POCOPSON HOME
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Pocopson Home in West Chester, Pennsylvania, has a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice for families considering nursing care. It ranks #101 out of 653 facilities in Pennsylvania, placing it in the top half of the state's options, and #6 out of 20 in Chester County, meaning only five local facilities are rated higher. The facility is showing improvement, as it reduced its issues from five in 2024 to none in 2025. Staffing is a strong point with a 5/5 rating and only 31% turnover, which is well below the state average, meaning the staff tends to stay and build relationships with residents. However, the facility has some concerning incidents, such as a resident being improperly restrained, which caused skin damage, and a failure to follow infection control practices during medication administration, highlighting areas that need attention. While the overall care quality is rated excellent, families should weigh these strengths against the serious issues reported.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Pennsylvania
- #101/653
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 31% turnover. Near Pennsylvania's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $16,036 in fines. Lower than most Pennsylvania facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 28 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Pennsylvania. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ○ Average
- 9 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (31%)
17 points below Pennsylvania average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
15pts below Pennsylvania avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
The Ugly 9 deficiencies on record
Mar 2024
1 deficiency
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 upon review of facility policy and procedure and observation, it was determined the facility failed to ensure adequate infection control measures occurred during medication pass observation on o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
4 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of facility policies, resident clinical records, and facility investigative reports, as well as staff interviews...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review and interviews with staff, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan related to restlessness, scoot chair use, restraints, or bed ...
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to repo...
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
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy, facility documentation, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to thoroughly in...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on a review of the facility's policy, observation, clinical records review, and interview with resident and staff, it was determined that the facility failed to notify the physician of a signifi...
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 clinical record review and interviews with staff it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for two of 32 residents reviewed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on the facility policy, clinical record review, observations and staff interviews revealed that the facility failed to ensure the residents enironment remains free of accident hazards for one ou...
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
Based on clinical record and facility policy review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to provide care and service to maintain or improve incontinence for one of one resident r...
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
- • 31% turnover. Below Pennsylvania's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 9 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $16,036 in fines. Above average for Pennsylvania. Some compliance problems on record.
About This Facility
What is Pocopson Home's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns POCOPSON 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 Pocopson Home Staffed?
CMS rates POCOPSON HOME's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 31%, compared to the Pennsylvania average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Pocopson Home?
State health inspectors documented 9 deficiencies at POCOPSON HOME during 2023 to 2024. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm and 7 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Pocopson Home?
POCOPSON HOME is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 275 certified beds and approximately 162 residents (about 59% occupancy), it is a large facility located in WEST CHESTER, Pennsylvania.
How Does Pocopson Home Compare to Other Pennsylvania Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Pennsylvania, POCOPSON HOME's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (31%) 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 Pocopson Home?
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 Pocopson Home Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, POCOPSON 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 Pocopson Home Stick Around?
POCOPSON HOME has a staff turnover rate of 31%, 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 Pocopson Home Ever Fined?
POCOPSON HOME has been fined $16,036 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Pennsylvania average of $33,239. 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 Pocopson Home on Any Federal Watch List?
POCOPSON 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.