Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
A standard survey is most likely before around September 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Juniper Village At Bucks County Rehab And Skd Care during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with dementia, GERD, and other comorbidities, identified as at risk for malnutrition, experienced a 7.4% weight loss over a short period despite a care plan calling for small frequent meals, intake monitoring, and nutritional supplements. Nursing notes documented poor appetite and the need for encouragement to eat, but although a dietitian consult was ordered, there was no documented RD evaluation of the resident’s nutritional status or weight loss, and orders for supplements and weekly weights were delayed. The RD, on limited hours, could not recall when she was notified of the resident’s poor intake or weight loss and could not confirm that timely interventions were implemented, demonstrating a failure to follow the facility’s own unintended weight loss policy for assessment and monitoring.
The facility did not provide the required RN coverage on two separate shifts, resulting in no RN hours being recorded when a minimum of 8.0 hours was required for each shift.
A resident who was cognitively intact signed a binding arbitration agreement at admission without being informed of the right to rescind the agreement within 30 days or that the agreement does not prevent communication with regulatory officials. Both the social worker and administrator confirmed they did not provide this information during the review process, and the resident was unaware of these rights.
A resident experienced a significant weight loss following a hospital stay and return to the facility. Although the dietician was eventually notified and offered nutritional supplements, the care plan was not updated to address the resident's recent weight loss or interventions, as required by facility policy and regulations.
The facility did not ensure ongoing water testing and compliance with its water management plan for Legionella prevention, as the last water test was completed over a year prior to the survey. Staff confirmed that required procedures and documentation were not maintained, resulting in a failure to adhere to CDC and CMS guidelines for waterborne pathogen control.
A facility failed to document a resident's advanced directives in their electronic medical record. Despite having a signed POLST form indicating DNR status and specific medical treatment preferences, these directives were not reflected in the resident's records. Staff interviews confirmed the oversight, highlighting a lapse in adhering to the facility's policy on maintaining accurate records.
The facility failed to notify the State Long Term Care Ombudsman of facility-initiated discharges for three residents. Despite informing responsible parties of hospital transfers, there was no documented evidence of Ombudsman notification. The Facility Administrator confirmed the lack of a process for notifying the Ombudsman of such discharges.
The facility failed to develop baseline care plans within 48 hours of admission for four residents, as required. A resident with multiple diagnoses, including reduced mobility, had no baseline care plan, and an error in the admission MDS regarding dental status was noted. Another resident with chronic venous hypertension and ulcers lacked a care plan for skin integrity. Two other residents had care plans without necessary interventions. Interviews confirmed the absence of timely baseline care plans.
The facility failed to create and implement individualized care plans for two residents, leading to deficiencies in addressing their specific needs. One resident, who was edentulous, had no care plan for dental issues, while another resident with chronic ulcers had care plans lacking specific interventions. This indicates a failure to provide comprehensive care as required by regulations.
The facility failed to timely address pharmacy recommendations for three residents, leading to deficiencies in medication management. A resident with Major Depressive Disorder experienced a 33-day delay in addressing a recommended dose reduction. Another resident's medication evaluation and adjustment were delayed, and a third resident's medication record had irregularities that were not reviewed by a physician. These issues were confirmed by the DON.
The facility failed to implement an effective infection control program, lacking systems to track infections and review antibiotic use as per their policy. An interview with a staff member confirmed the absence of these critical components, indicating non-compliance with established procedures.
Failure to Adequately Assess and Monitor Significant Weight Loss
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to accurately assess and monitor significant weight loss for a resident, contrary to its own Unintended Weight Loss policy. That policy requires close monitoring of weights, timely assessment by an interdisciplinary team, and implementation of interventions when weight loss occurs, with the Director of Wellness and Dietary Manager overseeing related processes. Compliance under the policy is defined as proper assessment, care planning, intervention, and ongoing evaluation, even when weight loss cannot be prevented. The resident involved was admitted with diagnoses including GERD, arthritis, dementia, traumatic brain injury, and anxiety, and had a BIMS score of 4 indicating severely impaired cognition. On admission assessment, the resident could use utensils, bring food and liquids to the mouth, and swallow safely, but required supervision with eating. A Mini nutrition note dated in February documented a weight of 94 pounds, no decrease in food intake over the prior three months, no weight loss, and a nutrition score of nine indicating risk of malnutrition. The care plan initiated in February 2026 identified gastrointestinal alteration, nutritional risk factors, and significant weight loss, and included interventions such as small frequent meals, monitoring intake, providing supplements, documenting intake each meal, and reporting signs and symptoms of malnutrition and weight loss to the physician as needed. Despite these identified risks and care plan interventions, the clinical record showed the resident experienced a 7.4% weight loss between early February and early March, with weights declining from 97 pounds to as low as 86 pounds. Nursing notes documented that the resident needed encouragement to eat and had poor appetite on multiple days in February. A dietitian consult was ordered on February 25, but March physician orders for a nutritional supplement and weekly weights were not obtained until early and mid-March. Nutritional progress notes lacked documented evidence that the RD evaluated the resident’s nutritional status and significant weight loss. In a phone interview, the RD, who is present about 10 hours per week, could not recall when she was first notified of the resident’s poor appetite or weight loss and could not confirm whether timely interventions were implemented, indicating a breakdown in the assessment and monitoring process required by facility policy.
