manner in the main dining room and nursing unit pantry. Findings include: During t...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to serve and store food items in a safe and sanitary manner in the main dining room and nursing unit pantry. Findings include: During the lunch observation on August 23, 2022, at 12:01 p.m., in the main resident dining room, Resident 10 was seated at a table and the nurse aide (NA 2) was setting up her lunch. After touching multiple items, including a soda can, and not performing hand hygiene, NA 2 used her ungloved fingers to hold back ice while pouring water from a glass into another container. She then opened the can of gingerale, poured it into the glass of ice, placed a straw, and presented it to Resident 10. Resident 10 was observed drinking the beverage. Observation on August 23, 2022, at 1:11 pm., in the East corridor pantry revealed an open container of applesauce in the resident refrigerator. The date on the facility label indicated that it was opened February 20, 2022, and the manufacturer's expiration date on the container was May 28, 2022. 28 Pa. Code 211.6(c)(f) 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 (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 3 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 Masonic Village At Warminster's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER 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 Masonic Village At Warminster Staffed?

CMS rates MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 40%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Masonic Village At Warminster?

State health inspectors documented 3 deficiencies at MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER during 2022. These included: 3 with potential for harm.

Who Owns and Operates Masonic Village At Warminster?

MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER 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 43 certified beds and approximately 38 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in WARMINSTER, Pennsylvania.

How Does Masonic Village At Warminster Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (40%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Masonic Village At Warminster?

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 Masonic Village At Warminster Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER 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 Masonic Village At Warminster Stick Around?

MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER has a staff turnover rate of 40%, 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 Masonic Village At Warminster Ever Fined?

MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER 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 Masonic Village At Warminster on Any Federal Watch List?

MASONIC VILLAGE AT WARMINSTER 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.