Moravian Hall Square Health And Wellness Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Nazareth, Pennsylvania.
- Location
- 175 West North Street, Nazareth, Pennsylvania 18064
- CMS Provider Number
- 395752
- Inspections on file
- 20
- Latest survey
- March 12, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 3
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Moravian Hall Square Health And Wellness Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with dementia and severe cognitive impairment, known to be at risk for falls and exhibiting escalating aggressive behaviors, sustained a head laceration and skin tear after a nurse placed a Dinamap device in front of the resident during an incident. The resident grabbed and shook the device, lost balance, and fell, resulting in injuries that required hospital treatment. Facility documentation and staff interviews confirmed that this action introduced a safety risk and led to an avoidable accident.
The facility failed to ensure accurate MDS assessments for two residents. One resident was incorrectly documented as receiving insulin, while another was inaccurately recorded as being discharged to a long-term care hospital instead of a personal care setting. These inaccuracies were confirmed by the Nursing Home Administrator.
The facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for two residents. A resident with legal blindness, hearing loss, and continence issues did not have interventions for these needs in their care plan. Another resident with difficulty walking and heart failure also lacked interventions for incontinence in their care plan. The Assistant DON confirmed the absence of documented evidence addressing these care areas.
A resident with a history of lower limb fracture, anemia, and osteopenia was transferred from bed to wheelchair by only one staff member, despite orders requiring two-person assistance. This deviation from the care plan resulted in the resident experiencing discomfort after the transfer, as confirmed by facility leadership.
A resident at Moravian Hall Square Health and Wellness Center received a Covid-19 vaccine without being informed or consenting to the treatment, as required by facility policy. The resident, who had dementia and required extensive assistance, was administered the vaccine without documented evidence of informed consent. The DON confirmed the oversight.
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for a resident with polyosteoarthritis and muscle weakness. The MDS CAA summary indicated that the resident's urinary incontinence should be addressed, but no interventions were documented in the care plan. This was confirmed by the Corporate Compliance Officer.
Failure to Prevent Avoidable Fall Results in Resident Injury
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when staff failed to ensure the safety of a resident with dementia and anxiety, who was identified as being at risk for falls due to confusion and behavioral symptoms. The resident, who was severely cognitively impaired and exhibited both physical and verbal aggression, began escalating in behavior, including tapping on the medication cart and attempting to throw the narcotic book. In response, a nurse placed a Dinamap device in front of the resident, which the resident then grabbed and shook. The nurse let go of the device, causing it to move, and the resident lost balance, fell backward, and struck his head on closed doors. As a result of the fall, the resident lost consciousness briefly and sustained a laceration to the head and a skin tear to the right hand, requiring transfer to the hospital for treatment, including staples and Steri-Strips. Facility documentation and staff interviews confirmed that the action of placing the Dinamap in front of the resident introduced a safety risk and directly contributed to the avoidable accident and resulting injuries.
Inaccurate MDS Assessments for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate completion of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two residents. Resident 47, who had a diagnosis of diabetes, was inaccurately documented as receiving insulin injections during a seven-day review period, despite having no physician's order for insulin and no administration of the medication. Additionally, Resident 57, admitted for short-term rehabilitation, was incorrectly recorded on the MDS assessment as being discharged to a long-term care hospital, while nursing notes indicated the resident was discharged to a personal care setting with memory support. These inaccuracies were confirmed by the Nursing Home Administrator during an interview.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plans for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for two residents, as identified in their comprehensive assessments. Resident 20, who has diagnoses including legal blindness, hearing loss, difficulty walking, and an enlarged prostate, was noted in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment to have vision difficulties, communication issues due to impaired hearing, and continence issues. However, there was no evidence that interventions for these issues were included in the care plan. Similarly, Resident 56, with diagnoses of difficulty walking and heart failure, was identified in the MDS Care Area Assessment (CAA) summary to have incontinence issues that needed to be addressed in the care plan. Despite this, there was no evidence that interventions for urinary incontinence were included in the current care plan. The Assistant Director of Nursing confirmed the absence of documented evidence addressing these care areas in the care plans.
Failure to Follow Transfer Safety Interventions
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when staff failed to implement the assessed safety intervention for a resident who had a closed fracture of the left tibia/fibula, anemia, and osteopenia. The resident was admitted with orders from the physical therapist and physician requiring transfers from bed to wheelchair to be performed with the assistance of two staff members. However, a nurse's note documented that the resident was transferred by only one staff member, contrary to the care plan, and the resident experienced discomfort following this transfer. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the nursing assistant did not follow the resident's plan of care.
