Search for Skilled Nursing by ZIP Code:  :

Broomall Presbyterian Village

  1. Skilled Nursing Home Facilities
  2. Pennsylvania
  3. Broomall Skilled Nursing Home Facilities
Full Name

Phone Number

Email Address

City of interest
We value your privacy. By submitting this form, you agree to the terms and conditions of our privacy policy and our Agreement to be Contacted by Telephone. You also consent that we, or our partner providers, can reach out to you using a system that can auto-dial. Your consent is not required to use our service.

Photos

Reviews
Overall Rating 3.4 / 5.0 ★★★★★

  • Jim Thomas
    ★★★★★ a month ago

    My Dad spent almost three years at the now former Broomall Presby - and it was a great experience. The staff took tremendous care of him and it was also obvious the staff (and management!) cared about the residents. Most if not all the people we were in contact with stayed with the new company and that is comforting for the current residents. Thank you all for your terrific care.

  • Milagros Rebollal
    ★★★★★ 2 weeks ago

    My mother came here for therapy after her fall. She did not receive the therapy that she needed. Every time you asked the nursing station a question, they sers to have an attitude problem. There is lack of care and compassion for the seniors staying here. I was there everyday to be with my mother and I saw plenty. If the workers don't have the compassion and care that these seniors need, maybe theis should not be in this line of work. The shower policy is that .every senior is supposed to be showered twice a week. For the 9 days my mother stayed there, they only gave her 1 shower. This is totally unacceptable. I complained about it to the manager just to happen again. U would not send your loved one here.

  • Nelson Jean-Louis
    ★★★★★ 8 months ago

    My mom is here for a stroke and so far so good I've had no complaints but I make sure I'm here all the time

  • Laura Savard
    ★★★★★ 12 months ago

    I have been on a 'waiting list' for 5 months trying to get my mother into this facility since she will need to go onto Medicaid. I have gotten nothing but a run around. Calls are never returned!!! I've wasted 5 months and much time and energy. Although they have Medicaid beds, it's clear they don't want to use them for Medicaid residents since I can get no clear answer on when she'd ever get in (although I'm told she's "top of the list"). The admissions manager is particularly unfriendly and not the LEAST BIT helpful. I'm not at all happy with this facility. I wish I was told 5 months ago that they would not have any Medicaid beds.

  • rachel8891
    ★★★★★ a year ago

    DO NOT SEND LOVED ONES HERE!!!!! If I could give this place zero stars, I would. You send your family members here to get better, but they end up with more health issues than they came with from the lack of nursing care and assessment skills.

About Broomall Presbyterian Village

General Information

Legal Business NamePhila. Presbytery Homes, Inc.
Ownership TypeNon Profit - Corporation
Changed Ownership In The Last 12 MonthsNo
First Accepted MedicareJanuary 1, 1967 ()
Capacity146
Residents125
Percent Occupied86%
Program ParticipationMedicare And Medicaid
Resident And Family CouncilsResident
In HospitalNo
Continuing Care Retirement CommunityYes
Special Focus FacilityNo
Auto Sprinkler System In Required AreasYes

Ratings for Broomall Presbyterian Village

Broomall Presbyterian Village was reviewed by Medicare to have a rating of 4 out of 5 stars.

About Medicare Ratings
Overall Rating
Health Inspections Rating
Quality Measures Rating
Staff Rating
RN Staff Rating

Overall Ratings of Pennsylvania Nursing Homes

Fines, Complaints, and Inspection Problems in the Past 3 Years

Compare The Number of Problems

Types of Problems at Nursing Homes

Some issues within a nursing home are much more severe than others. Medicare evaluates each problem based on 2 scales: the number of residents affected by a problem and the severity of the potential or actual harm to residents based on the problem. We have color coded the matrix below to make it easier to pick out the more severe problems. In general, orange and red issues related to the treatment of a resident are considered substandard quality of care.

  Residents Affected
Severity of the Deficiency Few Some Many
Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety J K L
Actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy G H I
No actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy D E F
No actual harm with potential for minimal harm A B C

April 26, 2017 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
ESomePotential for HarmHealth Inspection1) Hire only people with no legal history of abusing, neglecting or mistreating residents; or 2) report and investigate any acts or reports of abuse, neglect or mistreatment of residents.
ESomePotential for HarmHealth InspectionMaintain drug records and properly mark/label drugs and other similar products according to accepted professional standards.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionEnsure that each resident's 1) entire drug/medication regimen is free from unnecessary drugs; and 2) is managed and monitored to achieve highest level of well-being.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionStore, cook, and serve food in a safe and clean way.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionEnsure residents maintain acceptable nutritional status.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionDevelop a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionProvide necessary care and services to maintain or improve the highest well being of each resident .

December 2, 2016 - 3 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
DFewPotential for HarmComplaint1) Hire only people with no legal history of abusing, neglecting or mistreating residents; or 2) report and investigate any acts or reports of abuse, neglect or mistreatment of residents.

Staffing Levels Per Resident per Day

Medicare determines the expected staffing time per resident per day depending on level of care the residents of Broomall Presbyterian Village require. It is important to compare the reported time to expected time for a single facility instead of comparing the amount of time per resident of two facilities. Learn why.

2hr 35min
2hr 40min
ReportedExpected
CNA
40min
45min
ReportedExpected
LPN
1hr 5min
1hr 10min
ReportedExpected
RN
4hr 20min
4hr 30min
ReportedExpected
Total Nursing

This facility also provides approximately 30min per resident per WEEK of physical therapist time.

Quality Measures for Long Stay Residents

98.2%
99.1%
99.1%
99.1%
95.8%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
86.0%
86.5%
88.8%
89.2%
94.7%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
80.0%
69.7%
73.9%
70.8%
56.5%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
24.5%
21.1%
20.4%
18.9%
22.1%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antianxiety or hypnotic medication
12.9%
15.6%
21.5%
17.6%
20.1%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
10.3%
9.6%
13.1%
14.4%
15.6%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
18.8%
12.4%
11.1%
10.8%
15.3%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
12.3%
14.6%
12.5%
10.9%
7.3%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
1.0%
3.1%
12.0%
9.1%
5.0%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of high risk long-stay residents with pressure ulcers
7.1%
8.7%
9.7%
9.7%
5.9%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
8.9%
5.0%
1.0%
1.9%
2.7%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
3.8%
8.7%
3.8%
4.5%
3.3%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
4.7%
6.7%
5.6%
4.5%
3.3%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
0.5%
1.7%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of long-stay residents who were physically restrained

Quality Measures for Short Stay Residents

69.0%
79.6%
84.7%
91.2%
83.0%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
77.8%
84.1%
84.1%
84.1%
82.5%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of short-stay residents who were assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
63.9%
62.1%
54.0%
61.0%
64.4%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of short-stay residents who made improvements in function
13.7%
12.1%
31.9%
27.5%
15.4%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of short-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
0.9%
1.9%
2.2%
1.1%
1.9%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.9%
1.2%
1.0%
0.5%
0.9%
Q4 2016Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017PA
Percentage of short-stay residents with pressure ulcers that are new or worsened



Some page content retrieved from Google Places