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

Community Subacute and Transitional Care Center

3003 N Mariposa, Fresno, CA 93703 · Non profit - Corporation · 106 certified beds · (559) 459-1711 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (559) 459-1711 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 13 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (22% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2615 East Clinton Avenue
Pharmacy
3011 E Shields Ave · (559) 224-2965 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2308 N Fresno St
Park
3414 N Fresno St · (559) 621-7529 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
3130 N Fresno St · (559) 939-7303

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 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.

Overall rating5★
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 increased3.8%10.2%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.4%4.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.9%1.2%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.8%7.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.5%0.4%0.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%1.6%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.7%9.8%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.9%13.7%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.2%4.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control4.0%10.2%21.2%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table7.9%12.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.1%93.2%79.4%better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

0.54U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.30hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.18hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.54 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 84% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
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 number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. 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 number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.

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

Staffing

1.75
RN hours/ resident / day
2.99
LPN hours/ resident / day
4.45
Aide hours/ resident / day
9.19
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.16
RN hoursweekends
21.7%
Total nursing turnover
21.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 106 beds and averages 97.8 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 9.19 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.75 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 4.45 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 7.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 9.82 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.99 to 1.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 22% 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

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-06)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2025-12-19)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · F2025-12-19 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    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 daily nurse staffing information contained all required information and was posted in a prominent readily accessible place to residents and visitors when:1. Daily nurse staffing information was posted behind nursing station 1 and nursing station 2, which was inaccessible to residents and visitors.2. Daily nurse staffing information did not include the actual hours worked by Registered Nurse (RN)s, Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN)s, and Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)s.This failure resulted in restricted public access to posted nurse staffing information for 99 out of 99 residents admitted within the facility which had the potential to result in residents not knowing how many total or actual direct care hours were provided.During an observation on 12/19/25 at 11:26 a.m. at nursing station 1, Transitional Care, the facility's posted daily nurse staffing information titled, Report of Nursing Staff Directly Responsible for Resident Care, dated 12/19/25, was observed behind nursing station 1. The document…

    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 · E2025-12-19 · 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

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable (contagious) diseases and infections for four of ten sampled residents (residents 107,7, 39, and 42) when:1. A dignity bag was not correctly put on Resident 107's urine catheter bag and the urine catheter bag was touching the floor. This failure placed Resident 107 at risk to develop a Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection (CAUTI -a serious infection occurring when germs enter the urinary system through a urinary catheter).2. A medication tray was not cleaned or disinfected in between use and contact with Resident 42, Resident 7 and Resident 39, whom were on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP-- an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms using gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities).This failure placed Resident 42, Resident 7, and Resident 39 at risk for the spread and introduction of Multidrug-Resistant…

    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 · Dcited before2025-12-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain the dignity and privacy for one of 11 sampled residents (Resident 50) when Resident 50 was observed from the hallway of his room without any clothing on two occasions. This failure violated Resident 50's right to maintain his privacy.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 12/16/25 at 10:20 a.m. in Resident 50's room, Resident 50 was observed in bed covered with a sheet, holding the sheet to his chin with both hands. Resident 50 was asleep but woke up when knocked on the door and introduction made. Resident 50 stated he had been at the facility for three weeks, because he went to Mexico. Resident 50 did not answer any further questions.During a review of Resident 50's admission Record (AR - a summary of information regarding a patient which includes patient identification, past medical history, insurance status, care providers, family contact information and other pertinent information), dated 12/18/25, the AR…

    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 · D2025-12-19 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure one of nine sampled residents (Resident 5) received personal privacy and confidentiality of his personal and medical records when Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 4 left Resident 5's Medication Administration Record (MAR) computer screen visible in the hallway while administering medications. This failure resulted in Resident 5's personal and medical records being visible to staff, residents and visitors, which could lead to unauthorized access to confidential personal and medical records. During an observation on 12/17/25 at 12:18 p.m. Medication Cart 3 (MC 3) was observed next to Resident 5's room with the drawers and computer screen facing out toward the facility hallway. Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 4 was observed removing medication from MC 3. LVN 4 was observed donning personal protective equipment (PPE) and entering Resident 5's room. LVN 4 was observed closing Resident 5's room door. MC 3 was observed unattended in the hallway, next to Resident 5's room, with the drawers and computer screen…

