Mission Valley Post Acute
2400 Parkside Drive, Fremont, CA 94536 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 85 certified beds · (510) 793-7222 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
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 | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 5.5% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.1% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 16.5% | 7.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| 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 | 0.5% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.6% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.1% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.7% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.9% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.6% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.5% | 23.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.7% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.32 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.54 | 1.57 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
55.1% 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 249 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 76.7% 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 120 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 0.62 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 89% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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 | 55.1%CMS range 48.0–61.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 15.2%CMS range 12.6–19.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than 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 | 76.7% | 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 | 65.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 60.0% | 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 | 99.5% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 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 | 1.4% | 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 | 9.3%CMS range 6.9–12.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.23 | 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 85 beds and averages 81.1 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 4 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 4.06 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.43 is below 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 3.67 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.21 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.84 to 0.61 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
32 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · F2026-06-11 · tag F0839 — widespreadEmploy staff that are licensed, certified, or registered in accordance with state laws.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the administrator who supervised and directed the facility operations was licensed according to state regulation when the unlicensed Operations Manager (OM) had the role of administrator for more than two years and five months.This failure resulted residents and staff being supervised and directed by unqualified administrative leadership.During an observation on 7/23/25 at 11:19 a.m. a facility post board near the nurses station was inspected. The post board had a nursing home administrator (NHA) license holder (NHAH) which indicated OM was not the licensed administrator of the facility. The post board also had a letter to residents and families which was signed Sincerely, ADMINISTRATOR [OM]'s signature. NHAH was not at the facility.During a record review of two facility financial reports submitted to the state agency titled, Long Term Care Facility Integrated Disclosure and Medi-Cal Cost Report, dated 12/31/23 and 12/31/24, the report listed OM as the administrator. The two reports did not list 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 · Ecited before2026-06-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 it kept accurate records of controlled medications (medication with a potential for abuse) as evidenced by: 1. The facility failed to ensure, for Residents 1-8, the scheduled (controlled medication, narcotic) medication system was complete (all documents available) and accurate (information matched). The record system included Shipping Manifests (pharmacy delivery receipt), Controlled Substance Accountability Sheets (CDR, Controlled Drug Record), Medication Administration Records (MAR, record of medication administration) and destruction logs. The facility records were incomplete. The facility records were inaccurate. These failures had the potential to result in undetected loss and diversion of scheduled medications. In addition, these failures had the potential to result in preventable medication errors (medication not given as ordered).2. The facility failed to ensure, between 5/1/23-8/31/23, the Consultant Pharmacist identified the scheduled (controlled medication, narcotic) medication system 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 · E2026-05-21 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide safe, clean, and homelike environment for five of six sampled residents (Residents 21, 23, 54, 73, and 75) when: 1. Resident 21 and 75's shared room had wet floor surfaces without a caution signage.2. Resident 54 and 73's shared room had wet floor surfaces without a caution signage and multiple items on the floor, including spilled white liquid, a yogurt cup, plastic spoon, toothbrush and plastic