Maple Farm
Akron, Pennsylvania · CCN 396128
13 surveys since 2011. The first finding at harm level was recorded in 2015.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 42
- Surveys
- 13
- Harm or worse
- 1
- Immediate jeopardy
- 0
Findings where a surveyor recorded actual harm to a resident.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 46
- Ownership
- Non profit - Corporation
- Chain
- Independent
- County
- Lancaster
- Medicare-certified since
- 2010
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 5
- Health inspection
- 5
- Staffing
- 5
- Quality measures
- 4
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=11, floor 20).
Last survey on record
Jun 4, 2026
158 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 | 4.55 | 4.80 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 1.21 | — |
| Annual nurse turnover | 30.5% | 31.9% |
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 | D583.3% | E116.7% | F— |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B— | C— |
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Maple Farm, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF552May 29, 2025
Based on review of facility policy, staff interviews, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to discuss the risks/benefits and obtain consent for newly ordered antipsychotic and opioid medications for three of twelve residents records reviewed (Residents 2, 22, and 29). Findings include: Review of Resident 2's clinical record revealed diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease (loss of cognitive functioning such as thinking, remembering, and reasoning and interferes with a person's daily life) and dementia (a condition characterized by progressive loss of intellectual functioning, impairment of memory, and abstract thinking) with psychosis (a mental health condition characterized by a loss of touch with reality). […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF755Jun 10, 2021
Based on review of facility policy, staff interview, and pharmacy consultant interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement procedures to ensure accurate accounting of controlled medications (substances that have an accepted medical use [medications which fall under US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Schedules II-V], have a potential for abuse, ranging from low to high, and may also lead to physical or psychological dependence) for one of two medication rooms observed (Team Room [NAME]), and four of 15 resident medication storage boxes observed (Medication storage boxes for Residents 13, 15, 34. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF761Jun 10, 2021
Based on a review of the pharmacy policy, and manufacturer's guideline, staff interview, and pharmacy consultant interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that controlled medications (substances that have an accepted medical use [medications which fall under US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Schedules II-V], have a potential for abuse, ranging from low to high, and may also lead to physical or psychological dependence) were stored appropriately and medications were appropriately labeled for two of two medication rooms observed (Team Room Brossmann and [NAME]), and seven of 15 resident medication storage boxes observed (Medication storage boxes of Residents 8, 13, 17, 29, 31, 34. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF880Jun 4, 2026
Based upon clinical record review, facility observation, review of facility policies, and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions for one resident (Resident #13) out of 16 residents reviewed. Review of facility policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions, last reviewed April 23, 2025, states Enhanced Barrier Precautions will be used for those residents with chronic wounds. Review of Resident #13's wound assessment report dated May 28, 2026, finds that resident has a neuropathic ulcer (a chronic, slow healing, open sore or wound caused by nerve damage and poor circulation) on the left medial first metatarsophalangeal base (where the first toe connects to the long foot bone). […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF628May 29, 2025
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that the resident and/or their representative received written notice of a statement of the resident's appeal rights, including the name, address (mailing and email), telephone number of the entity which receives such requests, and the name, address (mailing and email), and telephone number of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman; and failed to provide notice of the transfer to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for one of two residents reviewed for hospital transfers ( Resident 7). […]
Read 21 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 21 of 42 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Jun 4, 2026Standard1 finding
- May 29, 2025Standard4 findings
- Jun 2, 2023Standard1 finding
- Jun 10, 2021Standard5 findings
- Sep 27, 2019Standard1 finding
- Aug 24, 2018Standard and complaint6 findings
- Sep 22, 2017Standard1 finding
- Sep 20, 2016Complaint1 finding
Show the 5 earlier surveys
- Aug 11, 2015Standard5 findings · 1 harm
- Sep 11, 2014Standard2 findings
- Aug 9, 2013—7 findings
- Sep 21, 2012—4 findings
- Aug 24, 2011—4 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