Failure to Obtain Informed Consent for Covid-19 Vaccine
Penalty
Summary
Moravian Hall Square Health and Wellness Center was found to be non-compliant with federal and state regulations regarding the right of residents to be informed and make treatment decisions. The facility failed to inform a resident or their responsible party in advance about a treatment option, specifically the administration of a Covid-19 vaccine. The facility's policy required that residents or their legal representatives receive information and education about the benefits and potential side effects of the vaccine and that consent be obtained prior to administration. However, this procedure was not followed for one of the sampled residents. The resident in question was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including dementia and muscle weakness, and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living. A physician had ordered the administration of a Covid-19 vaccine as needed in the event of an outbreak. On a specified date, the vaccine was administered without documented evidence that the resident or their representative was informed or consented to the treatment. The Director of Nursing confirmed that informed consent was not obtained prior to the vaccine administration.
Plan Of Correction
1. The Infection Prevention Nurse will provide education to residents and/or their designated representatives regarding vaccination options and their benefits and risks prior to obtaining informed consent. 2. If the resident representative and the resident are unable to recall IF they had received a recent vaccination, their community Primary Care Physician will be contacted. 3. The Infection Prevention Nurse will obtain informed consent for all vaccinations from residents and/or their designated representatives, utilizing the Document Manager in PCC or, where applicable, paper documentation. 4. A physician's order will be obtained. 5. The nurse will verify that informed consent has been obtained prior to administering any vaccinations. 6. Residents will be monitored for signs and symptoms for 24 to 48 hours following administration of the vaccine. 7. Vaccination administration will be documented by the nurse in EMAR on PCC and updated in the immunizations tab of the resident's EMR. 8. The COVID-19 Vaccine Policy has been reviewed, and staff have been educated on the associated policies and procedures. This includes training on how to effectively communicate with residents and their representatives regarding vaccination, ensuring they understand the informed consent process and their right to make an informed decision. 9. The Infection Preventionist will be responsible to ensure all vaccinations have physician orders and consent prior to administration. This will be completed by the Infection Preventionist, with the DON as her backup. This will be added to our QAPI reporting no less than quarterly for the next year.
Failure to Address Urinary Incontinence in Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to meet the needs of Resident 32, who was admitted with diagnoses including polyosteoarthritis and muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Care Area Assessment (CAA) summary indicated that the resident's urinary incontinence should be addressed in the care plan. However, there was no documented evidence that interventions for urinary incontinence were included in the current care plan. This deficiency was confirmed by the Corporate Compliance Officer during an interview.
Latest citations in Pennsylvania
A resident with dementia, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety, residing on a locked unit with a wander guard, was able to leave the secured area by closely following a housekeeper through coded double doors and out a side door without being noticed. Staff did not check for residents before and after exiting the unit, and the resident left the premises, traveled into the community, and purchased food and a drink before being located by local police and returned without injury. The facility’s elopement policy required monitoring for missing residents and initiation of emergency procedures, but these measures were only implemented after the resident was discovered missing and an elopement alarm was activated.
Surveyors observed that dietary staff did not follow the facility’s personal hygiene policy requiring hair restraints, as two dietary employees worked over uncovered food on the tray line with uncovered mustaches. In the same food preparation area, equipment including a large mixer with an uncovered bowl, a Robot-coupe mixer, and a blender were stored and used beneath window frames with peeling paint, and a nearby window blind had dried food debris along its length. Another window frame above a storage rack of meal trays also had peeling paint, demonstrating unsanitary food storage and preparation conditions.
Surveyors determined that the facility failed to provide required written notices of transfers and discharges to multiple residents and/or their representatives, and did not notify the State LTC Ombudsman when residents were transferred to the hospital after changes in condition or left against medical advice. Record reviews showed repeated absence of documentation that residents or responsible parties received written information about the transfers, and that the Ombudsman was informed. The Administrator confirmed that these notifications were not sent.
The facility failed to address repeated grievances regarding slow responses to resident call bells. The grievance policy required acknowledgment and active resolution of both written and verbal complaints, yet multiple residents reported that call bells often went unanswered for more than 30 minutes. Resident council minutes over several consecutive months documented ongoing complaints about delayed call bell response, and grievance records showed multiple similar complaints over an extended period. The DON and the administrator acknowledged a pattern of complaints about slow call bell responses and confirmed that the facility had not responded to these grievances.
