Auburn Ravine Healthcare Center
750 Auburn Ravine Road, Auburn, CA 95603 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 59 certified beds · (530) 823-6131 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2025
- a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 4.4% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 4.0% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.2% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.8% | 7.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.2% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 3.1% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.9% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.8% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.8% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.0% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.9% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.5% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.3% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.34 | 2.25 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.33 | 1.57 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
42.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 48 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 70.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 71 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 61% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 42.5%CMS range 30.6–56.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.2%CMS range 6.1–17.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 70.4% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 62.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 71.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 98.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 96.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 2.3% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.7%CMS range 3.9–13.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.90 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 59 beds and averages 55.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.98 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.36 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.49 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.09 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.37 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
31 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect one out of seven sampled residents' (Resident 1) right to be free from physical abuse by a resident (Resident 2) when Resident 2 placed her hand over Resident 1's mouth and grabbed and squeezed Resident 1's wrist.This failure resulted in Resident 1 getting hurt and had the potential for Resident 1 and all residents in the facility to experience physical and/or psychosocial harm.Findings:A review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated Resident 1 was admitted August of 2025 and had diagnoses that included dementia (impairment of the ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with everyday activities) with agitation, and cerebral atherosclerosis (hardening and narrowing of arteries in the brain due to plaque buildup, restricting blood flow and oxygen to brain regions).A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment tool) Cognitive Patterns, dated 11/5/25, indicated Resident 1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a tool to assess cognition) score…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program for one out of seven sampled residents (Resident 6) when,1.Two facility staff did not wear required personal protective equipment (PPE) when performing wound care on Resident 6 who was on enhanced barrier precaution (EBP- also known as enhanced standard precaution/ESP, infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms [MDROs- bacteria that resist treatment with more than one antibiotic] that employs targeted gown and glove use), and,2. for a facility census of 55, facility staff (Facility Hairdresser [FHD]) did not receive ongoing infection prevention and control training from the facility.These failures resulted in an increased risk for wound contamination, and potential exposure of Resident 6 to germs and infection and the possible spread of germs among the residents in the facility.Findings:1.A review of Resident 6's clinical record indicated Resident 4 was admitted December of 2025 and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards of food safety for a census of 54 when several food items were not labeled and several food items were not disposed of once past their use-by date.These failures present a potential risk of foodborne illnesses for residents eating facility prepared meals. Findings:During the initial kitchen tour on 9/7/25 beginning at 8:03 a.m., with [NAME] 1 for confirmation (CK 1), the following items were observed to be past their use-by date: a container of apple sauce, four containers of prepared pudding, a bag of vanilla pudding mix and a container of fajita seasoning. Additionally, the following items were not labeled with a use-by date: a container of coleslaw, two trays of sour cream, one tray of peaches, one tray of custard dessert, and three pudding cups.During an interview on 9/9/25 at 12:10 p.m., with the Registered Dietitian (RD), the RD indicated that food items should be labeled with a date and should be tossed once they are past their use-by date to ensure food…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly label medications for a census of 54 when four eye drops were not labeled with resident names.This failure increased the potential for residents to receive medication that did not belong to them and for cross-contamination and infection.