cup.3. Resident 23's oxygen concentrator (a medical device used to provide supplemental oxygen) had scattered white powder-like speckles on the top surface. These failures had the potential to result in slips, trips, falls, injury, exposure to unsanitary conditions and decreased resident comfort and well-being due to unsafe environmental hazards.1. During a record review of Resident 75's admission record (AR) printed on [DATE], the AR indicated Resident 75 as was admitted to the facility in [DATE] with diagnoses including lack of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 reviews, the facility failed to provide ongoing assessment, monitoring, and implementation of physician orders for three of five sampled residents (Residents 1, 10, and 95) when: 1. Resident 1, who experienced a change in condition, did not receive timely nursing assessment and evaluation after Resident 1 was observed very sleepy and unresponsive despite multiple attempts by the licensed nurse to awaken Resident 1. 2. Resident 10, who had physician orders for daily weights, did not receive weight monitoring as ordered, and the physician was not notified of the refusals. 3. Resident 95, who had physician orders for daily weights due to a diagnosis of congestive cardiac failure, had incorrect weights recorded (congested heart failure or CHF means the heart is too weak to pump blood efficiently and daily weights is taken because sudden weight gain is often the very first sign that the heart is struggling). These failures had the potential to result in delayed…
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 before2026-05-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 the provision of pharmaceutical services when: 1. A routine medication was not available for administration for 3 days for 1 out of 4 residents (Resident 67) observed during the medication pass. 2. Controlled substance (medications that can be easily abused and are under strict government control) medications were signed out of the Controlled Drug Record (CDR, an inventory document) but not documented on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 2 out of 6 sampled residents (Residents 49 and 95) 3. An as-needed pain medication was not administered as ordered by the physician for 1 out of 6 sampled residents (Resident 39) 4. A controlled medication was not accurately documented as given on two occasions for 1 out of 6 sampled residents (Resident 36). The failures had the potential for complications to the resident's medical conditions; and inaccurate accountability and potential for abuse and diversion (unlawful distribution or use) of controlled medications. 1 During a medication administration…
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 before2026-05-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for safety when: Three boxes of 4-fluid-ounce milkshakes (74 pieces per box) were stored in Freezer chest 4, which was not kept at the required temperature (fluid-ounce is a form of measurement).A box of blueberry muffins and two unopened bags of frozen potato wedges were stored in the emergency storage room.Clean water pitchers were kept next to the dirty coffee drainpipes. These failures had the potential for contamination of food resulting in food borne illness for 84 residents who received food from the kitchen. An observation and interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) during the kitchen's initial tour, on 5/18/26, at 9:44 a.m., showed three boxes of 4-fluid-ounce milkshakes (74 pieces per box). The boxes indicated to keep frozen at 0 degrees Fahrenheit or below (Fahrenheit or F is a form of temperature measurement). Although freezer chest 4's temperature registered at negative 4 degrees F, the freezer felt warm. At 2:45 p.m., 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 · Ecited before2026-05-21 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to implement their infection prevention and control policies and procedures for five out of ten residents (Resident 9, 13, 16, 86, and 70) and a facility census of 84 when:For one of three sampled residents (Resident 9), Resident 9's clothing was on the floor and was returned to the closet without being laundered or cleaned prior to storage.For one of two sampled residents (Resident 86), Resident 86's urinal was stored directly on top of the trash receptacle without a lid and not placed in a protective bag.Laundry Personnel (LP) transported soiled linens in an uncovered laundry barrel through the hallway while wearing contaminated personal protective equipment (PPE, is equipment worn to minimize exposure to hazards) and entered the clean area of the laundry room without removing the contaminated PPE, exposing clean linens to contamination.Overflow (a secondary, dedicated storage unit in nursing facilities or hospitals used to store backup or overflow prescription medications) medication cart #1's sharps…