Surveyors found that the facility did not ensure a safe, clean, and comfortable environment on two nursing units, noting a shattered clear plastic fire extinguisher cover in a hallway between resident rooms, holes in bathroom walls, a dented and misshaped room entrance doorframe near the floor, a hole in the wall between resident beds, and dented, crumbling wallboard near a bathroom entrance. These conditions were cited under state regulations for licensee responsibility and management.
A deficiency was identified when a resident’s MDS assessment did not accurately reflect the resident’s need for corrective lenses. The resident had a history of diabetes mellitus and falls and was care planned for impaired vision with a requirement for glasses. Despite this, the MDS indicated that no corrective lenses were needed during the look-back period, while direct observation showed the resident wearing glasses, and the Administrator later confirmed the inaccuracy of the MDS documentation.
A resident with chronic kidney disease and DM was documented on the MDS as alert and frequently incontinent of urine, and the CAA indicated that urinary incontinence should be addressed in the care plan. Review of the resident’s current care plan showed no interventions related to urinary incontinence, and the DON confirmed there was no documented evidence that this identified care area was included in the plan.
A resident with chronic kidney disease, polyneuropathies, and muscle weakness, who had no cognitive impairment and required substantial staff assistance for showers and total assistance for transfers, was scheduled to receive showers twice weekly on the evening shift. Over a 30-day period, there was no documentation that showers were provided, offered, or refused, and the resident reported not having had a shower since admission. The DON confirmed the absence of documentation that shower care was offered or provided, resulting in a deficiency related to nursing services and ADL care.
Surveyors found that staff did not follow multiple physician orders for three residents. A resident with diabetes received ordered insulin even when blood glucose readings were below the ordered hold parameter. Another resident with cerebral palsy, DM, and heart failure had repeated significant overnight weight gains without evidence that the physician was notified as ordered. A third resident with anemia and CKD had ordered CBC and CMP lab tests that were not documented as completed. The DON confirmed there was no documentation that these physician orders were carried out.
Staff failed to follow facility policy and physician orders requiring documentation of non-pharmacological interventions (NPI’s) before administering PRN oxycodone for two residents. One resident with osteoarthritis, hip pain, and diabetes had orders for NPI documentation each shift and PRN oxycodone for moderate to severe pain, yet received the narcotic multiple times in a month without any recorded attempt of NPI’s beforehand. Another resident with a history of stroke, diabetes, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis also had orders to document NPI’s prior to PRN pain medication, but similarly received PRN oxycodone several times without documentation that NPI’s were tried first, resulting in noncompliance with state pharmacy and nursing service regulations.
Failure to Prevent Elopement From Secured Unit
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a resident with unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety who was admitted to the facility in November 2025 and resided on a locked, secured unit requiring a code to exit. The facility had a written "Wandering and Elopements" policy that directed staff, when a resident was missing, to initiate the elopement/missing resident emergency procedure, determine if the resident was on an authorized leave, search the building and premises if not authorized to leave, and notify administration, the resident’s representative, the attending physician, and law enforcement if the resident was not located. On the date of the incident, the resident closely followed a housekeeper through double doors on the ground floor into a back hallway and then out a side door, leaving the secured unit without authorization. The housekeeper was unaware that the resident had followed through the door, and staff failed to ensure the resident’s safety by not checking for residents before and after exiting the unit. An elopement alarm was later activated after the resident was found to be unaccounted for on the secured unit, and the facility’s established protocols were then initiated, including notification of local law enforcement. The resident was subsequently located off premises by local police, sitting in a relaxed manner, conversing appropriately with officers, holding a beverage, and with no visible injuries, and he denied pain or discomfort. Facility documentation showed that the resident had been able to travel far enough to purchase food and a drink at a restaurant, as evidenced by a receipt from a nearby McDonald’s. A progress note recorded that the resident had been noted not on the unit, an immediate search was conducted, administration and proper authorities were notified, and the resident was returned safely, with a skin check completed and the resident later observed in his room eating dinner. In an interview, the resident stated that it was taking too long to get out of the building, that he waited for an opportunity and took it, and that he wanted to leave and go back to his place. In a separate interview, the Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that staff failed to ensure the resident’s safety by not checking for residents before and after exiting the unit, leading to the elopement from the secured environment.
