Macrina does not advance a charitable purpose because it does not operate at a loss. Specifically, the Board argues that, because Mt. Macrina’s revenues were in excess of its expenses for the years 1994 and 1995, it achieved a “profit” or a pecuniary gain. It is well established that accepting Medicaid or Medicare payments is not the “equivalent of conducting a business for profit. The decision to accept Medicaid [or Medicare] payments to help defray the cost of care for residents is perfectly consistent with a finding that the nursing home advances a charitable purpose.” St. Margaret Seneca Place v. Board of Property Assessment, Appeals and Review, 536 Pa. 478, 483, 640 A.2d 380, 382-83 (1994); see Couriers-Susquehanna, Inc. v. County of Dauphin, 165 Pa.Cmwlth. 192, 645 A.2d 290 (1994)(<HOLDING>). In West Allegheny Hospital v. Board of
holding that a nursing home violated  48325c in part because it failed to provide a pressure relief mattress that had already been identified as needed in the residents care plan holding that it is plain error for a trial court to require a defendant to pay courtappointed attorney fees in the absence of legally sufficient evidence that defendant has the ability to pay the amount imposed holding that promises city made to pay annual step increases did not result in contractual obligation and municipalities retain ability to change compensation and benefits provided to employees holding that couriers a nonprofit nursing home was held to advance a charitable purpose because it provided care in a nondiscriminatory manner without regard for ability to pay and did not expect to make a profit holding that father being held in jail based on presumption of ability to comply could not have been incarcerated for civil contempt of child support order after failing to appear at contempt hearing without affirmative finding based on evidence that he had present ability to pay purge amount