Alta Healthcare Center of Camarillo

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

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.

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.

53.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 582 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 44.8% 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 232 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 1.86 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 100% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 45 beds and averages 43.1 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.32 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.63 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 4.68 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.59 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

22 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-06-13 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure its Abuse/Injuries of Unknown Origin policies and procedures were implemented when one of two residents (Resident 1) was found by the responsible party (RP) and family with unreported injuries of unknown origin (abrasion to right shoulder and skin discoloration/bruise on the chin and on the left cheek) This failure had the potential for abuse and injuries to occur with no monitoring and follow up, thereby placing the residents at risk for increased abuse, injuries, or harm. Findings: During an observation on 5/16/24 at 3:06 p.m., Resident 1 was observed in her room, in bed, awake, responsive, and covered with a blanket from neck to lower extremities. Resident 1's bed was in a low position with bilateral floor mattresses folded by the wall. Three family members (FM) were at the bedside visiting. Resident 1 was further observed with reddish, purplish skin discoloration under the chin, about the size of a quarter and greenish yellowish skin discoloration on the left cheek. During an interview on 5/16/24…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
  Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 1 and Resident 2) had their call light responded to timely.This failure had the potential to result in residents' needs not being met.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 7/11/24 at 2:00 p.m. in Resident' room (Resident 2). Resident 2 stated that on most occasions, it took a while for her call light to be answered and sometimes as long as 45 minutes for staff to respond. Resident 2 further explained that this was the only means to communicate her needs to the staff while in the room and in bed. The call light was then pushed while in Resident 2's room and waited 15 minutes and no staff responded.During a concurrent observation and interview on 7/11/25 at 2:20 p.m. with licensed nurse (LN 2). There were approximately 6 staff members at the nurse's station observing Resident 2's room call light on and signing above outside of doorway and no one was seen approaching to respond to the call light. When asked about how the call light system and ow it…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered plan of care for 2 of 13 sampled residents (Residents 7 & 193) when: 1. Resident 7 had missing care plans for pressure injuries (an injury that breaks down the skin and underlying tissue) on the sacral (tail bone) and left heel and a wound on the right anterior (in front of) leg. 2. Resident 193's bed rail was used while in bed. These failures placed the residents at risk of not having their care needs met. Findings: 1. During facility tour observation on 5/19/25 at 9:30 a.m. in room [ROOM NUMBER], Resident 7 was wheeled inside the room by the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA 1). Resident 7 was observed with multiple skin discoloration on both upper and lower extremities and a dry dressing on the right leg. During a review of Resident 7's electronic record, the Minimum Data Set (MDS - standardized resident assessment in the nursing home) record was reviewed. The MDS record 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-22 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  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 assess the risk of entrapment (the state of being caught in between something) prior to the use of bilateral bedrails for 1 of 13 sampled residents (Resident 193). This failure had the potential to result in avoidable injuries to the resident. Findings: During a review of Resident 193's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated, Resident 193 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, unspecified psychosis (a condition where a person experiences psychotic symptoms but does not meet the full criteria for any specific psychotic disorder), dementia (a term for a decline in mental ability severe enough to interfere with daily life) with other behavioral disturbance and need for assistance for personal care. During an observation on 5/19/25 at 11:45 a.m., in Resident 193's room, the resident's bed was observed with small bilateral bedrails in a raised position. During a concurrent record review and interview with 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-22 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the order for pain medication management (Tylenol and Hydrocodone-Acetamenophen) was clarified with the physician with the correct pain parameters in relation to pain level in 1 of 13 sampled residents (Resident 201). This failure had the potential for Resident 201's pain to be mismanaged. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/20/25 at 11:04 a.m. with Resident 201, Ressident 201 was observed in bed, alert and oriented to time, place, and situation. Resident 201 stated is having chronic back and leg pain and had multiple spinal surgeries and is on multiple pain medications. During a review of Resident 201's Face Sheet, dated 5/18/25, the Face Sheet indicted, Resident 201 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, Spondylolisthesis (a condition where one vertebra in the spine slips out of place) and Personal history of other diseases of the Musculoskeletal system and connective tissue.…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment for 1 of 13 sampled residents (Resident 35) when oxygen and nebulizer tubings in use were not labelled and dated to determine when next to change the tubings. This failure had the potential to result in the transmission of infection to the resident. Findings: During a review of Resident 35's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated, Resident 35 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, pulmonary embolism (a blood clot that blocks and stops blood flow to an artery in the lung) and dependence on supplemental oxygen and nebulizer treatment. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/19/25 at 9:50 a.m., with a licensed nurse (LN5) in Resident 35's room, Resident 35's nasal cannula (a small plastic tube, which fits into the person's nostrils for providing supplemental oxygen) connected to an oxygen concentrator (a medical…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-07-10 · tag F0655 — isolated
  Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow its policy and procedure when a care plan was not developed for a suprapubic catheter (is a hollow flexible tube that is used to drain urine from the bladder through a cut in the abdomen) for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential to delay Resident 1's care and treatment needed. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's Baseline Admission/readmission Screen (BARS), dated 9/25/23, the BARS indicated, Resident 1 was admitted on [DATE] due to septic shock (serious condition when body respond poorly to an infection) and had a suprapubic catheter (an organ that stores urine). During a review of Resident 1's History & Physical (H&P), dated 9/26/23, the H&P indicated, Resident 1 had diagnoses including, status post (s/p) septic shock, suprapubic abscess (a pocket of infected fluid and pus), urinary tract infection (an infection in any part of the urinary system) and pressure ulcer (an injury that breaks down the skin…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to complete an individualized care plan for a pressure ulcer (an injury that breaks down the skin and underlying tissue) on the sacrum (tail bone) for one of two sampled residents (Resident1). This failure had the potential for health, safety and care needs to go unmet if Resident 1's condition changed. Findings: During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Care Plans - Baseline, dated 3/2022, the P&P indicated, A baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate health and safety needs is developed for each resident within forty-eight hours of admission. 1. The baseline care plan includes instructions needed to provide effective, person-centered care of the resident that meets professional standards of quality care and must include the minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for the resident including, but not limited to the following: a. Initial goals based on admission and discussion with the resident/representative; b. Physician's orders; c. Dietary orders; d. Therapy…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-06-20 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  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 report to the State Agency (Department) and the Ombudsman in a timely manner when injuries/abrasions of unknown origin were noted on Resident 1. This failure had the potential to result in further harm to the resident and to other residents. Findings: On 5/14/24 the facility submitted a report to the Department regarding an injury of unknown origin for Resident 1. The facility's investigation indicated, On Thursday morning 5/8/24, Director of Staff Development (DSD) noticed a skin abrasion on (Resident 1) shoulder. DSD checked for documentation and did not see anything reported, so DSD cleaned abrasion with normal saline, placed a bandage on the site, and reported finding during morning clinical meeting . That same morning . Director of Nursing (DON) delegated skin check to Treatment Nurse, who noted the 1.5cm x 1cm x 0.1 skin abrasion on right shoulder and also noted skin discoloration developing on chin, measuring 0.2cm x 0.2cm. The facility did not report Resident 1's injuries of unknown origin until…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program when: 1. A hand washing sink area was not accessible for staff use in a resident room identified as requiring transmission-based precautions (TBP - precautions put in place to prevent or control infections). 2. C-DIFF (Clostridium Difficile - an infection from a bacterium that causes diarrhea) feces contaminated briefs were discarded in the same trash can intended for doffing (removal) of personal protective equipment [(PPE) isolation gowns and gloves]. 3. A clean medication preparation area on the medication cart was contaminated when a jacket, personal supply bag, and blood pressure (BP) cuff were stored on it. 4. A BP cuff removed from a room requiring TBP was placed on top of the clean PPE supply cart for cleaning. 5. Medication cart trash was overflowing. 6. Water management test kits in use were expired. 7. Dirty laundry was transported through the clean laundry area.…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure: 1. Food was stored properly in accordance with professional standards of food service safety when a box of raw ground hamburger was stored above pork cutlets in the walk-in refrigerator. 2. Cooked pasta, a TCS (Time-Temperature Control for Safety - food that requires time-temperature control to prevent the growth of bacteria) food, was documented on the cool down log. 3. There was an appropriate air gap between the dish machine drain and the floor sink drain to prevent contaminated water from backing up into the dish machine should a problem arise with the floor drain. 4. The high temperature dish machine manufacturer guidelines were followed. These failures had the potential to place residents at an increased risk of a foodborne illness. Findings: 1. During an observation on 4/8/24 at 09:55 with the Food Service Director (FSD) in the main kitchen, inside the walk-in refrigerator was an open box of raw ground beef stored above a shelf that had a box of raw pork cutlets. During concurrent observation…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

$43,407 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $43,407 — penalty dated 2024-06-13

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 ASPEN SKILLED HEALTHCARE — 35 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 organizational owners 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.

This home reported $606K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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