Kyakameena Care Center
2131 Carleton Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 · For profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (510) 843-2131 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Nov 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $38,848 in federal fines (most recent 2023-10-17)
- nursing-staff turnover (57%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 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 fell from 4 to 3 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 | 4.3% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.0% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.1% | 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 | 4.8% | 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 | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.3% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 3.8% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.8% | 4.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 7.5% | 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 | 11.1% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.7% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.1% | 23.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.9% | 11.2% | 12.0% | 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.
21.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 56.5% 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 23 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 27% 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 | 21.5%CMS range 13.7–34.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.8%CMS range 6.4–16.0 | 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 | 56.5% | 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 | 56.5% | 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 | 60.9% | 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 | 57.1% | 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 | 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 | 70.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 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 | 0.86 | 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 60 beds and averages 55.5 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 4 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 3.93 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.545 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.58 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 3.61 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.06 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 57% is well above 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
40 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-09-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
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 provide supervision and maintain safety to prevent an avoidable accident for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) 1 provided Resident 1 two instant hot packs (a chemically activated disposable pack squeezed to pop an inner fluid bag and shaken to produce heat) without a physician order or protective barrier. Resident 1 placed the hot packs directly on her abdomen and was not supervised or reassessed during the application. This failure caused a second-degree burn (a burn that damages the outer layer [dermis] and second layer [epidermis] of skin) on Resident 1's lower abdomen. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record dated 9/8/23, the admission Records showed Resident 1 was admitted in May 2022. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment used to guide care) assessment dated [DATE], Section C showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS - 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 · D2026-05-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled resident's (Resident 1) care plans was revised and updated. The facility also failed to complete post-fall assessment risk and conduct an IDT meeting following each fall. This failure resulted in Resident 1's fall care plan not being updated to include post-fall interventions, which placed Resident 1 at increased risk for accidents and injuries.During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), dated 01/13/26, the AR indicated, Resident 1 had a diagnosis of Adreno myeloneuropathy (condition that makes a person's muscles weak and have walking difficult), muscle weakness, and difficulty in walking.During a review of Resident 1's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to evaluate a resident's functional capabilities, health needs, and clinical status), dated 4/29/25, the MDS indicated Resident 1 was able to understand others and make self-understood.During a review of Resident 1's admission Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), (BIMS, an assessment for mental…
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 before2026-05-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
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 implement and revise individualized fall-prevention interventions for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), with severe cognitive impairment, impaired mobility, and a documented history of recurrent falls. This failure resulted in Resident 1 sustaining a fall and without additional individualized fall-prevention interventions following recurrent falls, placed Resident 1 at continued risk for additional falls, accidents and injuries.During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), dated 01/13/26 with original admission date on 7/23/2024, the AR indicated, Resident 1 had a diagnosis of Adreno myeloneuropathy (condition that makes a person's muscles weak and have walking difficult), muscle weakness, and difficulty in walking.During a review of Resident 1's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to evaluate a resident's functional capabilities, health needs, and clinical status), dated 4/29/25, the MDS indicated…
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 · D2025-12-17 · tag F0559 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