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 · E2026-05-21 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility documents, the facility failed to ensure Freezer 3 was maintained in proper working condition, as evidenced by:1. The freezer's louvered panel was missing (a louvered panel is a cover located at the bottom of a freezer. It allows air to circulate freely for cooling, while keeping out direct light, dust, and debris).2. The freezer's right handle was missing. 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/20/26 at 8:23 a.m., with Dietary Manager (DM), DM showed freezer 3's louvered panel was missing. As a result, the wiring, coils, and mechanical parts underneath were exposed. In addition, the mechanical components and wiring were coated in scattered black sticky dust and the DM described the area as dirty. DM stated the louvered panel had been missing for one year.During an interview on 5/20/26 at 8:29 a.m., with the Maintenance Director (MD), MD stated that freezer 3's louvered panel was missing and was unsure when it was damaged. MD stated the risk was food contamination if the freezer stopped working due to 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 · D2026-05-21 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, for one of one sampled resident (Resident 70) reviewed for positioning and mobility, the facility failed to ensure Resident 70's reasonable accommodation of needs and preferences when the call light was left out of reach. This failure had the potential to impair the resident's ability to request help, placing the resident at risk for unmet care needs.During a review of Resident 70's admission Record (AR) dated 5/19/26, the AR indicated Resident 70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia (the severe or complete loss of motor function (paralysis) on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness or partial paralysis affecting only one side of the body) affecting left non-dominant side, difficulty in walking, weakness and aphasia (disorder that affects how you communicate, impacts speech and ability to understand written or spoken language). During a review of Resident 70's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used 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 · D2026-05-21 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 out of 5 sampled residents (Resident 8) was free from unnecessary psychotropic medications (drugs that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior). Resident 8 has been receiving Olanzapine (an antipsychotic medication) without staff monitoring target behaviors quantitatively. Quantitative measure of target behaviors would be helpful in monitoring the patient's progress, assessing effects of treatment, and a factor in considering whether to conduct gradual dose reduction (GDR, a tapering of a dose to determine if symptoms, conditions, or risks can be managed by a lower dose or if the dose or medication can be discontinued). A review of Resident 8's clinical record indicated she was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including unspecified dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities) and depression. A review of Resident 8's physician's orders indicated the resident has been receiving Olanzapine 10 milligrams (unit of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 22 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 that continued nutritional care and services were provided to one of 20 sampled residents (Resident 68) when Resident 68, who had a weight loss of 11.2 pounds which yielded 11.8% weight loss from 4/6/26 to 5/1/26, was not reweighed after 5/1/26 for a total of 20 days (pounds or lbs. is a form of measurement which is also used to measure body weight).This deficient practice had the potential to result in Resident 68's further unplanned weight loss. During a review of Resident 68's admission Record (AR) dated 5/21/26, the AR indicated Resident 68 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included depression (a serious mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness, emptiness, and a loss of interest in daily activities) and malignant neoplasm of stomach (cancer of the stomach).A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS - standardized assessment and care screening tool), dated 3/27/26, indicated Resident 68 '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 · Dcited before2026-05-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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, for two of three sampled residents reviewed for respiratory care (Resident 16 and 23), the facility failed to ensure residents received respiratory care in accordance with professional standards of practice when:1. Resident 16's BiPAP (machine is a non-invasive that helps people breathe easier, it delivers pressurized air through a mask, providing a higher pressure when you inhale and a lower pressure when you exhale) equipment was not applied and not maintained as ordered nor did the staff follow required procedures for equipment monitoring and troubleshooting.2. Resident 23's oxygen via nasal cannula was not positioned correctly.These failures had the potential to result in inadequate ventilation support and increased respiratory distress. 1.During a review of Resident 16's admission Record dated 5/19/26, the AR indicated Resident 16 on 5/3/26 with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, refers to a group of diseases that cause…
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 · D2026-05-21 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 2 out of 5 sampled residents (Residents 5 and 95) were free from unnecessary medications. Residents 5 had no hold parameters for an antihypertensive medication (medication to lower blood pressure); and Resident 95 had no monitoring for thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) while receiving levothyroxine (medication to treat hypothyroidism, a condition where the thyroid gland does not produce enough thyroid hormone). The failure resulted in inadequate monitoring and had the potential for complications related to these medications such as severely low blood pressure or too low/too high TSH without dose adjustment, for the respective residents. 1. A review of Resident 5's clinical record indicated she was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation (is an irregular and often very rapid heart rhythm) and hypertension (high blood pressure [BP]). A review of Resident 5's physician's orders indicated an order for metoprolol (an antihypertensive medication) 25 milligrams (unit of measurement), give 1…