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 9/8/25 with Licensed Nurse (LN1) of the number two medication cart, four eye drops in the top drawer were labeled only with a room number. LN 1 confirmed the findings and stated the eye drops should have the resident name on them. In case they move rooms.you don't want to give the medications to the wrong person.you don't want to mix them up, someone may be allergic.During an interview on 9/9/25 with the Director of Nursing (DON), the DON was shown a picture of the eyedrops. She confirmed the only identifier was a room number. The DON stated medications should be labeled with the resident names because residents could move rooms.During a review of the facility policy and procedures (P&P) titled, Labeling of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to follow proper infection control practices for three of 14 sampled residents (Resident 9, Resident 11, and Resident 43) when:1. Resident 9's oxygen tubing and humidifier container (a small container of water connected to oxygen tubing used to moisten the air) were not changed after seven days,2. Resident 11's oxygen tubing and humidifier container were not labeled with a date, and3. A staff member did not put on a gown while providing care to Resident 43 who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP, precautions taken to prevent the spread of disease and require the use of a gown and gloves).These failures had the potential to increase the spread of infection.Findings:1. Resident 9 was admitted to the facility in July of 2025 with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, a condition involving constriction of the airways and difficulty or discomfort in breathing).A review of Resident 9's Order Details (OD), dated 7/10/25, indicated, CHANGE HUMIDIFIER BOTTLE (if empty), O2 [oxygen] TUBING, and clean…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — widespreadDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement person-centered comprehensive care plans for four (4) residents (Resident 2, Resident 36, Resident 10, and Resident 56,) of 15 sampled residents when: 1. Resident 2 and Resident 36 did not have a care plan for the use of psychotropic (medication that affects the brain associated with mental processes and behavior) medications; 2. Resident 10 did not have a care plan for the use of a Wander/Elopement Alarm (WEA, a wearable device that alerts when the wearer wanders or elopes out of the building); 3. Nursing staff did not implement Resident 56's care plan when there was no WEA on him. These failures decreased the facility's potential to provide appropriate interventions and person-centered care. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 2's admission record indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 with diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — widespreadEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with acceptable professional standards of quality for seven residents (Residents 2, 36, 19, 10, 34, 56, and 110) out of 15 sampled residents when: 1. Psychotropic medications (medication that affects the brain associated with mental processes and behavior) were prescribed for Resident 2 and 36 without appropriate indications, manifestations or monitoring of behaviors. 2. Resident 19, 14 and 110 nasal cannulas (a plastic tube that delivers extra oxygen into your nose) and humidifiers (devices used to humidify supplemental oxygen) were not labeled or dated, and oxygen was not provided per the physician order. 3. Resident 10 and Resident 34 had incomplete monitoring orders for a Wander/Elopement Alarm (WEA, a wearable device that alerts when the wearer wanders or elopes out of the building) 4. Resident 56 had a WEA on without a physician's order. These failures decreased the facility's potential to prevent worsening of the residents' clinical condition. Findings: 1. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Dietary Supervisor (DS) met the state's education qualification requirements, as required per federal regulation, to be the DS to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition services. In addition, the facility failed to ensure the Registered Dietitian (RD) provided frequently scheduled consultations with the DS to include overseeing food safety and sanitation, food preparation, meal service and food storage. As a result, there were lapses in the delivery of food and nutrition services associated with meal distribution accuracy (cross reference F803), modified food texture accuracy (cross reference F805), and safe food handling and sanitation (cross reference F812), which lacked the benefit of a qualified DS responsible for the day-to-day food service operation for the skilled nursing facility. In addition, the facility lacked the benefit of the expertise of the RD input when there was not sufficient oversight over the food service operations via frequently scheduled consultation to the DS by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when: 1) Cool down process was not performed for meat leftovers (any food that was prepared for service but was not served), 2) Procedure for cooling down method for ambient (room temperature) food was not being followed, 3) Metal serving pans had brown and white substances on the inside surface; serving pans were found stacked wet, 4) Expired bread had not been discarded, 5) Microwave had food debris on upper interior surface, 6) Several cutting boards had gouges, black smudges, and rancid odor, 7) Employees' beverage containers were stored in residents' food and drink preparation area, and 8) Ice machines in kitchen and nourishment rooms were not clean. These failures had the potential to lead to foodborne illness for a total of 53 out of 55 residents who received facility prepared foods. Findings: 1. During an inspection in the walk-in refrigerator on 7/16/24, at 10:28 a.m., a bucket of cooked leftover…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a clean environment for the residents and visitors when one of one garbage dumpster, located outside the facility, was not closed securely due to deformed dumpster lids. This failure had the potential for an unsafe environment for the residents and visitors due to possible pest infestation and spread of diseases in the facility. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 7/16/24, at 10:52 a.m., it was observed one out of one outside dumpster was covered with its two lids. However, the dumpster lids were bowed away from the midline where they converged, leaving a two-inch gap in between. The deformed lids lacked the integrity to securely cover the bin. The Dietary Supervisor (DS) confirmed the condition of the dumpster lids and agreed that either the lids needed to be fixed or the facility needed a new trash bin. During an interview with the Director of Clinical Operations (DCO) on 7/19/24, at 9:35 a.m., she stated the facility did not have a policy and procedure regarding dumpster conditions. The DCO…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-19 · tag F0839 — widespreadEmploy staff that are licensed, certified, or registered in accordance with state laws.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), CNA 2, of five sampled CNAs had a valid CNA license. This failure had the potential to result in all 55 residents in the facility to receive care from an unqualified person. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on [DATE] at 11:44 a.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON), the CNA 2's license verification was reviewed. The DON confirmed CNA 2's license verification indicated an expiration date on [DATE]. The DON stated she expected CNAs who worked at the facility to have a valid CNA license. During a concurrent observation and interview on [DATE] at 11:48 a.m. with the Director of Staff Development (DSD) in the facility's dining room, CNA 2 was assisting residents with their lunch meal. The DSD stated she was aware CNA 2's license was getting close to expiration, CNA 2 had not yet submitted an updated CNA license and confirmed CNA 2 was currently working a CNA shift. An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection control program for a census of 55 residents when: 1. Facility staff were observed not performing hand sanitation when entering and exiting resident's rooms; 2. Soiled linens were processed without adequate use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE, equipment worn to minimize exposure to hazards that cause serious workplace injuries and illnesses); and, 3. The washing machine's water temperature was not monitored. These failures decreased the facility's potential to prevent the spread of disease and infections among residents. Findings: 1. During an observation and concurrent interview with Environmental Service 1 (EVS 1) on 7/18/24 10:32 a.m., the EVS 1 was observed entering and exiting resident rooms 24, 25, 12, and 13 without performing hand sanitation. The EVS 1 was observed to push her cart near room [ROOM NUMBER], entered room [ROOM NUMBER] with gloved hands without sanitizing her hands. The EVS 1 was observed to exit room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-19 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop, implement, and monitor an infection control program with the use of antibiotics when: 1. The Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) failed to monitor the laboratory indications on the use of antibiotics. 2. There were inadequate tracking tools in use for tracking of residents on antibiotics and the indications for the use of antibiotics 3. There were inadequate infection control inservices for the facility staff on handwashing. These failures had the potential for residents to be exposed and acquire infectious diseases causing illness. Findings: 1. During an interview with the Infection Preventionist (IP) on 7/18/24 02:35 PM the IP was asked to provide the tracking tool she used to monitor residents who were using antibiotics. The IP was further asked aside from the tracking tool she used what were the clinical indications for the use of the antibiotics. The IP provided a map of the facility which she stated she used to monitor…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-19 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — widespreadEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the required in-service trainings for three of four sampled Contracted Certified Nursing Assistants (CCNA 1, CCNA 2, and CCNA3) and three of five sampled facility employed Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA 2, CNA 3, and CNA 4), when the facility was unable to provide documentation to demonstrate the CCNAs and CNAs had no less than 12 hours per year of continuing competencies including dementia (a loss of memory and problem-solving abilities which interfere with daily life) management and abuse prevention. These failures had the potential to result in CCNAs and CNAs not identifying and reporting abuse nor being able to effectively care for residents with dementia. Findings: In an interview on 7/18/24 at 2:59 p.m., the Director of Clinical Operations (DCO) stated the facility used contracted staff through staffing agencies and she expected those staffing agencies to provide CCNAs mandatory training documentation for facility to review before scheduling the CCNAs to perform patient care. During a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-19 · tag F0655 — patternCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure baseline care plans (instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care) were developed, implemented, and signed by the resident or responsible party within 48 hours of admission for two out of 15 sampled residents (Residents 260 and 261). This failure had the potential to cause residents and staff to be unaware of the residents' plan of care. Findings: A review of Resident 260's admission record indicated Resident 260 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including sepsis (a life-threatening complication of an infection) and urine retention (difficulty urinating and completely emptying the bladder). During a concurrent observation and interview on 7/16/24 at 9:07 a.m., with Resident 260 in the resident's room, Resident 260 was observed with a urinary catheter. Resident 260 stated, I was transferred here from the hospital about three…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-19 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate did not exceed 5% for four residents (Residents 1, 18, 28, and 29) of 15 sampled residents when: 1. Resident 1 was administered morphine ER (extended release, narcotic pain medication) 15 mg (milligram, a unit of measurement) and pramipexole (medication used to treat restless leg syndrome) 0.125 mg at 11:13 a.m. when