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 of one sampled resident (Resident 1) received a written notification about the room change when Resident 1 was moved to another room.This failure resulted in violation of Resident 1's rights to receive written notice of the room change, including the reason for the change, before the resident's room in the facility was changed.During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, dated 12/17/25, the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted in the facility on 10/10/25.During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment used to guide plan of care) dated 10/16/25, the MDS indicated Resident 1's Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status regarding attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall information) score was 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognitive status.During a telephone interview on 12/17/25 at 10:43 a.m. with Resident 1, Resident 1 stated, she was told by the wound care nurse on her last…
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 · E2025-11-21 · tag F0638 — patternAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, for four (Resident 1,10, 19, and 27) of five sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure quarterly Minimum Data Set assessments (MDS - a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) were completed not less frequently than once every three months according to the regulation. This failure had the potential to result in delayed assessment of residents' needs, goals of care and inability to monitor each residents' progress over time. During a review of resident 1,10, 19, and 27's MDS assessment records the following quarterly MDSs were not completed every three months:Resident 1' MDS assessment indicated the last quarterly MDS assessment was completed on 10/28/25 over 120 days.Resident 10's MDS assessment indicated the last quarterly assessment was completed on 10/3/25 over 120 days.Resident 19's MDS assessment indicated the last quarterly assessment was completed on 10/12/25 over 120 days. Resident 27's MDS assessment indicated the last quarterly assessment was completed…
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 · E2025-11-21 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, for four (Resident 1,10,19, and 27) of five sampled residents, the facility failed to electronically transmit accurate and complete Minimum Data Set (MDS -a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan), data to the CMS system within 14 days after completion of resident's assessment.Definition: CMS - The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services provides health coverage through Medicare and Medicaid-a government national health insurance program that provided health insurance for adults and children with limited income and resources.These failures had the potential to result in the delay of assessment of residents' needs, goals of care and inability to monitor each resident's progress over time. During a review of the MDS 3.0 Final Validation Report (FVR), dated 11/11/25, the FVR indicated Resident 1's quarterly assessment was completed on 10/14/25 and transmitted on 11/11/25.Review of MDS 3.0 FVR indicated Resident 10's quarterly assessments was completed on 9/19/25 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 · E2025-11-21 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 accurately code three out of four sampled resident's (Resident 27, 31 and 49) Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) when:1. For Resident 49 section B was not coded accurately for vision.2. Facility inaccurately coded No to No natural teeth or tooth fragments when Resident 27 has no natural teeth. This failure resulted in inaccurate reflection of Resident 27's oral/dental status and had the potential to affect Resident 27's nutrition, oral care, and dietary needs.3. Resident 31's hospice care item was incorrectly coded on MDS to reflect Resident 31's choice.These failures resulted in an inaccurate reflection of Resident 27 and 49's clinical condition which had the potential to affect their health care outcomes. 1.During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/20/25 at 8:36 a.m. with Resident 49, Resident 49 stated he had problem…
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 · E2025-11-21 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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, interviews and record review, the facility failed to complete and update the care plan in a timely manner to reflect residents' care needs for two of two investigated residents when:1. For Resident 48 facility did not update care plan to accurately reflect the resident's required transfer method. This failure resulted in Resident 48 being transferred incorrectly and sustained a left lower leg fracture.2. For Resident 29 facility did not develop comprehensive care plan within 7 days of completion of assessment to address risks of elopement and Interdisciplinary Team did not review Resident 29 episodes of elopement from the facility with appropriate interventions. IDT- Interdisciplinary Team means professional disciplines that work together to provide the greatest benefit to the resident which includes the resident, the resident's family and/or representative, whenever possible, develops and implements approaches to care that are both clinically appropriate and person-centered.This failure…
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 · E2025-11-21 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — patternProvide appropriate foot care.
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 two of two sampled residents (Resident 30 and 48) were provide toenails care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice, when: 1. For Resident 30, facility did not provide appropriate toenails care and treatment for thick, long, brownish black toenails.2. For Resident 48, facility did not provide toenail fungal treatment and toenail trimming for 15 months.This failure resulted in Resident 30 and 48's overgrowth of toenails and increased risk for injury and infection.1.During a review of Resident 30's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan), dated 4/23/25, the MDS indicated Resident 30's Basic Interview of Mental status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status regarding attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall information. 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 before2025-11-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
