No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Seneca District Hospital D/P SNF

130 Brentwood Dr, Chester, CA 96020 · Government - Hospital district · 16 certified beds · (530) 258-2151 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuse2 actual-harm citations$11,408 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0609) — most recent Oct 2025
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • the CMS record shows $11,408 in federal fines (most recent 2025-10-08)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
209 Birch St · (530) 256-3152 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
271 Main St · (855) 258-2261 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
271 Main St · (530) 317-1370 · Call to confirm hours
Park
State Highway 89 · (530) 595-4480 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 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 3 to 2 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.

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased7.8%10.2%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight17.3%4.0%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder6.3%0.8%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection8.8%1.2%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms12.5%7.3%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.4%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.4%1.6%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.7%9.8%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.5%13.7%18.9%better
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers9.4%4.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.3%10.2%21.2%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table14.0%12.0%17.1%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.082.251.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.641.571.80worse

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.

0.19U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.06hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.76
RN hours/ resident / day
1.78
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.53
Aide hours/ resident / day
6.07
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.40
RN hoursweekends
48.1%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 16 beds and averages 14.8 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 1 bed 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 6.07 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.53 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 5.21 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.42 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.90 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-12)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-11-07)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-10-08 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from physical abuse and verbal abuse by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2 for two of two residents (Resident 1 and 2) sampled for abuse when:1. CNA 2 roughly turned, slapped, and held down Resident 1's hands and arms during patient care. This resulted in Resident 1 receiving a skin tear to her left wrist on 10/1/25 at 9:30 pm and caused Resident 1 to yell and scream at CNA 2 whenever she was in the room. The treatment of Resident 1 by CNA 2 had the potential to have caused the bruise that was discovered on Resident 1's left arm on 10/1/25. This failure resulted in psychosocial harm for Resident 1. Resident 1 would scream and use profanity toward CNA 2 upon her entering the room. Resident 1's behavior changed, as reflected in the MDS, from having no noted behaviors to exhibiting aggression specifically when CNA 2 was present, and when CNA 1 provided care alongside CNA 2.2. CNA 2 intentionally…

    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
  • Actual harm · Gdisputed · IIDR2025-10-08 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to report physical and verbal abuse, and an injury of unknown origin within two hours to the state and federal entities (California Department Public Health, CDPH, the Ombudsman, [a person appointed by the government who ensures that residents are treated fairly and that their rights are protected], and the Sheriff's office) for two of two residents (Resident 1 and 2) reviewed for abuse, when:1. On 10/1/25 at 9:30 pm, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1 witnessed CNA 2 roughly turning, slapping and holding down Resident 1's hands and arms and causing a skin tear to Resident 1's left wrist during patient care. CNA 1 did not report the abuse of Resident 1 to state and federal entities and waited until 10/2/25 at 3:45 pm, (18 hours later) before reporting abuse to Licensed Nurse (LN) A.2. On 10/1/25 at10:30 pm, CNA 1 witnessed CNA 2 intentionally placing a pillow over Resident 2's face and verbally tell her to shut up. CNA 1 did not report this…