it was scheduled at 8 a.m.; 2. Resident 18 was administered omeprazole (used to treat heartburn) 20 mg and gemfibrozil (medication to help lower high cholesterol and triglyceride levels in the blood) 600 mg at 8:16 a.m. instead of 30 minutes prior to the breakfast meal.; 3. Resident 28 was administered gabapentin (used to treat nerve pain) 300 mg at 10:17 a.m. when it was scheduled at 8 a.m., and a lidocaine patch 5% (pain relieving patch) at 10:17 a.m. when it was scheduled at 7 a.m.; and, 4. Resident 29 was administered cephalexin (an antibiotic) 250 mg and lisinopril (used to treat high blood pressure and heart failure) 5 mg at 10:56 a.m. when it was scheduled…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-19 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the menu was followed for the therapeutic diets (a modification of a regular diet, tailored to fit the nutritional needs of a particular person - may be part of a treatment or medical condition and usually prescribed by a physician) during the lunch meal on 7/17/2024 when: 1. 44 out of 44 residents with regular portion size received two scoops (eight ounces (oz.) instead of three scoops (12 oz.) of pasta entrée, 2. Five residents (Resident 6, 9, 14, 33, and 49) with pureed texture diets (diet with modified food texture that is smooth and lump-free for people with swallowing and/or chewing difficulties) received pureed garlic bread sticks instead of soaked white dinner rolls, 3. 16 residents (Resident 7, 11, 19, 21, 25, 29, 32, 38, 39, 40, 43, 46, 52, 56, 110, and 261) who were on Level 5 Minced and Moist texture diets (modified texture diet for people with swallowing and/or chewing difficulties), Heart Healthy/Cardiac diets (diet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-19 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility failed to ensure the appropriate food texture for five residents (Resident 6, 9, 14, 33, and 49) who were on a puree texture diet and received pureed ziti with cheese with chunks of pasta and tomato. The total census was 55. This deficient practice had the potential to increase risk to the residents with swallowing and/or chewing difficulties to choke and/or aspirate (a condition in which food, liquids, saliva, or vomit is breathed into the airway). Findings: A concurrent observation and interview on 7/17/24, at 10:27 a.m. with [NAME] (C)1 were conducted during puree preparation for the lunch meal. C1 stated the texture for the puree pasta (ziti with cheese) should be smooth, like mashed potatoes. A concurrent observation and interview on 7/17/24, at 12:38 p.m., with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), were conducted during food sampling of the puree pasta for the test meal tray. The texture of the puree pasta and cheese entrée had a bulky, lumpy consistency when sampling. After tasting, the DS stated the pureed pasta texture was lumpy with noticeable chunks of pasta and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident 10) out of 15 sampled residents was free from unnecessary psychotropic medications when Resident 10 was prescribed an order for lorazepam (a psychotropic medication that affects the brain associated with mental processes and behavior) as needed (PRN) indefinitely. This failure had the potential to cause medication interactions, confusion, and falls. Findings: A review of Resident 10's admission record indicated Resident 10 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 with diagnoses including dementia without behavioral disturbance or anxiety (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning) and recurrent depressive disorders (a mental health disorder characterized by persistently depressed mood or loss of interest in activities). During a review of Resident 10's Order Summary Report (OSR, physician orders), Resident 10 had a physician order for lorazepam, oral tablet 0.5 mg (milligram, a unit of measurement) every 12 hours PRN for anxiety manifested by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure safe food handling and storage for food brought in by family for one resident (Resident 2) out of 15 sampled residents. This failure had the potential for Resident 2 to experience foodborne dangers, such as, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea by consuming moldy food. Findings: A review of Resident 2's admission record indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 with diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe). During a concurrent observation and interview on 7/16/24 at 9:31 a.m. with Resident 2, in Resident 2's room, a transparent plastic container with a red plastic lid was observed on Resident 2's bedside table. Indistinguishable personal food items with greenish-blue spots and fuzzy growth were observed through the container. Resident 2 stated, I'm not sure what those are, my family brought me that a while ago. During a concurrent observation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-19 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a call light (a device used by a resident to signal the need for help) was accessible for one of 15 sampled residents (Resident 11). This failure had the potential to result in unmet resident needs and delayed staff response. Findings: A review of Resident 11's admission record, indicated Resident 11 was admitted to the facility in 2016 with diagnoses that included spastic hemiplegia (uncontrolled muscle movements on one side of the body), contracture (permanent tightening of muscles which causes stiffness and prevents normal movement of a body part), polyarthritis (painful inflammation and stiffness affecting five or more joints at the same time), dementia (a loss of memory and problem-solving abilities which interfere with daily life) and a history of falling. A review of Resident 11's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 5/1/24, indicated Resident 11 had moderate memory problems, impairments to both upper body and lower body, and was dependent on staff for mobility and care related to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-08 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure: 1. The Dietary Manager (DM) met the state's education qualification requirements, as required per federal regulation, to be the DM to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition services; and, 2. The Registered Dietitian (RD) provided frequently scheduled consultation to the DM to include overseeing food safety and sanitation, food preparation, meal service and food storage. These failures resulted in lapses in the delivery of food and nutrition services associated with meal distribution, safe food handling, sanitation, and insufficient oversight of food service operations for a census of 29 residents who received meals from the facility kitchen. Findings: During the annual recertification survey from 9/5/23 to 9/8/2023, multiple issues surrounding the delivery of dietetic services were identified: 1. Meal distribution accuracy - The menu/recipes were not followed and the portion size of food items were not served correctly, and 2. Safe food handling and sanitation: a. The ice machines in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-09-08 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespreadProvide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one dietary personnel was competent to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service when the [NAME] 1 (CK 1) was unable to verbalize the process of properly cooling down cooked food and was unable to practice safe food handling while preparing food for a census of 29 residents who received food from the facility kitchen. These failures had the potential to cause food borne illness in a potentially compromised population. Findings: During an interview with the CK 1 on 9/6/23, at 9 a.m., the CK 1 explained the cooling down process of the cooked food. The CK 1 stated he would put the cooked meat in the refrigerator to cool down in order to slice the meat easier. He then stated he would reheat the meat to 150 degrees Fahrenheit (F, a unit to measure temperature). In a concurrent review of the cooling log (a log to verify the effectiveness of the cooling process from 140 degrees F to at least 41 degrees F within the maximum cooling period of six hours), the CK 1 stated he had never seen the log…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-08 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the menu was followed for the therapeutic diet (a modification of a regular diet, tailored to fit the nutritional needs of a particular person. It could be part of a treatment or medical condition and is normally prescribed by a physician.) during the lunch meal on 9/6/23 when: 1. Six residents (Residents: 4, 6, 11, 23, 27, and 29) with small portion and/or consistent carbohydrate (CCHO, a diet to help keep blood sugar levels stable) received half of a white roll instead of a whole white roll; 2. Nine residents (Residents: 3, 5, 9, 11, 15, 20, 21, 25, and 29) with mechanical soft texture diets (chopped or ground food prescribed to those who have trouble chewing and swallowing) received whole spears of asparagus and sweet potato with the peel instead of diced asparagus and sweet potato without the peel; 3. 14 residents (Residents: 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 24, 26, and 28) who were not on CCHO and/or small portion diets got two ounces (oz, a unit of measurement) of tapioca pudding instead of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared, stored, served, or distributed in accordance with professional standards of food service safety when: 1. Food items were found with missing or incorrect labels and dates; 2. Food items found expired and available for use; 3. A food item was found opened and uncovered to prevent cross contamination (the unintentional transfer of bacteria and substances from one food to another); 4. Trays of prepared food were found uncovered, unlabeled and/or undated; 5. Drawers which stored clean ready-to-use utensils were dirty and one was broken; 6. Ice machines in the kitchen and in the nourishment room were not clean; 7. A juice dispenser was not cleaned per the manufacturer's instruction; 8. One Dishwasher did not perform the sanitizer concentration recording appropriately; and, 9. One [NAME] was unable to verbalize the proper cooling down process and did not perform safe food handling practices during food preparation. These failures decreased the facility's potential to prevent food-borne…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-08 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a clean environment for the residents and visitors when one of one garbage dumpsters, located outside the facility, were not secure with the dumpster lids closed. This failure had the potential for an unsafe environment for the residents and visitors due to possible pest infestation and spread of diseases in the facility. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 9/6/23 at 9:15 a.m., the facility's outside garbage dumpster lids were open, there were bags of garbage in the dumpster bin and trash was scattered on the ground around the dumpster bin. The Front of House Supervisor (FOHS) stated. [the dumpster] is supposed to be closed at all times to keep pests out of it. During an interview on 9/7/23 at 3:55 p.m., the Dietary Manager (DM) stated he expected the dumpster area to be kept clean and dumpsters should have been closed with tight fitting covers per their policy and to prevent pest and rodent activity. A review of the undated departmental policy and procedure titled, .FOOD SAFETY…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-08 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staffing requirements were met when the facility did not employ a registered nurse (RN) to serve as the Director of Nursing (DON) on a full-time (40 hours per week) basis. This failure resulted in a lack of administrative oversight and supervision and has the potential to affect the quality of care delivered to all residents by nursing staff. Findings: During a record review on 9/5/23, of the facility's staffing records for the month of August 2023, it was noted the DON was not present in the facility on Thursdays and Fridays. During an interview on 9/6/23 at 3:22 p.m. with DON, DON stated, she works three days a week, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, eight hours a day. This has been her schedule for the last two years. DON stated she understood the DON position should be full-time, but she can only work part-time. During an interview on 9/7/23 at 11:00 a.m. with Administrator (ADM), ADM confirmed the DON doesn't work full-time at the facility. ADM stated the DON position should be full-time. During a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure: -Opened multi-dose inhalers and biologicals were dated with an open and discard date to ensure they were not used beyond the discard date; and -Expired medications were not available for resident use. The deficient practices had the potential for residents to receive medications with unsafe or reduced potency from being used past their discard date. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 9/5/23 at 10:13 a.m. with Licensed Nurse 2 (LN 2), an inspection of Medication Cart 1 (Med Cart 1) identified one Brand Name (an inhaler to treat asthma) 200 microgram/25 microgram (mcg, a unit of measurement) inhaler and one Brand Name Inhub (an inhaler to treat asthma) 500 mcg/50 mcg inhaler, both opened and unlabeled with an open date. LN 2 reviewed the manufacturer's specifications on the outside of the Brand Name and Brand Name Inhub inhalers. LN 2 stated the manufacturer's specifications indicated both had shorter expirations after first use and should have been labeled with an open date.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-08 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident 1) of 13 sampled residents was free of a significant medication error when she received insulin glargine (a long-acting insulin, medication to lower blood sugar level) 10 times (doses) past the expiration date. This deficient practice had the potential for ineffective use of the insulin, resulting in uncontrolled high blood sugar for the resident. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on [DATE] at 11:03 a.m. with Licensed Nurse 1 (LN 1), an inspection of Medication Cart 2 identified one opened insulin glargine 100 units/milliliter (u/ml, a unit of measurement) vial, expired on [DATE], for Resident 1. LN 1 confirmed the finding and stated it should have been removed from the cart and not available for use. A review of Resident 1's medical record indicated a physicians' order, dated [DATE], for insulin glargine 100 u/ml, give 10 units sub-q (under the skin) once daily at bedtime. During a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program for one of 13 sampled residents (Resident 1) when hand hygiene was not performed during medication administration and an eye drop was not handled with infection control precautions. These failures had the potential to result in transmission of infection in the facility for all 29 residents. Findings: During a medication pass observation on 9/5/23 at 9:16 a.m. with Licensed Nurse 1 (LN 1), the LN 1 was observed preparing to administer medications to Resident 1, including a Brand Name eye lubricant eye drop. The LN 1 put on a pair of gloves, opened a binder that contained medical records and flipped through multiple pages before closing it. With the same gloves, LN 1 picked up Resident 1's medications and entered the resident's room. LN 1 removed the cap from the eye drop bottle and placed it directly on Resident 1's bedside table, next to her breakfast tray. LN 1 then administered two drops into each of Resident 1's eyes, all without changing gloves or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-08 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain equipment in safe operating condition and good repair when one reach-in freezer had a torn gasket and ice buildup. This failure had the potential to result in the freezer not holding proper temperatures for frozen foods stored inside. Findings: During an initial kitchen tour on 9/5/23 starting at 8:58 a.m., the reach-in freezer was found to have a torn gasket (a seal around the door that helps keep the cold air in and warm air out) and ice buildup (an accumulation of ice that occurs when warm or humid air flows into a freezer). During a concurrent observation and interview on 9/5/23 at 10:56 a.m., the Front of House Supervisor (FOHS) confirmed the reach-in freezer had a torn gasket and ice buildup. The FOHS added, the torn gasket made the freezer door not shut properly and could negatively affect the frozen food. During an interview on 9/7/23 at 3:55 p.m., the Dietary Manager stated the reach-in freezer gasket needed to be replaced to prevent ice buildup and maintain freezer temperature. A review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CYPRESS HEALTHCARE GROUP — 13 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 5 of 5 | 3.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 4.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
The other 12 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CYPRESS HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/11/2025 |
| JACKSON, MATTHEW | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| JACKSON, ROBERT | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| SANOFSKY, JACK | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| AMATON, ROXANNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| JONES, JAMIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| COKINOS, SUZETTE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| DAVIDSON, JAMIE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/22/2024 |
| DOBLER, STACIE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| KASZA, DANIELLA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/03/2024 |
| NOBILE, MICHELLE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| PASCARELLA, JOSHUA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
| SINGH, SUKHWINDER | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/29/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 26 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
What families pay in CA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 555645. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-10, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.