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 of two sampled residents (Resident 29) received adequate supervision to prevent accident hazards when: Resident 29 eloped from the facility and was found by the police in another town. Resident 29's incidents of elopements were not reported to the state department as required by federal or state regulations. Elopement is a situation in which a resident leaves the premises or a safe area without the facility's knowledge and supervision.This failure caused Resident 29 to continue to elope and had the potential to result in heat or cold exposure, dehydration or struck by motor vehicle. During a review of Resident 29's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan), dated 2/4/25, the MDS indicated Resident 29's Basic Interview of Mental status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status regarding…
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 · E2025-11-21 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
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 complete a performance review for three out of three certified nursing assistants (CNA 2, 3, 4) at least once every 12 months.This failure had the potential for a lack of training for any potential deficiencies identified during the performance review process. During a review of personnel files, indicated CNA 2, 3, 4, hired 3/25, 2/22, 11/24 respectively, had no performance review for year 2025.During a concurrent interview and record review on 11/20/25 at 9:02 a.m. with the Director of Staff Development (DSD), CNA 2, 3, 4's CNA annual skills checklist dated 9/11/25, 10/16/25 and 11/4/25 respectively was reviewed, the DSD stated CNA 2, 3, 4 only had annual skills check list. The DSD stated there was no other form the facility had provided for the performance review. The DSD stated the CNA annual skills checklist was their performance review.During a follow up interview on 11/20/25 at 9:38 a.m. with the DSD, the DSD stated asking the facility Administrator (Admin), previous acting DSD and facility consultant…
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 29 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-11-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement its Legionella Water Management Program policy and procedures when facilitydid not have a water management program. This failure had the potential risk for Legionnaires' disease, and unsafe water usage. During an interview on 11/21/25 at 8:55 a.m. with Administrator (Admin), Admin stated facility did not have a program for managing water systems to prevent Legionnaires' disease and had not tested water for legionella. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Legionella Water Management Program, revised September 2022, the P&P indicated, Our facility is committed to the prevention, detection and control of water-borne contaminants, including Legionella.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 4) of seven sampled residents' rights was free from misappropriation of property and exploitation when Resident 4's missing pants and tops were not replaced or reimbursed. This failure had the potential to cause Resident 4 emotional distress. During a review of Resident 4's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment and care guide tool), dated 7/13/25, the MDS indicated Resident 4's Basic Interview of Mental status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status regarding attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall information. A BIMS score of thirteen to fifteen is an indication of intact cognitive status.) Resident 4's score was 13 meaning intact cognition. Resident 4 had clear speech, able to make self-understood and understood others. MDS indicated Resident 4's diagnoses included Depression (a serious mood disorder characterized by persistent feelings of sadness or loss of interest which negatively impact daily life).During 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 · D2025-11-21 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 two of two sampled residents (Resident 3 and Resident 4) Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) were screened accurately and referred to the appropriate state mental authority for Level II PASRR evaluation and determination when Resident 3 and 4 with diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar and major depression were screened and documented as not having serious mental illness.(PASRR is a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals who have a mental disorder or intellectual disabilities are appropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care).This failure had the potential to prevent residents from receiving appropriate required mental health services. During a review of Resident 3's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment screening tool used to guide care), dated 8/18/25 the MDS indicated Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included schizophrenia (a severe mental health condition that…
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 · D2025-11-21 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
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 of three sampled residents (Resident 49) was provided appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve functional mobility to carry out the activities of daily living, when: For Resident 49 facility did not provide Restorative Nursing Services (RNA) treatment for decline in functional mobility as ordered by the physician. RNA is restorative nursing care consisting of nursing interventions to help promote optimal safety and independence. During a review of Resident 49's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan), dated 8/21/25, the MDS indicated Resident 49's Basic Interview of Mental status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status regarding attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall information. A BIMS score of thirteen to fifteen is an indication of intact cognitive status). Resident 49's score was 13 meaning intact cognition. Resident…
