Veterans Home Of California - Barstow
100 East Veterans Parkway, Barstow, CA 92311 · Government - State · 60 certified beds · (760) 252-6288 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (23% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 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 |
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 held steady at 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 | 15.6% | 10.2% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.2% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.3% | 1.2% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| 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 | 1.9% | 1.6% | 3.3% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.1% | 9.8% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.6% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.3% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.1% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 7.4% | 10.2% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 10.0% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.84 | 2.25 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.52 | 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.13 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 10% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 60 beds and averages 38.9 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 21 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 5.67 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.22 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.53 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 5.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.93 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.41 to 0.77 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 23% is below the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-23 · 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 ensure that staff followed infection prevention and control practices when Custodian 1 did not use appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) while performing environmental cleaning in a room under Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP).This failure had the potential to result in the spread of infection putting both residents and staff at risk.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/19/26 at 12:02 PM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) in Resident 6 and Resident 25's room, two EBP signs were observed posted by the room's entrance. CNA stated Resident 25 was on EBP for his wound on the left leg and Resident 6 was on EBP for his chronic suprapubic catheter.During an observation on 4/22/26 at 9:38 AM in Resident 6 and Resident 25's room, where two EBP signs were posted, Custodian 1 was observed not wearing gloves and gown while sweeping the floor, touching the beds, curtains, and dresser.During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/22/26 at 9:40 AM with the Hospital General Service…
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 · E2025-05-01 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — patternPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document non-pharmacological interventions for five of five sampled residents (Residents 1, 21, 24, 25, and 31) on psychotropic (affecting brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior) medications. This failure had the potential for residents to receive unnecessary psychotropic medications which can lead to side effects, such as sedation and falls. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 1's medical records indicated the following physician's orders: a. Alprazolam (generic for Xanax, a medication for anxiety) 0.5 milligrams (mg) OD (orally disintegrating, dissolves in the mouth), take one tablet by mouth and allow to dissolve daily for anxiety, manifested by mood changes, irritability, negative thoughts. Monitor for behavior and side effects every shift, dated 2/13/25; b. Bupropion (generic for Wellbutrin XL, extended release, a medication for depression) 150 mg, take one tablet by mouth daily for depression disorder m/b (manifested by) verbalization of hopelessness and sadness. Monitor for behaviors and side…
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 · E2025-05-01 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
2. During a review of Resident 31's Physician Orders on 4/30/25 at 9:11 a.m., the physician's orders indicated Resident 31 had three active orders for blood pressure medications: a. Amlodipine (generic for Norvasc, a medication for high blood pressure) 5 milligram (mg, a unit of measure) tablet. Take one tablet by mouth daily, hold for SBP (systolic blood pressure, the top number in a blood pressure reading) less than 110, dated 9/10/24. b. Chlorthalidone (generic for Thalitone, a medication for high blood pressure) 25 mg tablet. Take one tablet by mouth every morning for hypertension (blood pressure), hold if SBP less than 110 or if DBP (diastolic blood pressure, the bottom number in a blood pressure reading) less than 50, dated 9/10/24. c. Metoprolol succinate (generic for Toprol XL, a medication for high blood pressure) 50 mg ER (extended release). Take one tablet by mouth every evening. Hold if SBP less than 110, DBP less than 50 or HR (heart rate) less than 50, ordered 9/10/24. The holding parameters were updated to hold if SBP less than 105, HR less than 50 on 2/7/25. During…
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 · D2025-05-01 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 the accurate provision of medication for one out of five sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1 did not receive hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) medication as ordered by the prescriber. This failure had the potential for Resident 1 to experience symptoms of hypoglycemia, including confusion and dizziness. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 1's medical records indicated the following physician's orders: a. Check BS twice a day at 6:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., dated 7/12/24; and b. Glutose 15 gel (brand name for glucose (sugar) 15 grams, a medication to treat low blood sugar) by mouth as needed for blood sugar (BS) less than 80, dated 12/10/24. A review of Resident 1's January through April 2025 Medication Administration Records (MAR) indicated Resident 1's BS was less than 80 on the following dates and times: - 1/3/25 at 6:00 a.m. BS 70 - 3/11/25 at 6:00 a.m. BS 76 - 4/21/25 at 6:00 a.m. BS 78 The January through April 2025 MARs indicated Resident 1 did not receive Glutose 15 as ordered on any of the above dates.…
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 before2025-05-01 · 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 ensure medications were stored appropriately when two boxes of eye drops were found in a bin labeled and full of ear drops in one of one sampled medication rooms. This failure had the potential for residents to receive the wrong medication, which could result in the residents experiencing negative health outcomes. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/28/25 at 11:56 a.m., with the Director of Staff Development (DSD) 1, a tour of the Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) unit medication room was conducted. Eight boxes of ear drops were observed in a black bin labeled, EAR DROPS. Two boxes of eye drops (one box of Refresh and one box of Visine, both used to treat dry eyes) were also stored in the same bin. DSD acknowledged two eye drops were in the ear drop bin. During a concurrent interview and record review on 5/1/25 at 2:27 p.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON) 1, the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Storage of Medications, last reviewed by the facility on 5/31/24 was…
