Country Meadows Nursing Center of Bethlehem
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania · CCN 396053
13 surveys since 2011, and no finding has been recorded at harm level.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 46
- Surveys
- 13
- Harm or worse
- 0
- Immediate jeopardy
- 0
No finding on record has been cited at harm level or above.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 70
- Ownership
- For profit - Corporation
- Chain
- Independent
- County
- Northampton
- Medicare-certified since
- 1998
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 5
- Health inspection
- 4
- Staffing
- 4
- Quality measures
- 5
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=12, floor 20).
Last survey on record
Jul 31, 2025
466 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Staffing
| Measure | This facility | Peer median |
|---|---|---|
| Nurse hours per resident day | 4.12 | 3.54 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 1.19 | — |
| Annual nurse turnover | 35.2% | 46.3% |
As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.
Enforcement
No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.
Severity of recent findings
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J— | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D266.7% | E133.3% | F— |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B— | C— |
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Country Meadows Nursing Center of Bethlehem, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF550Jul 31, 2025
Based on policy review, staff and resident interviews, clinical record review, and review of electronic call bell logs, it was determined that the facility failed to answer call bells in a timely manner to provide care and services respectful of each resident's dignity and preferences to promote the quality of life for three of 17 sampled residents. (Residents 1, 25, and 28)Findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled Call Lights: Accessibility and Timely Response,” dated April 29, 2025, revealed that staff were responsible for responding to a call light in a reasonable amount of time. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF550Aug 5, 2026
Based on facility policy review, staff and resident interviews, clinical record review, and review of electronic call bell logs, it was determined that the facility failed to answer call bells in a timely manner to provide care and services respectful of each resident's dignity and preferences to promote the quality of life for two of eight sampled residents. (Residents 54 and 58)Findings include:Review of the facility policy entitled Call Lights: Accessibility and Timely Response, dated April 15, 2026, revealed that staff were responsible for responding to a call light in a reasonable amount of time. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF656Aug 5, 2026
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan that addressed individual resident needs as identified in the comprehensive assessment for one of eight sampled residents. (Resident 4)Findings include:Clinical record review revealed that Resident 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included retention of urine. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], indicated that the resident was alert and was frequently incontinent of urine. The Care Area Assessment summary dated May 23, 2026, noted that the resident's urinary incontinence was to be addressed in the care plan. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF656Jul 31, 2025
Based on clinical record review, review of facility documentation, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan that addressed each resident's needs as identified in the comprehensive assessment for two of 17 sampled residents. (Residents 5, 25) Findings include: Clinical record review revealed that Resident 5 had diagnoses that included dementia, major depression disorder, and chronic kidney disease. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], noted that the resident had severely impaired cognition, had impaired communication abilities, was frequently incontinent of urine and required substantial assistance with toileting hygiene. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF684Jul 31, 2025
Based on facility policy review, clinical record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement physician's orders for two of 17 sampled residents. (Residents 7 and 25)Findings include: Review of the policy entitled Elimination Bowel Protocol, last reviewed April 29, 2025, revealed that the day shift (7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) and evening shift (3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.) and medication nurses will check the bowel movement documentation in the electronic medical record (EMR). If no bowel movement had occurred in the past three days, the day shift medication nurse was to administer prune juice to the resident. […]
Read 20 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 20 of 46 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Aug 5, 2026Standard3 findings
- Jul 31, 2025Standard3 findings
- Sep 8, 2022Standard3 findings
- Dec 13, 2021Complaint1 finding
- Sep 30, 2021Standard2 findings
- Feb 22, 2019Standard1 finding
- Feb 17, 2017Standard2 findings
- Mar 11, 2016Standard10 findings
Show the 5 earlier surveys
- Feb 26, 2015Standard2 findings
- Mar 7, 2014Standard1 finding
- Feb 28, 2013—2 findings
- Jan 24, 2013—1 finding
- Feb 10, 2011—15 findings
Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.
Comparable facilities
The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.
Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction