Pennsylvania ›Worthington

Quality Life Services - Sugar Creek

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

120 Lakeside Drive, Worthington, PA 16262 (opens Google Maps) · Armstrong County · (724) 445-3146· 114 certified beds · avg 108 residents/day · certified since Apr 6, 1978 · 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 →

Part of chain: QUALITY LIFE SERVICES (10 facilities, chain avg rating 2.7★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 5, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 5, 2026
$246,480
Fines, last 3 years
3.45
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: 2/5 · 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, pattern · Mar 5, 2026 · F-0805 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems.

Why it matters: Food served in the wrong texture can cause choking or lead residents to stop eating and lose weight.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Apr 9, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · May 8, 2024 · F-0880 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.

Severity (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jun 4, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 44 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    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. F-0812

  2. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. F-0656

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. F-0745

View all 44 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 5, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Jun 5, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
Jun 5, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · F-0745
Jun 5, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jun 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605
Jun 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676
Jun 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. · F-0744
Jun 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 5, 2026▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · from a complaint · F-0805
Mar 5, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Mar 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583
Mar 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 16, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
May 16, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · F-0568
May 16, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0610
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · F-0627
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908
Jun 14, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
Jun 14, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · F-0622
Jun 14, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · F-0691
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jun 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908
May 8, 2024▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespreadThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
May 8, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
May 8, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 9).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024141L ▲
2025170F
2026131K ▲

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

2 fines totaling $246,480, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 5, 2026Fine$91,245
May 8, 2024Fine$155,235
May 8, 2024Payment Denial22 days from Jun 20, 2024

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityPennsylvania averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.45
Pennsylvania average: 3.94
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.58
Pennsylvania average: 0.80
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.17
Pennsylvania average: 3.58
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityPennsylvania avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.453.943.95bottom 39% in Pennsylvania; bottom 34% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.580.800.69bottom 39% in Pennsylvania; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.173.583.50bottom 41% in Pennsylvania; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.390.560.48bottom 43% in Pennsylvania; top 49% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)43.644.545.8top 48% in Pennsylvania; top 46% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)33.339.942.9top 37% in Pennsylvania; top 33% 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 3.45, RN 0.58, weekend 3.17.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.45 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Quality Life Services - Sugar Creek. 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 →

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Carter, ChristineIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Encova Mutual Insurance Group INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/09/2025
First National Insurance AgencyOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/09/2025
Kania, ToniaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Lopiccolo, BonnieIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Markivich, MichaelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Mercurio, RichardIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Nicholas, LawrenceIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Nicholas, LawrenceIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/15/2025
Stafford, LisaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Sugar Creek Rest, INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/15/2025
Tack, StevenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Tack-Beardsley, SusanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024
Tack-Yurek, MaryIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2024

All 14 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Quality Life Services — 10 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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 9 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "How do you handle residents who need modified food textures, and how do you make those meals appetizing?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "Who provides social services here, and how would they support my family member's emotional and social needs?"
  • "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
  • "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
  • "How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Pennsylvania midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 44% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 14 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Quality Life Services - Chicora4.9 miChicora, PA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Snu Armstrong Co Memorial Hosp9.5 miKittanning, PA★★★☆☆3/5
Armstrong Rehabilitation and Nursing Center10.1 miKittanning, PA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Concordia Lutheran Health and Human Care10.3 miCabot, PA★★☆☆☆2/5
Quality Life Services - Sarver10.5 miSarver, PA★★★☆☆3/5
Sunnyview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center11.7 miButler, PA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Embassy of Saxonburg12.7 miSaxonburg, PA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Kittanning Health & Rehab Center12.8 miKittanning, PA★★☆☆☆1/5
Eden Nursing & Rehabilitation Center19.9 miBrackenridge, PA★☆☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Worthington →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 395410.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details