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 · D2024-10-10 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 ensure the accuracy of a Level I preadmission screening resident review (PASARR) screening for 1 (Resident #74) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for PASARR screening. Findings included: An admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #74 on 08/20/2024. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of unspecified disorder of psychological development, unspecified psychosis, and depression. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/23/2024, revealed Resident #74 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident had active diagnoses to include depression, psychotic disorder, and unspecified disorder of psychological development. Per the MDS, the resident received an antipsychotic medication during this assessment period. Resident #74's care plan included a focus area initiated 08/20/2024, revealed…
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 · D2024-03-27 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide services which met professional standards for one resident (Resident 1) of three sampled residents when nursing staff did not document physician's orders were carried out. This failure contributed to formation and worsening of Resident 1's sacrococcyx (the backside area between a person ' s hips and down to the tailbone) wound. Findings: A review of Resident 1's admission record indicated an initial admission date of 2/15/23 with diagnoses which included mitral valve insufficiency (a condition in which the valve between two heard chambers does not close tightly, which allows blood to flow backward in the heart) and traumatic hemorrhage of the cerebrum (trauma to the head which results in blood intermixing with brain tissue). A review of Resident 1's Braden Scale (an assessment tool used for predicting pressure injury risk) assessment dated [DATE] at 6:22 p.m. indicated a score of 9 which indicated Resident 1 was at very high risk for developing…
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 · E2021-10-21 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility had a score of 11.43% medication error rate when four medication errors of 35 opportunities were observed during medication pass observation as follows: 1. Eliquis tablet 5 mg (milligram) also known as Apixaban- used to prevent serious blood clots due to irregular heartbeat) was not administered as prescribed by the physician. 2. Metformin HCL (hydrochloride) 500 mg (oral diabetes medicine that helps control blood sugar levels ) was given on an empty stomach. 3. Reglan 10 mg (metoclopramide-use to treat nausea,vomiting) was not administered as prescribed by the physician. 4. Peridex solution (Chlorhexidine gluconate, used as an oral rinse to treat the symptoms of gingivitis-gum disease) 5 ml.(milliliters) was not administered as prescribed by the physician. These failures had the potential of ineffective medication treatment for Residents 45, 318 and 118. Findings: 1. Review of the admission Record indicated Resident 45 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses that included Long standing persistent Atrial…
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 · E2021-10-21 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the nutritive value, flavor, and appearance of the food prior to serving. This failure had the potential to decrease the nutrition status of the residents in promoting recovery from illness or injury. Findings: Observations made in the kitchen on 10/18/21 at 11:50 a.m., showed the bread dressing and pork loin lacked color. The pork loin appeared dry and brussel sprouts looked mushy. During an interview with Resident 61 on 10/18/21 at 1 p.m., Resident 61 stated he could not eat most of his lunch because the chicken was tough and dry and the brussel sprouts were mushy. Resident 61 stated they would not serve food like this at their home, so why would they serve this to us? Surveyor informed Resident 61 it was not chicken but pork loin. Resident 61 stated he could not tell from the taste. During an observation of Resident 61's tray after eating on 10/18/21 at 1 p.m., indicated Resident 61 did not eat the pork loin or the brussel sprouts. During an interview with Resident 170 on 10/19/21 at 10:11 a.m.,…
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 before2021-10-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prepare, store, and serve food under sanitary conditions when they were using unpasteurized eggs and proper hand washing was not done. These failures had the potential to expose residents who received nutritional services from the kitchen to food borne illness. Findings: 1. During an observation of the kitchen on 10/18/21 at 11:18 a.m.,the eggs stored in refrigerator #3 were not pasteurized. During an interview with the [NAME] on 10/18/21 at 11:50 a.m., [NAME] stated if a resident asked for eggs over easy she would cook them. [NAME] stated she does get that request. During an interview with Dietary Manager (DM) and Dietary Manager Assistant (DMA) on 10/18/21 at 11:20 a.m., stated they were not aware the eggs were not pasteurized. 2. During an observation in the kitchen on 10/18/21 at 12:10 p.m., [NAME] was plating lunches while wearing gloves. [NAME] touched dinner rolls with gloved hand after touching other items. During an interview with [NAME] on 10/18/21 at 1 p.m., [NAME] stated she should have removed…