Unsanitary Food Storage and Staff Hygiene Practices in Dietary Department
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store and handle food in a sanitary manner in the dietary department in accordance with its own policy and professional standards. The facility’s “Personal Hygiene” policy dated February 2, 2026, required all staff to wear hair restraints to effectively keep hair from contacting exposed food. During observation of the lunch meal service tray line on April 15, 2026, from 11:30 a.m. to 12:03 p.m., two dietary employees were observed working directly over uncovered food on the tray line with uncovered mustaches. In the same area, the window frame above the shelf where a large mixer with an uncovered bowl, a Robot-coupe mixer, and a blender were stored had peeling paint, while the Robot-coupe mixer and blender were actively being used to prepare resident food. Additionally, the blind in this window frame had dried food debris along its length, and another window frame above a storage rack of resident meal trays also had peeling paint. These conditions were cited under 42 CFR 483.60(i) Food Safety Requirements and 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) Responsibility of licensee, and had been previously cited on March 26, 2025. No specific residents, medical histories, or clinical conditions were described in the report; the deficiency focused on environmental and staff hygiene practices in the dietary department during food preparation and tray line service.
Failure to Provide Required Written Transfer Notices and Ombudsman Notification
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility failed to provide required written notifications of transfers and discharges to residents and/or their representatives, and failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for six residents who were transferred out of the facility. Clinical record review showed that one resident was transferred to the hospital after a change in condition on December 26, 2025, without documented evidence that the resident or responsible party received written information regarding the transfer or that a copy of the transfer notice was sent to the Ombudsman. Another resident was transferred to the hospital after a change in condition on January 9, 2026, with no documented evidence that the Ombudsman was notified of the transfer. Additional record reviews revealed that three more residents were transferred to the hospital after changes in condition on March 30, 2026, and March 12, 2026, without documentation that the residents and/or their responsible parties or legal representatives were provided written information regarding the transfers, or that the Ombudsman was notified. One resident left the facility against medical advice on February 3, 2026, and there was no documented evidence that the Ombudsman was notified of this transfer. In an interview on April 17, 2026, the Administrator confirmed that notifications of transfers were not sent to the residents and/or their representatives and that written notices of the transfers and discharge were not sent to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman.
Failure to Address Repeated Grievances About Slow Call Bell Response
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address ongoing grievances related to slow response times to resident call bells, as required by its grievance policy. The policy, last reviewed on February 24, 2026, stated that grievances could be either formal written complaints or verbal complaints to staff, and that the facility was to acknowledge and actively work toward resolution of such complaints. During a confidential resident group interview on April 14, 2026, all four participating residents reported that call bells were answered slowly, often taking more than 30 minutes. Review of resident council minutes from September 8, 2025, through December 11, 2025, showed repeated complaints about slow call bell responses at each monthly meeting, with no evidence that any resident council minutes were recorded in 2026. Additionally, review of resident grievances from October 31, 2025, through March 23, 2026, revealed multiple complaints about slow call bell responses on several dates in late 2025 and early 2026. In an interview on April 17, 2026, the DON and Nursing Home Administrator confirmed there was a pattern of complaints about slow call bell responses and that the facility had failed to respond to those grievances. These findings demonstrate that the facility did not honor residents’ rights to have grievances acknowledged and addressed, despite repeated verbal and written complaints documented through resident council minutes and the grievance process.
Damaged Walls, Doorframes, and Fire Extinguisher Cover Compromise Safe, Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment on two of five nursing units, specifically the [NAME] and [NAME] units. During observations conducted over two days, surveyors noted that the clear plastic fire extinguisher cover in the hallway between rooms 135 and 137 was shattered. In one resident bathroom, there were holes on the left and right walls, and the doorframe at the entrance to another resident room was dented and misshaped near the floor. Additionally, there was a hole in the wall between the beds in another resident room, and the wallboard at the bottom of the wall to the right of the entrance to a bathroom in yet another room was dented and crumbling. These environmental deficiencies were directly observed in resident care areas and common hallways and were cited under 28 Pa. Code 201.14(a) regarding the responsibility of the licensee and 28 Pa. Code 201.18(e)(2.1) regarding management responsibilities.