    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 before2025-12-12 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, this requirement was not met when the facility failed to obtain the services of a registered nurse for eight consecutive hours, seven days a week. This had the potential to adversely affect residents' care, which could lead to potential negative clinical outcomes.Findings:During a concurrent interview and record review on 12/10/25 at 8:29 a.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON), of the facility's Registered Nurse (RN) staffing/schedule documentation from the period of 4/1/25 to 4/30/25 and 5/1/25 to 5/31/25 the documentation indicated that no RN was scheduled to work 4/16/25, 4/17/25, 4/18/25, and 5/26/25 when the DON was off. The DON confirmed that RN coverage was provided by RN E (a nurse from the hospital side of the facility down the hallway) on 4/16/25, 4/17/25, and 4/18/25 and that RN coverage was provided by RN F (a nurse from the hospital side of the facility down the hallway) on 5/26/25. The DON indicated that if the Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) needed help they could get an RN from the hospital down the hall. The DON 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-12-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    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 implement and maintain infection control practices to prevent the transmission of infection when: 1. Staff failed to ensure proper hand hygiene and clean administration technique during the administration of eye drops to for one of 16 sample residents (Resident 8). 2. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine used by residents was maintained in a clean and sanitary condition, free from contamination. These deficient practices had the potential to put the residents at risk for unwanted infections, and negatively impact their quality of life.Findings: 1. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Medication Administration, dated 5/29/2025, indicated, that standard universal precautions, which include hand washing using soap and water or the hospital supplied hand antiseptic cleaner will be completed prior to and following all medication passes and after physical contact with residents. During a review of Resident 8'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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-12 · 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 revise care plans to meet the medical needs for two of eight residents sampled (Resident 7 and Resident 6) when:1. Resident 7's bladder incontinence (inability to hold urine) was not reflected on her care plan.2. Resident 6 had no care plan developed that addressed her heart condition.These failures had the potential to result in negative clinical outcomes for Resident 6 and Resident 7, by not receiving the care and services they needed.Findings: A review of the facility's Policy and Procedure titled, Comprehensive Care Policy effective 3/27/25, indicated the facility shall ensure a comprehensive care plan will be implemented for each skilled nursing facility resident that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet a resident's medical, nursing and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. 6. The care plan will include the following information: b. All identified 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-12 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure controlled medications (medications with high potential for abuse and addiction) verification process was accurately completed for one of four medication carts when the medication verification documentation was not signed with two (2) licensed nurses. This failure had the potential to cause the diversion (illegal distribution of controlled drugs for any illicit use) of controlled medications by staff, compromising the facility's ability to ensure safe and appropriate medication management for its patients. Findings: During a review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Medication Administration, dated 5/29/2025, indicated, that controlled substances will be counted at the change of each shift by the licensed on-coming and off-coming nurses and that each nurse will be responsible for assuring the completion of the record. During a concurrent interview and record review on 12/10/25 at 11:27 am with Licensed Nurse (LN) B, the facility's narcotic reconciliation (the comparison of controlled…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    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 one of two residents sampled for dignity (Resident 1), was treated with dignity and respect when Houskeeper (HSK) A made comments to Resident 1 indicating he had sexy legs and a sexy face. This failure caused Resident 1 to feel uncomfortable and unsafe around HSK A. Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled Implementation of Patients' [NAME] of Rights dated 9/22/16, indicated Patient right number 10: to be treated with consideration, respect and full recognition of his/her dignity and individuality. 1. Members of the staff will display respect when speaking with, care for, or talking about patients as constant confirmation of their individuality and dignity as human beings. Staff members will address patients with respect at all times. A review of a Facility Reported Incident (a report written by the facility and sent to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) dated 7/21/25, indicated On 7/18/25 the Housekeeping Manager (HSKM)…

    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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policies to ensure that Resident 1 was kept safe after he bought two electronic hand warmers to use when we went outside. This resulted in an avoidable accident when Resident one sustained two blisters on his left hand from using the warmers. Findings: In an interview with the DON (Director of Nurses) on 4/28/25 at 10 am, she stated that on 3/27/25, CNA1 (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported that Resident 1 had blisters on his hand that were not being addressed. The DON stated that she was unaware of the blisters and upon assessment of Resident 1's left hand she identified two blisters on his left palm, which measured 2.8 x 1 cm (centimeters) and 2 x 1.4 cm. Resident 1 told the DON that he had purchased lithium battery personal warmers that he attached to his body to keep him warm when he went outside. He stated that he had been using the warmers all winter. He further told the DON that usually there was a layer of clothing between the warmers and the skin, but on one occasion an unidentified staff member…