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 before2021-10-21 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control practices when; 1. The staff did not wash hands between residents during medication pass for Resident 54 and Resident 7. 2. The staff did not change gloves between residents when obtaining blood pressures (BP) or sanitize the BP cuff for Residents 63 and 22. 3. In the medication room specimen refrigerator, there was a urine specimen dated 10/15/2021 and unlabeled [NAME] - [NAME] (JP- drain is a closed- suction medical device for collecting body fluids from surgical sites) with 30 ml (milliliter) of brown color liquid. These failures increased the potential for cross contamination. Findings: 1. During the medication pass observation on 10/18/2021 at 4:10 p.m., with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN ) 1, LVN 1 gave medications to Resident 54 and Resident 7 without performing hand hygiene between resident medication administration. 2. Further medication observation on 10/18/2021 at 4:26 p.m., LVN 1 was obtaining the BP…
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 · D2021-10-21 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 complete the Comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct care) within 14-calendar days of admission for two of five sampled residents (Resident 1 and 56). This failure had the potential to delay the development of a comprehensive care plan necessary to provide the appropriate individualized care and services for each resident related to the care areas identified on their Comprehensive MDS. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 1's Face Sheet indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 1's admission Comprehensive MDS assessment indicated it was due on 4/26/21 and completed on 5/6/21 (10 days late). 2. Review of Resident 56's Face Sheet indicated Resident 56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 56's admission Comprehensive MDS assessment indicated it was due on 5/31/21 and completed on 6/13/21 (13 days late). During an interview with the Regional MDS Coordinator (RMC), on…
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 · D2021-10-21 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, for three of five (Resident 56, 57, and 58) sampled residents, the facility failed to complete Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct care) Assessments in the regulatory specified manner. This failure had the potential for Residents 56, 57, and 58 to not receive care and services based on their current health status. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 56's the Face Sheet indicated Resident 56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 56's Quarterly MDS assessment indicated it was due on 8/31/21 and completed on 10/14/21 (44 days late). 2. Review of Resident 57's the Face Sheet indicated Resident 57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 57's Quarterly MDS assessment indicated it was due on 9/9/21 and completed on 10/14/21/ (35 days late). 3. Review of Resident 58's Face Sheet indicated Resident 58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 58's MDS Quarterly MDS Assessment indicated it was due on…
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 · D2021-10-21 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure one of two sampled residents (Resident 11) was accurately assessed using the Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), when Resident 11's MDS was inaccurately assessed as not being a hospice patient. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 11 to not receive hospice care due to incorrect data entered and receive planned care not consistent with the resident's condition. Findings: During a review of Resident 11's MDS, dated [DATE], which indicated Resident 11 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 02, indicating Resident 11 is severely, cognitively impaired. In addition, it reflected Resident 11 was not receiving hospice care. The medical diagnoses for Resident 11 included heart failure, kidney failure, and Alzheimer's Disease. During a review of Resident 11's physician orders dated 5/3/21 indicated Resident 11 was placed on pallative (relieving pain and optimizing quality of life) care. During an interview with…
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 before2021-10-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 provide care that met the professional standards of care for one resident out of 20 sampled (Resident 170) when she was cleaned after being incontinent of feces with Chlorox bleach wipes. This deficient practice had the potential to cause pain and chemical burns to Resident 170. Findings: During a review of Resident 170's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to guide care), dated 10/11/21, indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 170 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 13/15, indicating Resident 170 is cognitively intact. The medical diagnoses for Resident 170 included cancer, hip fracture, and pelvic fracture. During an interview with Resident 170 on 10/19/21 at 10:38 a.m., Resident 170 stated the staff from therapy cleaned