How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Canterbury Place
310 Fisk Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15201 (opens Google Maps) · Allegheny County · (412) 622-9000· 115 certified beds · avg 111 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: UPMC SENIOR COMMUNITIES (6 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 16, 2026
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 3, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.18
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jun 3, 2026 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jun 3, 2026 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 7, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 13, 2026 · F-0919 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 13, 2026 · F-0919 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Why it matters: A resident who falls or needs help in a bathroom without a working call button may be stranded and unable to summon aid.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Mar 4, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has plan of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 3, 2026 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 3, 2026 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jul 19, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 3, 2025 · F-0695 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 3, 2025 · F-0695 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Why it matters: Mistakes in breathing care can quickly become life-threatening for residents who depend on oxygen or equipment.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jul 8, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 52 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint F-0658
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint F-0684
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint F-0689
View all 52 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Jun 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint · F-0835 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give all staff the required training on its quality improvement program — the internal system for finding problems and making care better. · from a complaint · F-0944 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide its staff with training in compliance and ethics — teaching employees the laws and ethical standards that govern how residents must be treated. · from a complaint · F-0946 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide its staff with required training on behavioral health — caring for residents with conditions like dementia, depression, or other mental health needs. · from a complaint · F-0949 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint · F-0835 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · F-0849 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Jul 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Jun 3, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0695 |
| Jun 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Apr 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0695 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · F-0849 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Jan 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943 |
| Oct 31, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint · F-0623 |
| Feb 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Jan 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Jan 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Jan 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Jan 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Jan 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Jan 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (12 → 13).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 27
Serious citations (G–L): 3
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 17 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 27 | 3 | J ▲ |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityPennsylvania averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.18
Pennsylvania average: 3.94
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.27
Pennsylvania average: 0.80
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.73
Pennsylvania average: 3.58
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Pennsylvania avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.18 | 3.94 | 3.95 | top 31% in Pennsylvania; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.27 | 0.80 | 0.69 | top 12% in Pennsylvania; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.73 | 3.58 | 3.50 | top 35% in Pennsylvania; top 32% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.92 | 0.56 | 0.48 | top 12% in Pennsylvania; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 41.6 | 44.5 | 45.8 | top 40% in Pennsylvania; top 41% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 43.8 | 39.9 | 42.9 | bottom 40% in Pennsylvania; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.96, RN 1.20, weekend 3.53.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.96 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Canterbury Place. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UPMC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 07/01/2007 |
| UPMC Senior Communities INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 07/01/2007 |
| Baker Tilly Us LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/13/2025 |
| Beckwith III, George | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Blum, Eva | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/12/2014 |
| Borgo, Angela | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/10/2020 |
| Borgo, Angela | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/10/2020 |
| Brodine, Deborah | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2007 |
| Brodine, Deborah | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Caplan, Debra | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Cestello, Louis | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/18/2023 |
| Clagette, Vaughn | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2019 |
| Covert, James | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2019 |
| Davis, Leslie | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2021 |
| Dick, Douglas | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Gabel, John | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/17/2023 |
| Ghubril, Saleem | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/20/2023 |
| Haley, Lisa | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/20/2023 |
| Hamilton, Richard | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Humphrey, Kathy | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/20/2023 |
Showing 20 of 48 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 28 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain UPMC Senior Communities — 6 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Cranberry Place — Cranberry Township, PA · overall 1/5abuse
- Muncy Place — Muncy, PA · overall 3/5
- Sherwood Oaks — Cranberry Township, PA · overall 3/5
- UPMC Northwest Transitional Care Unit — Seneca, PA · overall 5/5
- Wecare at the Green Home — Wellsboro, PA · overall 2/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you show me the call buttons in the bathrooms and bathing areas, and tell me your average response time when one is pressed?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 42% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 48 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 66 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivy Park Post Acute | 1.9 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Spring Hill Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 1.9 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| East End Health & Rehab Center | 1.9 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital Tcu | 2.0 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Champion City Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 2.6 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Concordia at RP Home | 2.7 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Squirrel Hill Wellness and Rehabilitation Center | 2.8 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Heritage Care Center | 3.0 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Southwestern Veterans Center | 3.2 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Burgh Care Center | 3.9 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Little Sisters of the Poor | 4.3 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| John J Kane Regional Center-Gl | 4.4 mi | Pittsburgh, PA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Allegheny, PA — 52 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Caring Heights Community Care & Rehab Ctr — Coraopolis, PA · overall 1/5
- Carnegie Park Post Acute — Pittsburgh, PA · overall 1/5
- Cedar Hill Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center — Coraopolis, PA · overall 3/5
- Concordia at Rebecca Residence — Allison Park, PA · overall 4/5
- Concordia at the Cedars — Monroeville, PA · overall 5/5
- Concordia of the South Hills — Pittsburgh, PA · overall 5/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 395146.