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 · D2025-01-08 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 implement their policy for Theft and Loss Reporting and Investigation for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), when the Report of Suspected Dependent Adult-Elder Abuse (Form SOC 341) for Resident 1 was not completed and sent to the ombudsman. This failure had the potential to result in an inadequate investigation of the loss of Resident 1's property. Findings: On 1/6/25 at 10:30 a.m., an unannounced visit was conducted at the facility to investigate a facility reported incident regarding a resident loss of one hundred dollars and a fifty dollar gift card. Resident 1, an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of Hypertension, and Emphysema. During an interview on 1/6/25 at 10:50 a.m. with the Health and Safety officer (HS 1), HS 1 stated the incident was reported on 12-29-24 by the CNA (CNA 1) for Resident 1. CNA 1 verified the resident had one hundred dollars and a fifty dollar gift card in his wallet and the money and gift…
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 · E2024-06-06 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that food was stored in a safe and sanitary conditions in the food service department when: 1. Equipment was not replaced when considered unsafe. 2. The kitchen freezer contained foods that were not dated and labeled. These failures had the potential to expose residents to food contamination and food-borne illnesses (sickness by consuming contaminated food or drinks). Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/4/2024 at 9:02 a.m. with Food Manager (FM) in the kitchen, there was a spatula (kitchen utensil used to mix ingredients) with cracks on the right lower side and a yellow dried substance on the top edges. FM confirmed the spatula was not safe to be used due to the risk of food contamination and food-borne illnesses. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Food and Nutrition Services-Sanitation (All Homes), dated 11/5/2023, the P&P indicated, All utensils, counters, shelves, and equipment will be kept clean and maintained in good repair (i.e. free…
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 · E2024-06-06 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 safe and comfortable working environment for staff when the water temperature of the kitchen's hand washing station was 156.1 degrees Fahrenheit (unit used to measure temperature). This failure had the potential for staff burning their hands and poor handwashing practices, leading to a potential spread of infection. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/4/2024 at 11:06 a.m. with the Director of Dietetics (DOD) and the Food Manager (FM) in the kitchen, the Surveyor checked the water temperature at the hand washing station using a thermometer (a device that measures temperature), and the water temperature registered at 156.1 degrees Fahrenheit. DOD and FM confirmed the water temperature was too hot and had the potential for staff to burn their hands. DOD stated the hot water has always been out of range, and there was no work order to fix it. FM stated the hand washing water temperature should be 120 degrees Fahrenheit, but there was no work order. During a review of 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 · D2024-06-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview , the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, and comfortable environment, when the wheelchair of one of 15 sampled residents (Resident 29) was not found in good working condition with a torn, cracked, and frayed armrest. This failure had the potential to violate Resident 29's rights to a safe, clean, and comfortable environment. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/5/2024 at 8:42 a.m. with Resident 29, Resident 29 was observed sitting in their wheelchair. The wheelchair had a large tear on the right armrest with the cushion exposed. In addition, the armrest had a large worn area consisting of multiple rough raised cracks and the edges were frayed with white lining showing through the black armrest cover. Resident 29 stated that the armrest was torn when they received the wheelchair from the facility. Resident 29 further stated that the worn armrest bothered them, was not comfortable, and did not look nice. During an interview on 6/5/2024 at 3:20 p.m. with Lead Registered Nurse (LRN), the LRN stated the armrest was torn,…
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 before2024-06-06 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to date an opened bottle of Polyethylene Glycol (medication to treat constipation) for unsampled Resident 30. This failure had the potential for Resident 30 to receive expired and less than optimal medications. Findings: During a review of Resident 30's Face Sheet (resident demographics), the Face Sheet indicated Resident 30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of dementia (loss of memory, language and problem-solving abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life) and chronic pain. During a review of Resident 30's Quarterly Minimum Data Sheet (MDS, standardized assessment and care screening tool), dated [DATE], the MDS indicated Resident 30 had a severe cognitive impairment. During a concurrent medication storage observation and interview on [DATE] at 10:11 a.m. with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 3, the medication cart for the 600 POD had an opened bottle of Polyethylene Glycol for Resident 30 which was not…
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 · D2024-06-06 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 ensure the Medication Administration Record (MAR, a record of all medications administered to a resident) was accurately documented on 6/2/2024 for two of 15 sampled residents (Residents 19 and 48) when: 1. For Resident 19, a licensed nurse did not document that medications were administered for the 8 a.m. dose on 6/2/2024. 2. For Resident 48, a licensed nurse did not document that medications were administered for 10 a.m. dose on 6/2/2024. These failures had the potential to result in inaccurate medication administration including underdosing or overdosing Residents 19 and Resident 48. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 19's Face Sheet (resident demographics), the Face Sheet indicated Resident 19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of high blood pressure and urinary incontinence. During a review of Resident 19's MAR, dated June 2024, the MAR indicated, on 6/2/24, for the 8 a.m. administration time, there were no staff initials…
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 · D2024-06-06 · 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 the kitchen dishwasher in a safe operating condition. This failure had the potential to result in safety concerns. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/4/2024 at 9:00 a.m. with Food Service Technician (FST) 2 in the kitchen, the dishwasher was spraying water resulting in a pool of water on the floor. FST 2 stated the spraying started when the machine was turned on. During an interview on 6/5/2024 at 8:40 a.m. with Chief Plant Operations (CPO), CPO stated the dishwasher machine was spraying water because it was missing the multi-flap curtains. During an interview on 6/5/2024 at 8:50 a.m. with the Food Manager (FM), FM stated the expectation was to prevent the water spraying out of the dishwasher machine, due to infection control and safety issues. During a review of the dishwasher's manual, [undated], the manual indicated, Multi-flap curtains are used throughout the dishwasher to keep moisture inside and reduce the potential of hot water injury. During a review of 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.
“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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VETERANS HOME OF CALIFORNIA BARSTOW | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/07/2008 |
| GAUTAM, RAVINDRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/08/2024 |
| JENKINS, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 10/09/2024 |
| PHAM, ANTHONY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/26/2026 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
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 555853. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-23, 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.