her after she had a bowel movement and used Chlorox wipes on her bottom. Resident 170 stated she did not know their names and has not seen them since and she thought it was a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-10-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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 care for two (Resident 55 and 65) of four residents that required oxygen therapy when Resident 55 and 65 were given oxygen without doctor's orders. These deficient practices had the potential to result in Resident's 55 and 65's inadequate monitoring of Resident 55 and 65's safe use of oxygen and response to oxygen therapy. Findings: A review of the document titled, admission Record, dated 10/21/21 indicated Resident 55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of acute respiratory failure (occurs when fluid builds up in the air sacs in your lungs. When that happens, your lungs can't release oxygen into your blood). A review of Resident 55's Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool) dated 8/11/21 indicated Resident 55 required the use of oxygen. During an observation on 10/19/21 at 11:20 a.m. Resident 55 was using oxygen at 3 liters per minute through a nasal canula (tube with prongs inserted into the nostrils) 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 · D2021-10-21 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to provide care for three (Resident 44, 45 and 118) of three residents that required dialysis (artificial kidney machine that rids your blood of unwanted toxins, waste products and excess fluids by filtering your blood). Staff did not do a complete assessment before Resident 45 and Resident 118's dialysis treatment or complete the dialysis communication record for Resident 45 and 118 before they went to their dialysis treatments. This deficient practice resulted in an inaccurate assessment of Resident 45 and 118's dialysis access site and functionality and failure to communicate potential changes in the resident's physical condition prior to receiving dialysis care. Findings: A review of the document titled, admission Record, dated 10/20/21 indicated Resident 44 was admitted to the facility and had a diagnosis of End Stage Renal (kidney) Disease or ESRD, a longstanding disease of the kidneys leading to renal failure. A review of Resident 44's Minimum Data…
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 · D2021-10-21 · 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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure the pharmacist's medication regimen review (MRR) was promptly acted upon for two (Residents 63 and 66) of 20 sampled residents. This failure had the potential for a delay in treatment and risk for serious side effects for Residents 63 and 66. Findings: Review of the admission Record indicated Resident 63 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses that included seizures (a disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed, casing seizures). Review of the facility's Consultant Pharmacist (CP) Medication Regimen Review (MRR) dated 8/1/2021 and 9/1/2021, indicated Resident 63 was currently on Carbidopa-Levodopa tablet 10-100 mg (milligram) for seizures. The recommendation indicated please clarify diagnosis for Carbidopa/Levodopa use- this is not used for seizures but Parkinson's Disease. Review of the admission Record indicated Resident 66 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses that included major depressive disorder and dementia (memory disorder) in other disease classified…
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 · D2021-10-21 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident 66) of 20 sampled residents was free from unnecessary psychotropic (drugs that affect the brain activities associated with mental processes behavior) medications when Resident 66 received: 1. Zyprexa ( used to treat certain mental/mood conditions (such us schizophrenia, bipolar disorder) without a gradual dose reduction (GDR, a tapering of a dose to determine if symptoms, conditions, or risk can be managed by a lower dose or if the dose medication can be discontinued) attempt or resident -specific clinical rationale for continuing the medication since 7/30/2020. 2. Ativan (used to treat anxiety) without a GDR attempt or resident -specific clinical rationale for continuing the medication since 6/25/2020. 3 Paxil (used to treat depression) without a GDR attempt or resident -specific clinical rationale for continuing the medication since 6/8/2020. Review of the admission Record indicated Resident 66 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses that included major depressive disorder,…
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 · D2021-10-21 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident 45) of 20 sampled residents was free of significant medication errors when Eliquis tablet 5 mg (Apixaban- used to prevent serious blood clots due to an irregular heartbeat) was not administered as prescribed by the physician. This failure had the potential for an increased risk of stroke (not enough blood flow and oxygen to the brain due to a clot) when the medication was not provided. Findings: Review of the admission Record indicated Resident 45 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses that included Long standing persistent Atrial Fibrillation (an irregular, often rapid heart rate that commonly causes poor blood flow). During the morning medication pass observation and concurrent interview on 10/19/2021 at 9:15 a.m.,with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN 2), LVN 2 gave all 9 medications by mouth, except the Eliquis. LVN 2 stated, Resident 45 will not receive her morning dose of Eliquis because it is not available. Review of Physician order dated 9/11/2021 indicated Eliquis…
