Brighton Post Acute
361 E. Grangeville Blvd, Hanford, CA 93230 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 133 certified beds · (559) 582-9221 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- about 24% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 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 | 11.9% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.7% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.5% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.8% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.8% | 7.3% | 6.5% | better |
| 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 | 1.4% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.5% | 9.8% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 3.3% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.2% | 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 | 19.6% | 10.2% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.4% | 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 | 96.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.4% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 21.9% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| 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 | 2.89 | 1.57 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
67.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 177 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 38.4% 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 86 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 | 67.0%CMS range 60.3–75.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.7%CMS range 6.0–11.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from 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 | 38.4% | 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 | 31.4% | 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 | 33.7% | 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 | 99.2% | 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 | 97.0% | 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 | 95.1% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 7.8%CMS range 4.3–11.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.16 | 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 133 beds and averages 114.9 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 18 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 3.93 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.26 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.65 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.03 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.29 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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.
35 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited beforedisputed · IDR2025-04-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision to prevent falls for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1 was assessed to be at risk for falls on 1/22/25, had impulsive behavior and staff were aware of Resident 1 not using the call light to request assistance to walk in his room and effective individualized interventions to prevent falls were not implemented. Resident 1 experienced an unwitnessed fall on 3/15/25, fall on 3/16/25 and a fall on 3/17/25. These failures resulted in Resident 1 ' s avoidable fall on 3/16/25 sustaining a fracture of the left greater trochanter (a type of hip fracture [broken bone] where the femur [upper thigh bone] meets the pelvis) causing pain and decreased mobility which required transportation to the emergency department (ED) for assessment and treatment of his injury and was readmitted to the facility. Resident 1 had a third fall on 3/17/25 which placed the resident at risk for further…
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 before2026-06-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive person-centered care plan (CP - a detailed approach to care customized to an individual resident's needs) was developed and implemented for one of five sampled residents (Resident 4) when, Resident 4's care plan was not developed and initiated for two-person assistance with transfers.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 4's care needs to not be met and placed Resident 4 at risk for falls and injuries due to inadequate staff assistance.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/22/26 at 10:15 a.m. with Resident (Res) 4, in Res 4's room, Res 4 was observed lying in bed, dressed with a sheet covering him and his bed elevated. Res 4 stated he had been at the facility since 6/3/26 due to having neuropathy (a nerve problem that causes pain, numbness, tingling, swelling, or muscle weakness in different parts of the body) in his legs and heart issues and was unable to get out of bed. Res 4 stated he was bedridden. Res 4 stated he received help to get in his…
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 before2026-04-10 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to meet professional standards of practice for five of 53 of sampled residents (Residents 87, 101, 122, 123 and 124) when:1.Physician (MD) orders for insulin administration lacked parameters for MD notification for low or high blood glucose (a type of sugar in the blood that the body used for energy) levels for two of seven sampled residents (Resident 123 and 124).This failure had the potential to result in delayed MD notification and intervention for abnormal blood glucose levels. 2.Resident 124 experienced significant weight gain and had an SBAR completed on 4/3/26, which required initiation of 72-hour alert charting and ongoing monitoring for fluid overload. Alert charting was not initiated timely, was not completed consistently each shift and lacked communication of edema or related assessments.This failure had the potential to result in delayed identification and treatment of worsening fluid overload or other complications due to 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 · E2026-04-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide food that is palatable and attractive, for three of 49 sampled residents (Residents 33, 83, and 119) when residents complained the food lacked flavor, tasted bad or refused to eat their meal.These failure resulted in Resident 33 and 119 not eating all of their lunch and had the potential for unintended weight loss.During an observation and interview on 4/7/26 at 11:59 a.m. with Resident 119 in Resident 119's room, Resident 119 was sitting up in bed with a regular diet meal tray, on her bedside table, consisting of chopped chicken, potatoes, green beans, and a cup of hot chocolate. Resident 119 stated that she did not like the food. Resident 119 stated that the coffee did not taste good and that is why she requests hot chocolate. Resident 119 stated that the potatoes do not have a taste. Resident 119 stated that the green beans do not taste good. Resident 119 stated that she tells the staff she does not like the food, but they keep…
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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