    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 · D2025-12-19 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure two out of 22 residents (Resident 38 and Resident 87) received a level II Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR- evaluation for individuals suspected of having a Serious Mental Illness (SMI) or Intellectual/Developmental Disability (I/DD)/Related Condition (RC), triggered by a positive Level I screen, to determine if they need specialized services, ensuring placement in the least restrictive setting) evaluation by the designated entity to determine if SMI, ID/DD/RC conditions were present when: 1. Resident 38 had a PASRR level I screening result positive for SMI, and the facility did not ensure a PASRR level II screening was completed. 2. Resident 87 had a PASRR level I screening result positive for SMI, and the facility did not ensure a PASRR level II screening was completed.These failures resulted in Resident 38 and Resident 87 not receiving the required PASRR level II screening which had the potential to result in missed…

    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 · D2025-12-19 · tag F0800 — isolated
    Provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
    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 residents had a well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs when the facility's approved therapeutic diet manual:1. Was not based on current standard of practice or nationally recognized diet for residents with diabetes when the facility had a Reduced Concentrated Sweets (RCS) diet order for nutrition care with diabetes for one sampled resident (Resident 107); and 2. Did not contain a small portion diet or menu for one sampled resident (Resident 29) when the physician's diet order was for a small portion diet.These failures had the potential to result in inconsistent nutritional management related to therapeutic diet planning, limiting resident choices and failure to have all the diet choices in the diet manual could result in resident's receiving incorrect portions of food items. 1. During kitchen observation on 12/16/25 at 10:49 a.m. with Dietary Aid (DA) 1, DA 1, was observed preparing Resident 107's lunch tray. DA 1 stated his job was to place condiments, drinks,…

    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 before2025-12-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when two of three kitchen staff (Dietary aid 1 and 2) did not have hair and facial hair fully restrained or covered during meal preparation and service. This failure had the potential to compromise food sanitation and resident safety.During an observation of lunch meal service on 12/16/25 at 12:35 pm, in the kitchen, Dietary Aid (DA)1 was wearing a baseball cap with longer hair in back and hair was not fully covered. DA 1 was not wearing hairnet. DA 1 was calling out trays, checking out meal tickets and meal trays with food, putting cold beverages on meal trays and placing meal trays into food carts.During a concurrent observation and interview on 12/17/25 at 12:32 pm with DA 2 in the kitchen, DA 2 was wearing surgical mask, the side of face had facial hair and was uncovered. DA 2 stated that he was mixing Juven (medical drink mixture with vitamins and minerals), diet cranberry beverages in cups and food…