    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 · E2024-11-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that blood sugar testing equipment was dated when opened and that the glucometers (a machine used to test blood sugar), was calibrated (a control test to ensure the glucometer readings are accurate) when: a. Two vials of glucometer control test vials were not dated when opened, or when the solution was to be discarded. b. Two bottles of glucometer test strips were not dated when opened, or when they were to be discarded. c. Facility failed to perform quality control (QC) calibration checks daily on glucometers. These failures could lead to inaccurate blood sugar test results due to using outdated, inaccurate, and less effective testing equipment and supplies, which could result in negative clinical outcomes for the residents. Findings: A review of the facility's policies and procedures (P&P) titled, Glucose Testing Machine: Care and Use of, dated 6/19/24, indicated, before using the glucometer and testing a resident's blood sugar, facility staff would Verify that QC was performed and within expected…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolated
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    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 observe the meal preferences of one of eight sampled residents when Resident 9 was served brussel sprouts. This failure had the potential to reduce intake of nutrients, weight loss and have negative clinical outcomes. Findings: A review of the facility's undated policy and procedure titled, Skilled Nursing Facility Food Preferences, indicated, the facility would take into consideration resident food preferences. A review of an untitled and undated record indicated, Resident 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of type 2 diabetes (high blood sugar) and major depressive disorder (a sad mood). A review of the annual (yearly) Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 10/8/24, Section C, indicated, Resident 9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (an assessment that tested a resident's ability to recall information and memory. The test was scored from 0-15 where 0 meant the resident was not able to remember 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-06-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — widespread
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to protect twelve (12) of twelve (12) residents (Resident 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12) from abuse by a staff member when Licensed Nurse (LN) A, with willful intent, deprived residents of necessary medical care and treatment by withholding Resident one (1) through 12 ' s medications that were ordered by their Medical Doctor (MD). This occurred during the morning (am) shifts of 5/25/24 and 5/26/24. LN A was observed via video from a camera located above the nurse ' s station medication desk throwing medications in the garbage, putting medications in her scrub (uniform) pockets, and leaving some medications in drawers that were subsequently found by LN B. LN A documented that the medications observed being withheld, were administered to residents one through 12. This failure had the potential to cause significant physical harm, pain, and mental anguish by depriving residents of necessary medications that were ordered by their MD,…

    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 · E2023-12-14 · 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 record sanitizing temperatures for the dishwashing machine. This had the potential for staff to not recognize low, non-sanitizing temperatures and spread foodborne illness to residents and cause gastrointestinal (stomach and bowel) illness including nausea, vomiting and diarrhea with the potential for adverse clinical outcomes. Findings: On 12/11/23 at 10:30 AM, a review of the dishwashing temperature logs in the kitchen was conducted with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) and the Dishwasher (DW). In October 2023, 9 temperature recordings were missing, in November 2023, 5 temperature recordings were missing, and in December 2023, 2 temperature recordings were missing. The CDM and the DW both confirmed that there were missing temperature recordings on the Dishwasher Temperature Log, and that this could have a negative impact on the health and safety of the residents. On 12/12/23 9:17 AM, during an interview with the CDM she indicated that the dishwashing machine requires heat to sanitize dishes, utensils 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-14 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — isolated
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, this requirement was not met when the facility failed to obtain the services of a registered nurse for eight consecutive hours, seven days a week. This had the potential to adversely affect residents' care, which could lead to potential negative clinical outcomes (worsening condition). A review of the facility's Registered Nurse (RN) staffing/schedule documentation from the period of 10/1/23 to 10/31/23 indicated that the RN working as Director of Nursing (DON) was scheduled to work weekdays (Monday through Friday) leaving nine weekend days (10/1, 10/7, 10/8, 10/14, 10/15, 10/21, 10/22, 10/28, and 10/29/23) uncovered during this four-week time period. There were four days (10/26, 10/27, 10/30, and10/31/23) when the DON was on time off. During an interview on 12/12/23 at 3:16 PM, DON confirmed that an RN was not on duty for eight consecutive hours, seven days a week. DON stated, We are a very small town, RNs are difficult to recruit. The position is almost continuously posted, for 5-6 years we have had staffing waivers. DON acknowledged that 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · Bcited before2024-11-07 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, this requirement was not met when the facility failed to obtain the services of a registered nurse for eight consecutive hours, seven days a week. This had the potential to adversely affect residents' care, which could lead to potential negative clinical outcomes. Findings: A review of the facility's Registered Nurse (RN) staffing/schedule documentation from the period of 11/1/24 to 11/30/24 indicated that the RN working as Director of Nursing (DON) was scheduled to work weekdays (Monday through Friday) leaving six weekend days (11/2, 11/3, 11/9, 11/10, 11/23, and 11/30/24) uncovered during this four-week time period. There are two days (11/28, and11/29/24) when the DON had time off. On 11/5/24 at 7 am, during an interview with the facility's Chief Nursing Officer (CNO), the CNO indicated the facility had requested the federal waiver for RN coverage, indicating a reduction in the required registered nurses' hours from 56 hours a week to 40 hours a week to be renewed this year. We have the waiver and will have it renewed again. On 11/6/24 at 9:30…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services 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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$11,408 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $11,408 — penalty dated 2025-10-08

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
Ownership Data Not Available

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

What families pay in CA

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in California
$12,167/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$15,178/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,000/mo
Assisted living

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 555022. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-12, 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.

What to do next