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 · D2021-10-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe medication storage when: 1. In the Medication Room, there were multiple unlabeled, discontinued intravenous (administered into the vein) solution in a medium size plastic bin. 2. Station 3-Medication Cart 3 was dirty with small pieces of aluminum paper and multiple loose tablets in the bottom of the cart. 3. Station 2-Medication Cart 2 was dirty with small pieces of aluminum paper and multiple loose tablets in the bottom of the cart. Discontinued medication was still stored in Medication Cart 2 and had multiple opened eyedrops, an unlabeled bottle of nitroglycerine (used for heart/chest pain), and bisacodyl suppositories (laxative) were stored together in a small plastic bin. These failures had the potential for medication tampering, receiving expired medications that could lose their efficacy or the wrong medication. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 10/18/2021 at 5:40 p.m., with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), the medication room had a medium size bin with 10…
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 · D2021-10-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the electronic medical record for one of 20 sampled residents (Resident 2), when Resident 2's medical record had information scanned into it belonging to Resident 171. This deficient practice did not ensure the medical record contained records specifically for Resident 2. For Resident 171, the resident's confidential record was not protected and the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), a screening tool to ensure individuals with mental illness are not inappropriately placed and receive specialized services if indicated) was not readily available to the healthcare team. Findings: During a review of Resident 2's Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool used to guide care) dated 10/14/21 indicated Resident 2 had a readmission date of 10/6/21. The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) reflected Resident 2 scored 11/15 which meant moderately, cognitively impaired. Resident 2's diagnoses included end stage kidney…
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 before2024-10-10 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents' rooms measured at least 80 square (sq) feet (ft) per resident in 8 (Rooms 27 - 34) of 13 residents' rooms on 1 (Station 3) of 3 units in the facility. Findings included: On 10/10/2024 at 8:28 AM, the Maintenance Director measured the following rooms and confirmed the following dimensions: - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 70 sq feet for resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 70 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 70 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 70 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 70 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 70 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 78.75 sq ft for each resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 75sq ft for each resident. During an interview on 10/10/2024 at 9:40 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1, stated she had no problems with providing care due to a resident's room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2021-10-21 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to provide 22 of 22 residents in the following multiple resident rooms (27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34) with at least 80 square feet per resident. This failure had the potential to result in a lack of sufficient space for the provision of care by facility staff and for the lack of sufficient space for residents to have personal belongings at the bedside. After observation and interview, there was adequate space for residents and staff to move about without obstruction. Recommend granting waiver. Findings: Accompanied by the Maintenance Director (MD), on 10/20/21, at 1:40 p.m., the following multiple resident rooms were measured in feet (ft) and inches (in) which were less than 80 square ft: room [ROOM NUMBER]: 11 ft. 3.5 in x 19 ft 2 in room [ROOM NUMBER]: 11 ft 1 in x 19 ft 2 in room [ROOM NUMBER]: 11 ft 1 in x 19 ft 2 in room [ROOM NUMBER] 11 ft 3.5 in x 19 ft 2 in room [ROOM NUMBER] 11 ft 3.4 in x 19 ft 1 in room [ROOM NUMBER] 11 ft 2 in x 19 ft 2 in room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 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 | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 273; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| DHUGGA, GURPREET | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 12/01/2023 |
| BILLS, KELLY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/01/2023 |
| APT, FREDERICK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| HANCOCK, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| JERGENSEN, JOSHUA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| MITCHELL, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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 $692K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 055276. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-21, 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.