    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 before2024-08-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when: 1. The cook failed to follow the diet order for three of three residents (Residents 56, 69, and 88). 2. The facility failed to have an air gap (an unobstructed vertical space between the water outlet and the flood level of a fixture), under the food preparation sink. These failures had the potential to result in residents being exposed to contaminated food which could lead to food born illness for all residents who receive food prepared in the kitchen and had the potential for Resident 56, Resident 69 and Resident 88 to have weight gain or loss by diet orders not being followed. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 8/27/24 at 12:20 p.m. with the Dietary Manager (DM), in the facility's kitchen, the [NAME] (DA), did not follow the recipe for three residents with small portion diet orders during the lunch service…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-30 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect for three of 11 sampled residents (Resident 37, Resident 43, Resident 69) when: 1. Registered Nurse (RN) 1 administered medication to Resident 37's and did not provide privacy. This failure resulted in Resident 37 not being provided with respect and dignity while taking her medication. 2. RN 1 checked Resident 69's blood pressure (B/P-measures the pressure of circulating blood against the walls of blood vessels [channels that carry blood throughout the body]) and did not provide privacy. This failure resulted in Resident 69 not being provided with respect and dignity while her B/P was checked. 3. Resident 43's privacy curtain was tied in a knot. This failure resulted in Resident 43 not being provided his right for a respectful and dignified existence and denied Resident 43 the right to have an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his quality of life. Findings: 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain medical records which were complete, and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for three of seven sampled residents (Resident 6, Resident 55 and Resident 41) when Resident 6, Resident 41 and Resident 55's copy of Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST-a medical document which outlines a patient's preferences for end-of-life care) were incomplete and not readily available as part of Resident 6 and 55's current medical records. These failures had the potential risk for Resident 6, Resident 41 and 55's decision regarding their healthcare treatment options not being honored. Findings: During a review of Resident 6's admission Record, (AR-document containing resident profiles) dated 8/29/24, the AR indicated, Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease (occurs when the kidneys are no longer able to function…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS-assessment of physical and psychological functions and needs) accurately reflected resident's health and functional status for one of three sampled residents (Resident 6) when Resident 6's antipsychotic medication (used to treat severe mental disorder in which a person loses the ability to recognize reality or relate to others) use was inaccurately coded in the MDS assessment. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 6's care needs not met. Findings: During a review of Resident 6's admission Record (document with resident demographic and medical diagnosis information), dated 8/29/24, indicated Resident 6 was admitted in the facility on 8/30/23 with diagnoses which included unspecified psychosis (mental health problem that causes people to perceive or interpret things differently from those around them) and end stage renal disease (terminal illness that occurs when kidneys can no longer function 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled in accordance with current accepted professional principles and facility policy and procedures for one of two medication carts in Transitional Unit when medication cart contained Resident 53's (Fluticasone Propionate brand name- used to relieve allergic and non-allergic nasal symptoms) 50 mcg (microgram-unit of measurement) was found to not have an open date and beyond use date (BUD-the last date you can safely use a medication). This failure had the potential for Resident 53's medication to be administered past the discard date which could result in loss of effectiveness of medication leading to poor management of Resident 53's condition. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on [DATE] at 2:06 p.m. at the medication cart in Transitional Unit with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1, Resident 53's (Fluticasone propionate brand name) was found with no open date and BUD. LVN 1 stated…

    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 · D2024-08-30 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
    Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed provide one of 11 residents an accessible call system when Resident 43's call light (a device that is used by a resident to call staff for assistance) was out of reach and wrapped around the television arm behind the resident's bed. This failure resulted in Resident 43 being unable to call for assistance and had the potential to delay care during an emergency and cause adverse outcomes. Findings; During a review of Resident 43's admission Record (AR), dated 8/29/24, the AR indicated Resident 43 had been admitted on [DATE]. Resident 43's admitting diagnoses included: nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (bleeding in the space between the brain and the surrounding membrane), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- lung disease that causes restricted airflow and makes it difficult to breathe) with acute exacerbation (a sudden worsening of respiratory symptoms), epilepsy (a chronic brain disorder that causes seizures, which are episodes 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.

    Environmental 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.

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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
COMMUNITY HOSPITALS OF CENTRAL CALIFORNIAOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2009
ABUNDIS, SUSANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
BENNETT, LORIIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/04/2022
BOONE, KEITHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
BRYANT, FATIMAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2024
COELHO, MARKIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2023
COPELAND, GREGORYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/25/2025
DUGAN, NICHOLASIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/25/2025
ESTEP, GREGORYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
GONZALEZ, FABIOLAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/20/2025
HERNANDEZ, GERARDOIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/06/2023
IBRAHIM, WAGIHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
MARTINEZ, ISABELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
MCCAFFREY, KARENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
MELENDEZ, KATHERINEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
MOFFETT, DEBORAHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2013
NEUMAN, CHRISTOPHERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
PARNAGIAN, LELANDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2023
STURDEVANT, ROGERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
VENUGOPAL, CHANDRASEKARIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
WAGONER, CRAIGIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
BELLISTON, CORYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/12/2022
CHOJNACKI, ARIANAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/24/2025
DAVIS, DANIELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
GROSSMAN, STEPHENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/19/2016
BAKER TILLY US LLPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 95 rows in the source record cover these 26 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.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

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 055258. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-06, 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