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 permit a resident to return to the facility following hospitalization for one of four sampled residents (Resident 142) when Resident 142 was not re-admitted back to the facility on [DATE].This failure violated Resident 142's right to return to the facility and had the potential to result in delayed placement and care.Findings:During a review of Resident 142's admission Record (AR- a summary of information regarding a resident which includes patient identification, past medical history, insurance status, care providers, family contact information and other pertinent information), the AR indicated, Resident 142 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included epilepsy unspecified non intractable without status epilepticus (a brain condition that causes recurring seizures), unspecified sequelae of nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (long-term or permanent physical, cognitive, and emotional impairments that remain after the initial…
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 · D2026-04-10 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS-assessment of physical and psychological functions and needs) accurately reflected resident's health and functional status for two of four sampled residents (Resident 133 and Resident 134) when:1.Resident 133's upper and lower extremities were coded inaccurately in the MDS assessment.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 133's care needs not met.2. Resident 134's diagnosis of anxiety was not coded in the MDS assessment.This failure had the potential for Resident 134's need not met and changes in behavior not monitored. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 133's admission Record (AR-document containing resident profile information) dated 4/9/26, the AR indicated Resident 133 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included osteoarthritis (occurs when the smooth, protective cartilage cushioning the ends of the bones wears down causing bones to rub together) 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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 complete a Preadmission screening and Resident Review (PASARR-a federal requirement to ensure residents with mental disorder or intellectual disorder or intellectual disabilities are not inappropriately placed in a nursing home) level I screening for one of five sampled residents (Resident 100) when Resident 100's PASARR level I screening dated 6/3/24 did not indicate Resident 100's diagnosis of anxiety disorder (mental health condition characterized by excessive, uncontrollable, and persistent fear or worry that interferes with daily life) and no PASARR Level I screening was completed.This failure had the potential for Resident 100 to not receive the appropriate services related to her mental disorders. Findings: During a review of Resident 100's admission Record (AR- a document containing resident profile information), dated 4/8/26, the AR indicated, Resident 100 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included…
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 before2026-04-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive, person-centered care plan (a plan that provides direction for individualized care of the resident) was developed and implemented to meet the identified needs for one of eight sampled residents (Resident 44), when the facility did not have a care plan to monitor for side effects of Plavix (antiplatelet - blood thinners that prevent blood cells called platelets from sticking together and forming dangerous clots in arteries). This failure placed Resident 44 at risk for not being monitored for side effects of antiplatelet medication such as bleeding, bruising, and passing out.Findings: During a concurrent observation, on 4/8/26 at 10:18 a.m. in Resident 44's room. Resident 44 was in bed sleeping with tray table across her bed. During a review of Resident 44's admission Record (AR), (a document containing pertinent resident profile information) dated 4/9/26, the AR indicated, Resident 44 was admitted to the facility 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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 timely revise and implement a person-centered comprehensive care plan for one of five sampled residents (Resident 101) when Resident 101's care plan for oxygen (O2- a colorless, odorless and tasteless gas essential for life) was not updated and did not accurately reflect the physician's order for Resident 101's use of oxygen.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 101's care needs to not be met.Findings:During an observation on 4/7/26 at 9:37 a.m. in Resident 101's room during the initial tour, Resident 101was sitting in her wheelchair with a nasal cannula (NC- thin plastic tube that delivers oxygen directly into the nose through two small prongs) in her nose, connected to a working oxygen concentrator (device that produces oxygen for breathing) and was set to 1.5 L/M (liter per minute- a unit of measurement for the flow rate of oxygen).During a review of Resident 101's admission Record (AR - a summary of information…
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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility to provide the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for one of five sampled residents (Resident 13) when Resident 13 was not provided showers on his scheduled days in accordance with his needs and plan of care.This failure resulted in Resident 13 to miss his showers and had the potential to result in skin breakdown and infection.Findings:During interview on 4/7/26 at 9:16 a.m. with Resident 13 in his room, Resident 13 stated They don't bathe me. Resident 13 stated he did not recall the last time he had a bath. Resident 13 stated he wanted a bath because he felt dirty.During a review of Resident 13'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 4/9/26, the AR indicated Resident 13 was admitted to the facility from an acute care hospital on 2/2/26 with diagnoses of encounter of attention to gastrostomy(medical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure bed rails were properly maintained in safe working condition for one of five sampled residents (Resident 68) when Resident 68's bedrail was not functional and not securely locked.This failure placed Resident 68 at risk for injury such as falls, skin tears and possible entrapment.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/7/26 at 9:37 a.m. with Resident 68 in her room, Resident 68 was lying bed, head of bed elevated, and bilaterial bed rails up. Resident 68 stated I just need a new bed. Resident 68 was observed facing the right side, holding onto the right bed rail. Resident 68 stated my bed rail broke, the one on the left when they turn me over, I have to grab it, and it does not stay up. Resident 68's bed rail on the left side was evaluated and noted to not hold steady. The bed rail was not securely locked and would drop once hands were placed on it. Resident 68 stated it is scary, I have to catch it, I am…