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 · D2025-11-21 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
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 of one sampled resident (Resident 49) was assisted to receive proper vision treatment to maintain vision when Resident 49 was not assisted with referral for cataract surgery as ordered by the doctor.This failure had the potential to cause Resident 49 decline in vision, blindness and emotional distress. During a review of Resident 49's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan), dated 8/21/25, the MDS indicated Resident 49's Basic Interview of Mental status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status regarding attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall information. A BIMS score of thirteen to fifteen is an indication of intact cognitive status). Resident 49's score was 13 meaning intact cognition. Resident 49 had clear speech, able to make self-understood and understood others. MDS indicated Resident 49's diagnoses included anxiety disorder (a group…
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 · D2024-06-20 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to act upon the Consultant Pharmacist's recommendation for 2 (Resident #2 and Resident #32) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Consultant Pharmacist Reports, effective date 06/2021, revealed, The consultant pharmacist performs a comprehensive medication regimen review (MRR) at least monthly. The MRR includes evaluating the resident's response to medication therapy to determine that the resident maintains the highest practicable level of functioning and prevents or minimizes adverse consequences related to medication therapy. 1. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #2 on 11/15/2023. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included a diagnosis of heart failure. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/23/2024, revealed Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident…
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 · D2024-06-20 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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, record review, interview, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. The facility had 4 medication errors out of 26 opportunities, which yielded a medication error rate of 15.38% for 1 (Resident #40) of 4 residents observed for medication administration. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Medication Administration Oral Inhalations, dated 05/2016, indicated, 14. If another puff of the same or different medication is required, follow the manufacturer's product information for administration instructions including the acceptable wait time between inhalations. The undated Dulera Patient Information, revealed, 10. Wait at least 30 seconds to take your second puff of Dulera. A facility policy titled, Medication Administration General Guidelines, dated 09/2018, indicated, Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with manufacturers' specifications, good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer…
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 · D2024-06-20 · 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
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to transcribe a physician's order for wound care for 1 (Resident #2) of 14 sampled residents. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Wound Care, revised in10/2010, revealed, The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the care of wounds to promote healing. Preparation 1. Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #2 on 11/15/2023. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included a diagnosis of heart failure. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/23/2024, revealed Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. Resident #2's care plan, initiated on 11/16/2023, revealed the resident had potential/actual skin impairment to skin integrity related to suspected deep tissue injury. Resident #2's Surgical Consult dated 06/12/2024, revealed the physician 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 · Dcited before2024-06-20 · 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, record review, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions were implemented for 1 (Resident #26) of 14 sampled residents. Findings included: The Enhanced Standard Precautions for Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF), 2019 published by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), revealed, CDPH recommends the use of Enhanced Standard precautions, primarily the use of gowns and gloves for specific care activities, based on the resident's characteristics that are associated with a high risk of MDRO [multidrug-resistant organism] colonization and transmission: Table 1. Characteristics of Residents at High Risk for MDRO Colonization and Transmission Functional Disability: Totally dependent on others for assistance with activities of daily living Incontinence: Habitual soiling with stool or wetting with urine Presence of indwelling devices: urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy tube, vascular catheters Ventilator-dependence Wounds or presence of pressure ulcer (unhealed) Implement Enhanced Standard Precautions…
