Grass Valley Healthcare Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

53.3% 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 205 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 147 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 0.69 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 92% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 86 beds and averages 83.3 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 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 4.37 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.70 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.56 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

23 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-11-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide appropriate and adequate supervision to prevent an avoidable accident when one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) left the facility without the facility's knowledge and supervision.This failure resulted in Resident 1 experiencing falls outside the facility, leading to multiple abrasions on the hands and knee and increased the risk of cold exposure and potential injury from passing motor vehicles. Findings: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in the fall of 2025 with diagnoses which included traumatic brain injury (an injury to the brain caused by a sudden bump, or jolt to the head, which can disrupt its normal function), muscle weakness, and difficulty walking. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 11/6/25, the MDS indicated Resident 1 had moderate impairment of his memory and was independent with most activities of daily living (ADLs). During a review of Resident 1's document titled FALL RISK EVAL [FRE, fall risk evaluation], dated 10/30/25, the FRE indicated…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store items in a sanitary manner for two of six sampled residents (Resident 1 and Resident 2) when used urinals were stored uncovered in a drawer that contained the residents' personal items.This failure increased the risk of contamination and infection for the residents.Findings:Resident 1 admitted to the facility in late 2025 with diagnoses which included urinary tract infection and weakness.Resident 2 admitted to the facility in mid 2024 with diagnoses which included urinary tract infection and bacteria in the bloodstream.During an interview on 12/30/25 at 12:53 p.m. with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA1), CNA 1 stated urinals should be stored in a drawer without other items.During a concurrent observation and interview on 12/30/25 at 1:28 p.m. with the Infection Preventionist (IP) of Resident 1's closet, Resident 1's bottom drawer of the closet contained an uncovered urinal, a clear drinking cup which held an uncovered toothbrush, and a bottle of cologne. The IP confirmed the findings and stated 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-09-25 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
  Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one out of 24 sampled resident (Resident 17) was provided with an ongoing activity program that meets psychosocial needs (a combination of mental health, emotional, spiritual, or behavioral needs that are important to a person) when Resident 17's frequency of ongoing activity program visit was followed.These failures had the potential for Resident 17 to not achieve her highest mental, emotional, spiritual, and psychosocial well-being.Findings:A review of Resident 17's clinical record indicated Resident 17 was admitted February of 2018 and had diagnoses that included dementia (impairment of the ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with everyday activities), anxiety disorder (a mental health disorder characterized by feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that are strong enough to interfere with one's daily activities), skin cancer, and muscle weakness.A review of Resident 17's Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool used to guide care) Cognitive Patterns, dated 9/16/25, indicated Resident 17…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-09-25 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the menu was followed for therapeutic diets (a modification of a regular diet, tailored to fit the nutritional needs of a particular person - may be part of a treatment or medical condition and usually prescribed by a physician) during the lunch meals on 9/22/25 and 9/23/25 when:1. Two residents (Resident 19 and 77) with CCHO (controlled carbohydrate) diets (a therapeutic diet to manage diabetic disease and/or to stabilize blood sugar level) received one slice of garlic bread instead of one half (1/2) slice.2. 22 residents (Resident 3, 5, 16, 22, 28, 32, 37, 38, 40, 47, 50, 62, 63, 65, 66, 67, 70, 74, 77, 81, and 96) with fortified diets (a dietary pattern that includes foods that have been enriched with additional nutrients, such as calories and protein) did not get the fortified foods.3. Two residents (Resident 26 and 44) with puree (a very smooth, crushed or blended food usually for people with swallowing and/or chewing difficulties) diet received mashed potatoes and did not get the pureed red beans…

  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 before2025-09-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared, stored, served, or distributed in accordance with professional standards of food service safety when:1. The ice machine was not clean; and2. The arrangement of the food stored in the freezer was not in a food safety manner; and3. Items found in the clean and ready-to-use storage areas: A few metal sheet pans were stored and stacked wet; and The metal sheet pans, food processor and metal strainers were found with brown substances; and4. Three dietary staff did not wear hair restraint and beard restraint appropriately; and5. Three dietary staff did not practice hand hygiene between soiled and clean dishes during the dishwashing process; and6. The metal coating of the can opener blade was worn off These failures had the potential to result in food contamination which could cause illness for 80 residents who received food prepared from the facility kitchen. Finding: 1. During an concurrent observation and interview on 9/22/25 at 11:06 a.m. with Dietary Supervisor (DS) 1, DS 1 stated 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program for a census of 80 residents when:1. Enhanced barrier precaution (EBP- also known as enhanced standard precaution/ESP, infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms [MDROs- bacteria that resist treatment with more than one antibiotic] that employs targeted gown and glove use) was not implemented to Resident 5 and Resident 63;2. A facility staff did not wear required personal protective equipment (PPE) when performing resident care on Resident 56 who was on EBP; and,3. Facility staff entered a contact precaution room (an infection control measure used in healthcare settings to prevent the spread of infectious agents that can be transmitted by direct or indirect contact with a patient or their environment) without using all the required PPE.These failures resulted in an increased risk for cross-contamination (movement…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide 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