Failure to Meet Minimum RN Staffing Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with Pennsylvania state regulations requiring a minimum of one registered nurse (RN) per 250 residents on all shifts. A review of the facility's nursing staff ratio for the week of July 29, 2025, through August 5, 2025, showed that on two separate shifts, the required RN coverage was not met. Specifically, there was no RN coverage for the entire night shift on July 31, 2025, and no RN coverage for the entire evening shift on August 2, 2025, despite a minimum of 8.0 hours being required for each shift. These findings were discussed with the facility's administrator.
Plan Of Correction
No negative outcomes occurred due to this deficient practice. DON/designee will review and approve all schedules to ensure one RN is scheduled for each shift. DON/designee will audit staffing daily for 4 weeks, then weekly for 2 months, reporting results to the QA Committee. Noncompliance will be corrected immediately.
Failure to Inform Resident of Arbitration Agreement Rights
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident was properly informed about the terms and rights associated with signing a binding arbitration agreement upon admission. Although the resident was cognitively intact, as indicated by a BIMS score of 15 on the admission MDS, the review of the signed arbitration agreement revealed that it lacked documentation of who reviewed the agreement with the resident. Interviews with the social worker and the nursing home administrator confirmed that neither informed the resident of their right to rescind the agreement within 30 days of signing, nor did they explain that the agreement does not prevent communication with federal, state, or local officials, including surveyors and ombudsmen. Further interviews with the resident and their spouse revealed that the resident was unaware of the right to rescind the agreement or the ability to communicate with regulatory officials despite having signed the document. Both the social worker and the administrator admitted to omitting these critical explanations during their review of the arbitration agreement with residents. The deficiency was confirmed by the administrator, who acknowledged that residents were not informed of these rights in a language they could understand, as required.
Failure to Update Care Plan for Significant Weight Loss
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan to address a significant weight loss in a resident. The facility's policy requires that residents experiencing unintended weight loss be assessed by the interdisciplinary team, with interventions implemented and documented in the care plan, including measurable objectives and time frames. However, review of the clinical record for a resident who was admitted after a hospital stay, subsequently discharged back to the hospital for gastrointestinal bleeding, and then readmitted, revealed a significant weight loss of 18.8 pounds over eleven days. The resident's weight dropped from 143.8 pounds to 125.0 pounds during this period. Despite this significant weight loss, the registered dietician was only made aware of the issue several days later and, although supplemental shakes were offered and refused by the resident, the care plan was not updated to reflect the new interventions or the resident's current nutritional status. The dietician confirmed that the protocol would involve communication with nursing staff and the physician, followed by an update to the care plan, but this was not completed. The failure to update the care plan and document appropriate interventions constituted noncompliance with facility policy and regulatory requirements.
Failure to Implement and Maintain Water Management Program for Legionella Prevention
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement an effective water management program for the prevention, detection, and control of waterborne contaminants, specifically Legionella. According to the report, the facility's water management plan, which is contracted to an outside company, outlines procedures such as routine control measures, inspection of plumbing and hot water systems, quarterly cleaning of aerators, and regular water testing. However, documentation and staff interviews confirmed that the facility did not ensure ongoing water testing and compliance with its own water management plan, as the last recorded water test was completed on February 18, 2023. This deficiency was identified through observation, policy review, and staff interviews, which revealed that the facility did not adhere to CDC and CMS guidelines requiring regular risk assessments, implementation of water management programs, and documentation of testing and corrective actions. The Environmental Director and Nursing Home Administrator confirmed the lapse in water testing and compliance, indicating a failure to follow established protocols for minimizing the risk of Legionella and other waterborne pathogens in the facility's water system.
Failure to Document Advanced Directives in Resident's Record
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that advanced directives were accurately reflected in the records of a resident, identified as Resident R70. Upon review of the clinical records and interviews with staff, it was found that Resident R70's electronic medical record did not include their DNR status or any advanced directives. This omission was despite the resident having a completed and signed POLST form indicating their preferences for medical interventions, including a DNR order, limited additional interventions, and no artificial hydration or nutrition by tube. The POLST form was signed by both the physician and Resident R70. Interviews with facility staff, including Employee E4 and the Facility Administrator, confirmed the absence of the advanced directives in the electronic medical record. Employee E4 acknowledged that Resident R70 had signed a POLST form and expressed specific medical treatment preferences, yet these were not documented in the electronic system. The Facility Administrator also confirmed the lack of documentation for Resident R70's advanced directives in the electronic medical record, indicating a failure to adhere to the facility's policy on maintaining accurate records of residents' advanced directives.