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 · D2023-11-01 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to administer the medication Tramadol 50 mg (medication used to help relieve moderate to moderately severe pain) as per physician ' s order for one (Resident 1) of three sampled residents. This failure resulted in Resident 1 receiving a double dose of medication within 12 hours and placed Resident 1 ' s health and safety at risk. Findings: During a review of Resident 1 ' s admission record, printed on 11/1/23, the admission record indicated Resident 1 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a review of Resident 1 ' s physicians orders dated 8/15/23, the physician orders indicated to administer Tramadol HCL oral tablet 50 mg, 1 tablet every 12 hours as needed for pain. During a review of Resident 1 ' s Antibiotic and Controlled Drug Record, dated 8/30/23, the controlled drug record indicated on 9/20/23, Tramadol was taken out of the medication cart at 10:15 p.m. and signed by licensed nurse. The controlled drug record also indicated…
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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 meet professional standards for care for one of three residents (Resident 1) when Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) 1 provided Resident 1 two instant hot packs (a chemically activated disposable pack squeezed to pop an inner fluid bag and shaken to produce heat) without a physician order or protective barrier. Resident 1 placed the hot packs directly on her abdomen and was not supervised or reassessed during the application. This failure caused a second-degree burn (a burn that damages the outer layer [dermis] and second layer [epidermis] of skin) on Resident 1's lower abdomen. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record dated [DATE], the admission Records showed Resident 1 was admitted in [DATE]. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment used to guide care) assessment dated [DATE], Section C showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS - an assessment tool used to evaluate mental status) 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 · D2023-09-21 · 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 written policies and procedures (P&P) that prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents when registry Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were not given abuse training/orientation prior to working with residents. This failure had the potential to result in abuse of residents. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included muscle weakness, end stage kidney disease, and high blood pressure. During a review of Resident 1's Progress Notes, dated 9/4/23, the Progress Notes indicated Resident 1 complained of eight of 10 (0 for no pain and 10 as the most painful) pain on the back of her head after being transferred from the chair to the bed by CNA 1 and she hit her head on the headboard. The Progress Notes indicated Resident 1 had a round contusion at the back of the head that measured half an inch, Resident 1's…
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 · F2021-06-10 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — widespreadEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to serve two residents (Resident 51 and 49) of 57 sampled residents diets prescribed by a physician. This failure had the potential for two residents, Resident 51 and 49, to receive inadequate calories and/or nutrients contraindicated for a prescribed diet leading to nutritional related health issues. Findings: 1. An observation of trayline food service on 6/8/21, at 12 p.m., showed resident [NAME] 1 placed a scoop of mashed potatoes on a plate for resident 51's lunch. An observation of the tray ticket for Resident 51 located on his tray showed he was on a Regular, Controlled Carbohydrate (a diet typically prescribed to diabetics), Renal (a diet typically prescribed to a person with kidney disease), Thin Liquids. During a review of the Cook's Spreadsheet titled Summer Menus Week 1 Tuesday and used for lunch on 6/8/21, showed residents on a renal diet received wheat pasta with margarine instead of mashed potatoes which was served to regular diets. In a concurrent interview with [NAME] 1, the Registered…
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 · F2021-06-10 · tag F0813 — widespreadHave 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and facility record review, the facility failed to store food, brought into the facility by visitors, safely for residents. The facility also failed to have a policy to show food would be stored safely for residents upon request. This failure had the potential for decreased food intake by residents who preferred to eat food brought in from outside sources for 56 residents who were able to eat food by mouth out of a facility census of 57. Findings: Review of the undated facility policy and procedure titled Food For Residents From Outside Sources showed food brought in from outside sources for the resident would first be shown to the charge nurse for approval to ensure the food was within the diet order parameters. The nurse would consult with the Food and Nutrition Supervisor (FNS) or the consultant dietitian as needed. Prepared or perishable food must be consumed within one hour of receiving . Unused food would be disposed of immediately thereafter. An observation on 6/8/21 at…
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 · E2021-06-10 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — patternProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services to promote healing and prevent infection for one (Resident 51) of six sample residents when the facility staff did not provide the wound treatment on multiple shifts for Resident 51's multiple wounds. This deficient practice could result in worsening of Resident 51's existing pressure ulcers. Findings: Review of the facility admission Record, dated 5/17/21, indicated Resident 51 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnosis including sepsis (a serious condition resulting from the presence of harmful microorganisms in the blood or other tissues and the body ' s response to their presence, potentially leading to the malfunctioning of various organs, shock, and death). During a review of the Treatment Administration Record from 5/1/21 through 5/31/21 the following treatment were not provided: a. The treatment to the wound on the coccyx area to apply collagen powder and cover with foam dressing was not provided on 5/22/21 during the day shift b. The treatment to the wound on 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 · E2021-06-10 · 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