Inaccurate MDS Documentation of Resident’s Need for Corrective Lenses
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected a resident’s current status. Clinical record review showed that Resident 139 had diagnoses including diabetes mellitus and a history of falls, and the resident required glasses to correct impaired vision. The resident’s care plan documented a problem with impaired vision and indicated that glasses were required beginning March 8, 2022. However, the MDS assessment dated [DATE] documented in Section B (Hearing, Speech, and Vision) that the resident did not require corrective lenses during the previous seven days. On observation on April 14, 2026, at 11:00 a.m., Resident 139 was noted to be wearing glasses. In an interview on April 17, 2026, at 1:00 p.m., the Administrator confirmed that the MDS assessment for this resident was inaccurate, as it did not reflect the resident’s actual need for and use of corrective lenses during the assessment look-back period.
Failure to Include Urinary Incontinence in Comprehensive Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan that addressed an identified care area for one resident. Clinical record review showed that this resident had chronic kidney disease and diabetes mellitus, and a Minimum Data Set completed on February 20, 2026, documented that the resident was alert and frequently incontinent of urine. The Care Area Assessment summary dated the same day specified that the resident’s urinary incontinence was to be addressed in the care plan. However, review of the current care plan revealed no evidence that interventions for urinary incontinence were included. In an interview on April 17, 2026, at 10:25 a.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed that there was no documented evidence that this identified care area was addressed in the resident’s care plan.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Showers and Document ADL Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide and document assistance with activities of daily living, specifically showering, for one resident who was dependent on staff for this care. The resident was admitted on March 12, 2026, with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, polyneuropathies, and muscle weakness. A Minimum Data Set assessment dated March 19, 2026, showed the resident had no cognitive impairment, required substantial staff assistance for showers, and was totally dependent on staff for transfers. Facility documentation indicated the resident was scheduled to receive showers on Wednesdays and Saturdays during the evening shift. However, the resident reported on April 14, 2026, that they had not had a shower since admission, and review of the clinical record showed no evidence that a shower had been provided, offered, or refused during the previous 30 days. The DON confirmed on April 16, 2026, that there was no documented evidence that showers were offered or provided to this resident. This deficiency was cited under 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) related to nursing services.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders for Insulin, Weight Monitoring, and Lab Tests
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement and follow physicians’ orders for three residents. For one resident with diabetes mellitus, a physician ordered Novolog insulin to be administered in the morning prior to breakfast, with instructions to hold the insulin if the resident’s blood sugar was less than 80 mg/dL. Review of the April 2026 MAR showed that staff administered the insulin on three occasions when the resident’s blood sugar was below 80 mg/dL, contrary to the physician’s order. Another resident with cerebral palsy, diabetes mellitus, and heart failure had a physician’s order to be weighed every night shift and to notify the physician if the resident gained more than 2 lbs in 24 hours or 5 lbs in one week. Clinical records showed multiple instances of significant weight gains over 24-hour periods, including gains of 4.7 lbs, 3.4 lbs, 6 lbs, 2.3 lbs, 5.8 lbs, 4 lbs, 2.4 lbs, and 3.3 lbs, without documented evidence that the physician was notified as ordered. A third resident with anemia and chronic kidney disease had a physician’s order for two blood tests (CBC and CMP), but the clinical record contained no documentation that these lab tests were obtained. The DON confirmed there was no documented evidence that care and services were provided in accordance with these physicians’ orders.
Failure to Document Non-Pharmacological Interventions Before PRN Narcotic Administration
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to follow the facility’s pain management policy and specific physician orders requiring documentation of non-pharmacological interventions (NPI’s) and their effectiveness prior to administering as-needed narcotic pain medication for two residents. The policy, last reviewed February 24, 2026, required staff to document NPI’s and their effectiveness for patients receiving pain interventions. For a resident with left knee osteoarthritis, right hip pain, and diabetes, a physician ordered on March 17, 2026, that NPI’s be documented every shift, and on April 6, 2026, ordered oxycodone every four hours as needed for moderate to severe pain. Review of the MAR showed that this resident received as-needed oxycodone 23 times in April 2026 without documented evidence that NPI’s were attempted prior to administration. Another resident with diagnoses including cerebral infarction (stroke), diabetes, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis had a physician order dated February 7, 2026, directing staff to document NPI’s used before administering as-needed pain medication, and an order dated April 3, 2026, for oxycodone every four hours as needed for moderate to severe pain. MAR review revealed this resident received as-needed oxycodone nine times in April 2026 without documented evidence that NPI’s were attempted prior to administration, in violation of 28 Pa. Code 211.9(a)(1) Pharmacy services and 28 Pa. Code 211.12(d)(1)(5) Nursing services.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release May 27, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
Trusted by long-term care providers and associations.