Failure to Notify Ombudsman of Facility-Initiated Discharges
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the State Long Term Care Ombudsman of facility-initiated emergency transfers and discharges for three residents. Resident R73 was discharged to the hospital on July 26, 2024, but there was no documented evidence that the Ombudsman was informed of this discharge. Similarly, Resident R74 was transferred to the hospital on two occasions, May 19, 2024, and June 23, 2024, without notification to the Ombudsman. Resident R75 was also discharged to the hospital on July 25, 2024, with no evidence of Ombudsman notification. Interviews with the Facility Administrator, Employee E1, confirmed that the facility lacked a process for providing the Ombudsman with copies of discharge notices. Employee E1 acknowledged that the Ombudsman was not notified of the discharges for Residents R73, R74, and R75. This oversight was identified during a review of clinical records and facility documents, which revealed the absence of documented notifications to the Ombudsman for these facility-initiated discharges.
Failure to Develop Baseline Care Plans for New Admissions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for four residents, as required by regulations. The facility's policy on care planning did not address the creation of a baseline care plan. Resident R14 was admitted with multiple diagnoses, including reduced mobility and cognitive communication deficit, but no baseline care plan was established. Additionally, an error was found in the admission MDS regarding the resident's dental status, which was not corrected. Observations revealed that Resident R14 was edentulous and not wearing dentures, which he reportedly did not like wearing. Resident R70 was admitted with chronic venous hypertension and multiple non-pressure ulcers, yet no baseline care plan for skin integrity or wound care was in place. Resident R9, admitted with sepsis and other conditions, had a care plan that lacked necessary interventions. Similarly, Resident R120, admitted with a thoracic spine fracture and bipolar disorder, had a care plan without interventions. Interviews confirmed that baseline care plans were not completed within the required timeframe for Residents R9 and R120.
Failure to Implement Individualized Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement individualized comprehensive care plans for two residents, leading to deficiencies in addressing their specific needs. Resident R14, who was admitted with conditions including reduced mobility and cognitive communication deficit, was observed to be edentulous and not wearing dentures during a meal. Despite having dentures, the resident expressed a preference not to wear them. However, there was no care plan in place to address the resident's dental issues, indicating a lack of individualized planning for this aspect of care. Similarly, Resident R70, admitted with multiple chronic ulcers and other health issues, had a care plan for venous stasis ulcers that lacked specific interventions. Additionally, care plans for falls, impaired vision, and potential pressure ulcers were also missing interventions. This lack of detailed planning and intervention documentation highlights the facility's failure to provide comprehensive care plans tailored to the residents' needs, as required by their own policies and federal and state regulations.
Delayed Response to Pharmacy Recommendations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to act on pharmacy recommendations in a timely manner for three residents, leading to deficiencies in medication management. Resident R10, who was admitted with Major Depressive Disorder, had a pharmacy recommendation for a gradual dose reduction of Mirtazapine and Citalopram on August 15, 2024. However, the attending physician did not address this recommendation until September 17, 2024, resulting in a 33-day delay. This delay was confirmed by the Director of Nursing (DON) during an interview. For Resident R14, the pharmacy recommended evaluating the necessity of atorvastatin, monitoring symptoms, and adjusting the Eliquis dose. Despite the DON signing off on the pharmacy review, the physician reviewed the recommendations late. Additionally, Resident R70's pharmacy consultation report noted irregularities in the medication administration record, including incomplete directions and missing strength for ascorbic acid. The report lacked the physician's signature, indicating that the recommendations were not reviewed. These issues were confirmed by the DON, highlighting a pattern of delayed response to pharmacy recommendations.
Failure in Infection Control and Antibiotic Stewardship
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to establish an effective infection control program related to infection surveillance and periodic review of antibiotic use. The facility's policy on antibiotic stewardship outlines the need for a program to promote appropriate antibiotic use and optimize infection treatment while reducing adverse events. However, the facility did not have documented evidence of tracking infections or conducting periodic reviews of antibiotic use, as required by their policy. This lack of documentation indicates a failure to adhere to the established procedures for monitoring antibiotic usage patterns, reviewing antibiograms, and tracking multi-drug resistant organisms. An interview with Employee E2 confirmed that the facility lacked a system to track infections and antibiotic use, and there was no periodic review of antibiotic use in place. This deficiency was identified through observations, policy reviews, and staff interviews, highlighting a significant gap in the facility's infection control and antibiotic stewardship efforts. The absence of these critical components in the infection control program suggests non-compliance with the facility's own policies and state regulations.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 1,325 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 23 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Bensalem
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Langhorne Gardens Health & Rehabilitation Center | 1.7 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Statesman Health & Rehabilitation Center | 2.8 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
| Oxford Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center | 2.9 mi | — | 15 | 0 |
| Bristol Health & Rehab Center | 3.4 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Delaware Valley Veteran's Home | 4.2 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Juniper Village At Bucks County Rehab And Skd Care.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.