2. During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/8/21, at 12:20 p.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON), in the Medication Storage Room, an uncapped and undated multi-dose vial (MDV) of Aplisol (used in skin tests to help diagnose tuberculosis) was found in the refrigerator. During an observation, on 6/8/21, at 12:30 p.m., with the DON, the uncapped and undated MDV of Aplisol was compared side-by-side to the capped MDV of Aplisol. The fluid level was lower in the uncapped and unlabeled MDV compared to the capped MDV, which indicated the vial had been opened. During an interview on 6/9/21, at 4 p.m., the DON stated she cannot find a facility policy and procedure for dating opening MDV. During a review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Injection safety, dated 6/2019, it indicated If a multi-dose (vial) has been opened or accessed (e.g., needle-punctured) the vial should be dated and discarded within 28 days unless the manufacturer specifies a different (shorter or longer) date for that opened vial. Based on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed 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 · E2021-06-10 · tag F0801 — patternEmploy 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 facility document review, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure the Registered Dietitian (RD) supported the Dietary Supervisor (DS) in maintaining a clean and safe kitchen environment; 2. Ensure the Dietary Supervisor (DS) maintained a clean kitchen and clean equipment on a day-to-day basis; and 3. Involve the RD in the quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI; a data driven and proactive approach to quality improvement), when food and nutrition services was involved. This failure had the potential for contamination of food leading to foodborne illness for a highly susceptible population of 56 residents who received food from the kitchen out of a facility census of 57. Findings: 1. During the Federal Recertification Survey from 6/7/21-6/10/21, multiple issues were identified inside the kitchen including cleanliness of the environment such as a significant amount of residue, dirt, and/or dust on windows, window screens, window shade, walls, vents, window air-conditioner unit, on the inside surface of cabinets holding clean cooking utensils,…
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 · E2021-06-10 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — patternProvide 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 facility document review, the facility failed to ensure competency of staff in the functions of the food and nutrition service when: 1. [NAME] 2 did not follow and properly document cooldown procedures for a time temperature control for safety (TCS) food (food that is more likely to grow harmful bacteria if not stored appropriately leading to foodborne illness); 2. [NAME] 1 did not appropriately demonstrate how to check the quaternary ammonia strength to clean food contact and nonfood-contact surfaces; 3. [NAME] 1 did not follow the menu for residents on a renal diet; and 4. Dietary Assistant 2 (DA2) did not appropriately demonstrate how to check the chlorine strength for the dish machine. This lack of competency by kitchen staff had the potential to result in contamination of food leading to foodborne illness as well as residents receiving different nutrients as indicated on the planned menu. Findings: 1. An observation during the initial kitchen tour on 6/7/21, at 10:30 a.m., showed a plastic bag filled with cooked white rice. The plastic bag…
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 before2021-06-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 provide a safe and sanitary environment for four (Residents 21, 26, 36, and 255) of 57 sampled residents, as evidenced by: 1) Nurse did not disinfect and clean BP cuff between using the BP cuff on residents 26, 36, 255 2) Nurses did not follow manufacturer's directions for SaniWipe use on medication baskets 3) Certified Nursing Assistant did not perform hand hygiene after doffing gloves and assisting a resident 4) The facility did not screen staff members for COVID-19 symptoms on 6/6/21 prior to providing care for the residents. . These failures had the potential to result in cross contamination and infection. Findings: 1. During an observation on 6/8/21, at 8:35 am., Registered Nurse (RN)2 removed wrist blood pressure (BP) cuff from his own wrist and placed it directly on the left wrist of Resident 255. After measuring Resident 255 BP. RN 2 removed the BP cuff from Resident 255's wrist and placed it back on his wrist. The BP cuff was not cleaned or disinfected prior to or after use with Resident 255. During 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 · D2021-06-10 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each 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 one (Resident 6) of two sampled residents needs were accommodated when administrator (Adm) told him he was not allowed to smoke. This failure caused Resident 6 psychological distress. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interviews on 6/8/21, at 11:36 a.m., with Resident 44 and Resident 6 were on the back patio, Resident 44 was seen smoking and Resident 6 was not. Resident 44 stated he often assists Resident 6 to smoke, but the Adm told Resident 6 he was not allowed to smoke. Resident 6 stated the Adm told him recently he was not allowed to smoke even though he has been smoking at the facility with assistance. Resident 6 further stated he had not smoked all day and felt stressed out that he was not allowed to smoke any longer. During an interview on 6/8/21, at 11:59 a.m., with Adm, Adm stated Resident 6 does not qualify to smoke. Adm further stated Minimum Data Set (MDS - a screening and assessment tool of health status) coordinator completed a safe smoking assessment on Resident 6 and added 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 · D2021-06-10 · 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 the observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide a homelike environment when three (Resident 36, 51 and Resident 255) of five sample residents were complaining about the noise level at night. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 36 and 255 inability to sleep and feeling tired. Findings: During an observation on 06/07/21, at 9:40 a.m.,. a beeping noise was heard from the call light of Resident 51's room number and was ongoing until 3:30 p.m. same day. During an interview with the Director of Nursing ( DON) on 06/07/21, at 3:20 p.m., DON stated the call light had been broken since 6/6/21 on the night shift. DON stated they had called the company to fix the call light on 6/7/21. During an interview with Resident 35 on 06/07/21, at 10:32 a.m., Resident 35 stated There was so much noise at night. Resident 35 stated she was not able to sleep because of a beeping noise and residents yelling. During an interview with Resident 255 on 06/07/21, at 11:28 a.m., Resident 255 stated She was not able to sleep at nighttime because the place was so…
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 · D2021-06-10 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to follow its Grievances/Complaint policy and procedure to make prompt efforts to resolve a complaint for one (Resident 40) of 15 sampled residents when the facility did not follow up and resolve Resident 40's concerns regarding cold food. This deficient practice had the potential to cause emotional distress. Findings: During an observation on 6/08/21, at 8:08 a.m., breakfast tray for Resident 40 was on the bedside table containing eggs, waffles and harsh browns. During an interview on 6/8/21, at 8:08 a.m., Resident 40 stated that breakfast was always cold. Resident 40 stated the harsh browns was very hard, dry and cold. Resident 40 stated he had complained to the staff about the cold food ,but it continued to be served cold. During an interview with Dietary Supervisor (DS) on 6/09/21, at 2:38 p.m., DS stated Resident 40 had concerns about cold food. DS stated Resident 40 complained to her about cold food and she warmed his food as needed. DS stated she had no documentation regarding resident concerns and could…
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 · D2021-06-10 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure one (Resident 3) of six sampled residents received treatement to prevent further decline of range of motion when restorative nursing exercise was not provided as ordered by the physician. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 3's range of motion to further decline. Findings: During a review of the Minimal Data Set (MDS-an assessment screening tool used to guide care), dated 5/28/21, indicated: Resident 3 had functional limited range of motion on one side of the upper and lower extremities. Resident 3 required 2-person physical assistance with movement to and from lying positron, turns side-to-side, movement to or from bed, chair and wheelchair. Resident 3's diagnosis included hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body). During a review of Resident 3's physician orders dated 11/27/20, it indicated Resident 3 was prescribed restorative nursing exercise three times a week for twelve weeks for upper/lower extremities, range of motion for contractor management. During a review of Resident 3's care…
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 before2021-06-10 · tag F0912 — isolatedProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility had seven resident's rooms (Rooms A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H) with multiple beds that provided less than 80 square feet (sq.ft) per resident who occupied these rooms. This deficient practice had the potential to result inadequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in each room, or for storage of the residents' belongings. Findings: During an observation on 6/7/21, at 10:00 a.m.,. the following rooms and corresponding square footage per bed were identified: Room number A and B has three beds, total SQF is 235.30 and SQF per bed is 78.42. Room number C has five beds and total SQF is 463.33 and SQF per bed is 97.41. Room number D, E, F and G has six beds, total SQF is 465.60 and SQF per bed is 77.59. Room number H has five beds and total SQF is 406.28 and SQF per bed is 86.43. During random observation of care and services from 6/7/21 to 6/10/21 there was sufficient space for the provision of care for the residents in all rooms. There was no heavy equipment kept in the rooms that might interfere with resident's care…
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.
- No harm found · B2025-11-21 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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, for three of three sampled residents (Resident 9, 19, and 55) the facility failed to have a formal written agreement with dialysis provider for residents needing dialysis (a treatment for kidney failure to remove waste products and excess fluids by external filtration of blood), that outline responsibilities for care coordination, communication, and emergency preparedness. This failure had the potential for Residents 9, 19 and 55 to not receive consistent care that meets professional standards. During a review of Resident 19's admission Record (AR) dated 11/21/25, the AR indicated Resident 19 was admitted on [DATE] with principal diagnosis of end stage renal disease (ESRD- is the final stage of kidney failure, where the kidneys are no longer able to function adequately to keep the body healthy). During a review of Resident 19's Order Summary Report (OSR) dated 4/20/23, OSR indicated, physician prescribed Resident 19 to receive hemodialysis every Monday, Wednesday and Friday…
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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-11-21 · tag F0911 — patternEnsure resident rooms hold no more than 4 residents; for new construction after November 28, 2016, rooms hold no more than 2 residents.