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed in accordance with professional standards of care for one out of 24 sampled residents (Resident 3), when Resident 3 did not receive treatments as ordered by the physician. This failure had the potential for Resident 3's wounds to not heal, put them at risk for further skin breakdown and not achieve their highest practicable well-being. Resident 3 was originally admitted to the facility in September 2024 with multiple diagnosis which included type 2 diabetes mellitus (condition where the body either doesn't produce enough insulin or doesn't respond properly to the insulin) with foot ulcer (open sore on the foot) and cellulitis (bacterial infection of the deeper layers of the skin) of right lower limb. A review of Resident 3's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) signed 8/21/25, indicated, Resident 3 was cognitively intact. A review of Resident 3's Order Summary Report, with start date 9/11/25, indicated, Tx [treatment]: Left medial [middle] ankle wound: cleanse with NS [normal…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-25 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one out of 24 sampled residents (Resident 56) received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, and facility's policy, procedure (P&P), and care plan when Resident 56's foley catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) care and butterfly strap (a small, adhesive device designed to secure the catheter tubing to the skin, preventing accidental removal and reducing patient discomfort) monitoring was not done consistently.This failure had the potential for Resident 56 to develop infection and possible foley catheter dislodgement (removal) and/or other complications.Findings:A review of Resident 56's clinical record indicated Resident 56 was admitted June of 2025 and had diagnoses that included neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder (a condition where the nerves or muscles that control bladder function are impaired, leading to abnormal bladder control), and left thigh fracture (a break in the continuity of a bone).A review of Resident 56's Minimum Data Set…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-25 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  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 and proper delivery of respiratory care consistent with the facility's policy and procedures (P&P) for one out of 24 sampled residents (Resident 11) when Resident 11's oxygen saturation (percentage of oxygen carried in the blood) was not consistently monitored.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 11 developing respiratory issues without staff knowledge and for Resident 11 to not achieve her highest practicable well-being.Findings:A review of Resident 11's clinical record indicated Resident 11 was admitted January of 2024 and had diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a group of diseases that causes airflow blockage and breathing-related problems), and congestive heart failure (CHF-a heart disorder which causes the heart to not pump the blood efficiently).A review of Resident 11's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment tool) Cognitive Patterns, dated 7/7/25, indicated Resident 11 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a tool…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-25 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one out of 24 sampled residents (Resident 56) received appropriate pain management services consistent with professional standards of practice, facility's policy and procedure (P&P), and physician's order when Resident 56's pain medication order was not consistently followed.This failure had the potential for Resident 56 to experience unrelieved pain and not attain her highest practicable well-being.Findings:A review of Resident 56's clinical record indicated Resident 56 was admitted June of 2025 and had diagnoses that included left thigh fracture (a break in the continuity of a bone), and cardiomyopathy (a group of heart muscle diseases that weaken or thicken the heart muscle, making it difficult for the heart to pump blood effectively).A review of Resident 56's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment tool) Cognitive Patterns, dated 9/9/25, indicated Resident 56 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a tool to assess cognition) score of 9 out of 15 which indicated Resident 56 had 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-09-25 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolated
  Provide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
  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 dental services were provided in accordance with professional standards of care for one out of 24 sampled residents (Resident 7), when facility staff did not assist Resident 7 in obtaining a dental appointment as physician ordered. This failure had the potential for Resident 7 to experience unnecessary pain and an increased risk for infection. Resident 7 was originally admitted to the facility in August 2024 with multiple diagnosis which included bacteremia (bacteria in the blood), depression (mental health condition characterized by persistent feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and loss of interest in activities) and anemia (low levels of healthy red blood cells). A review of Resident 7's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) signed 6/27/25, indicated, Resident 7 had severe cognitive impairment. A review of Resident 7's Order Summary Report, with start date 7/30/25, indicated, Dental referral for dental pain.During a concurrent interview and record review on 9/24/25, at 3:21 p.m., with the Social Services…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CYPRESS HEALTHCARE GROUP — 13 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 5 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.

About 77% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $736K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in CA