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 and record review, the facility had six resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER], 27, 29, 31, 33, and 35) that accommodated more than four residents in each room.This failure had the potential to result in inadequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in each room, or for storage of the residents' belongings.Findings: Room Number Number of Bedsroom [ROOM NUMBER] 5 bedsroom [ROOM NUMBER] 6 bedsroom [ROOM NUMBER] 6 bedsroom [ROOM NUMBER] 6 bedsroom [ROOM NUMBER] 6 bedsroom [ROOM NUMBER] 5 beds During an interview on 11/20/25 at 11:14 a.m. with Resident 24, Resident 24 stayed in a room that accommodated more than four residents. Resident 24 stated that he had enough space for storage of his belonging and was comfortable had no complaints regarding bed space. During random observation of care and services from 11/18/25 through 11/21/25, there was sufficient space for the provision of care for the residents in all rooms. There was no heavy equipment kept in the rooms that might…
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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-11-21 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
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 had six resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER], 25, 27, 29, 31 and 33) with multiple beds that provided less than 80 square feet 9sq ft) per resident who occupied these rooms.This failure had the potential to result in inadequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in each room or for storage of the residents' belongings. During an observation on 11/20/25 at 11:11 a.m. the following rooms had corresponding square footage (sq. ft.0 per bed were identified: Room Activity Room Size Floor Area23 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER].3 sq. ft 78.42 sq. ft/bed25 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER].3 sq. ft 78.42 sq. ft/bed27 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER].6 sq. ft 77.59 sq. ft/bed29 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER].6 sq. ft 77.59 sq. ft/bed31 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER].6 sq. ft 77.59 sq. ft/bed33 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER].6 sq. ft 77.59 sq. ft/bed During an interview on 11/20/25 at 11:14 a.m. with Resident 24, Resident 24 stayed in a room that accommodated more than four residents. Resident 24…
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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-06-20 · tag F0911 — patternEnsure resident rooms hold no more than 4 residents; for new construction after November 28, 2016, rooms hold no more than 2 residents.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure 6 (Rooms 26, 27, 29, 31, 33, and 35) of 16 resident bedrooms in the facility did not have more than four residents. Findings included: The facility Daily Census, dated 06/17/2024, revealed five residents resided in room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER] and six residents resided in Rooms 27, 29, 31, and 33. During an interview on 06/20/2024 at 10:04 AM, the Director of Nursing stated the facility had a room variance waiver in place for the rooms that had more than four occupied beds. During an interview on 06/20/2024 at 10:30 AM, the Administrator stated she expected staff to treat the residents in the rooms with more than four beds the same as all other residents in terms of quality of care and services.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-06-20 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
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 document review, the facility failed to ensure residents' rooms measured at least 80 square (sq) feet (ft) per resident in 6 (room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], and room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 16 resident rooms in the facility. Findings included: The facility request for renewal of waiver for room size, dated 06/17/2024, revealed the following dimensions: - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 78.42 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 78.42 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 77.59 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 77.59 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 77.59 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 77.59 sq ft for each resident. During an interview on 06/20/2024 at 10:04 AM, the Director of Nursing stated the facility had a room size variance waiver in place for the rooms that provided less than the required 80 sq…
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
$38,848 in federal fines across 8 penalties.
- $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-10-17
- $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-10-10
- $4,235 — penalty dated 2023-10-02
- $3,882 — penalty dated 2023-09-25
- $7,443 — penalty dated 2023-09-21
- $3,529 — penalty dated 2023-09-18
- $3,176 — penalty dated 2023-09-11
- $7,409 — penalty dated 2023-08-21
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PRATAP PODDATOORI — 6 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 | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.5★, 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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PODDATOORI, PRATAP | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 04/01/2001 |
| HYCARE INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/07/2006 |
| ANDRES, NORMA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2004 |
| CABLE, ELAINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/19/2025 |
| DHUGGA, GURPREET | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2020 |
| GUERRERO, SYLVIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2022 |
| JAYANKURA, THIDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2014 |
| MCGRADY, MELINDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/05/2024 |
| MCGREGOR, TERRANCE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2003 |
| PADANIA, HILDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/16/2025 |
| SMITH, ROSALIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/21/2025 |
| SMITH, SEYNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/26/2024 |
| TACOTACO, FRANCIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/13/2017 |
| VALENCIA, ARIANA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| WITTEN, TERRY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/29/2024 |
| WONG, JUDY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/13/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 16 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.
About 78% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $851K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. 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, FY2023). 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 055715. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-21, 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.