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 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-10 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost 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 nurse staffing information was accurately posted when: 1. The actual number of hours worked per shift by Registered Nurses (RNs), Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) and Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) was not accurately reflected.2. The actual number of Licensed Staff (RN's, LVNs, and CNAs) was not specifically reflected in the staffing sheets. This failure resulted in an inaccurate posting of daily nurse staffing information and had the potential to result in residents, visitors and the public from determining the number and type of nursing staff providing direct care in the facility. Findings:During a concurrent interview and review of daily staffing hours sheets on 4/9/26 at 1:40p.m. with the Employee Services Representative (ESR), the ESR stated she generated the staffing hour reports each morning, which included RN, LVN and CNA hours and was calculated from midnight to midnight. Upon review of the staffing hours sheet dated 4/8/26, the ESR stated the posted staffing hours reflected projected…
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 · D2026-04-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of five sampled residents (Resident 84 and Resident 133) drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs when:1.Resident 84 received Namenda (medication used to improve memory, attention, reason, and language abilities) for memory loss without a written informed consent and monitoring of side effects and behaviors. This failure resulted in Resident 84 receiving medication and not properly informed of the possible side effects which had the potential for Resident 84 to have experienced side effects of medication and changes of behavior without proper monitoring.2. Resident 133 received acetaminophen (medication used to treat pain) tablet as needed for pain and oxycodone HCL (hydrochloride) (opioid prescription medication used to treat pain) tablet as needed for pain daily without pain parameters. This failure had the potential for Resident 133 to not received adequate pain relief which could lead to serious medical condition.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 · Dcited before2026-04-10 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to meet the needs of residents in accordance with established national guidelines for three of 49 sampled residents (Residents 41, 53 and 95) when Residents 41, 53 and 95 were not served cornbread with lunch on 4/8/26 and the menu indicated cornbread to be served.These failures resulted in Residents 41, 53 and 95 not receiving all the nutrition and calories for lunch and the potential for unintended weight loss.Findings: During an observation on 4/8/26 at 11:14 a.m. with [NAME] (CK) 1, in the kitchen, CK 1 was preparing to plate lunch for the residents in the facility. CK 1 put ham, beans and steamed cabbage on the first plate. CK 1 placed ham, beans and steamed cabbage on the second plate. CK 1 placed ham, beans and cabbage on the third plate. There was a pan of squared cornbread on the food counter next to the food items that were kept warm. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/8/26 at 11:57 a.m. with Resident 53 in the dining…
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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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 food preferences were followed for one of eight sampled residents (Resident 33) when he was served cabbage and the resident's care plan stated resident disliked cabbage. This failure violated Resident 33's food preference and had the potential to result in weight loss.Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/8/26 at 4:11 p.m. with Resident 33 in his room. Resident 33 stated, . - I did not enjoy my lunch, the cabbage was soggy, the beans had no flavor, I only ate the ham, and I am ready to eat again but I will wait for dinner .During a review of Resident 33's admission record (AR), dated 4/9/26, the AR indicated Resident 33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnosis: Hemiplegia (a form of paralysis that causes severe or complete loss of movement on one side of the body) to the right side of the body, major depressive disorder (a mental health condition characterized by persistent, intense…
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 before2026-04-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 store and prepare food in accordance with professional standard for food service safety for 49 residents who were served food from the ice machine and kitchen when there was no air gap (a safety feature that uses open air to physically separate a clean water line from a dirty drain line) at the ice machine drain and no air gap at the drain of food preparation sink.These failures had the potential to result in contamination of ice and food and could lead to illnesses.Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/7/26 at 8:25 a.m. during the initial tour in the kitchen, with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), the food preparation sink had black pipes that went into the wall. There was a drain sink under and to the left of the food preparation sink that was not being used. The black pipe under the sink had a white plastic piece on top of the black pipe. The CDM stated the white plastic piece was an air gap installed by the maintenance department.During a concurrent observation and interview 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 · D2026-04-10 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
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 have an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free of pests for 51 residents that ate food prepared in the kitchen when two flies were in the kitchen on 4/7/26 and one fly was in the kitchen on 4/8/26.These failures had the potential for cross-contamination (the transfer of harmful germs from one surface to another) from the flies to resident food which could result in illnesses.Findings:During an observation on 4/7/26 at 8:35 a.m. during the initial tour in the kitchen, two flying insects were observed flying around the dishwashing area.During an interview on 4/8/26 at 9:18 a.m. with Dietary Aid (DA) 1, DA 1 stated there had not been a problem with flies in the kitchen until today. DA 1 stated the kitchen had a negative airflow over the exit door to assist with the control of flies. DA 1 stated it was important not to have flies in the kitchen because of cross contamination. DA 1 stated if there was a problem with flies…
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 · F2026-01-02 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 provide a safe environment for the residents, staff, and visitors when the fire protection system (a combination of equipment and technologies designed to detect, alert, control, and extinguish fires automatically or manually, aiming to save lives, minimize property damage, and ensure safe evacuation) stopped functioning from 12/31/25 to 1/2/26, and the facility failed to notify the California Department of Public Health (CDPH, a government agency for the State of California in charge of protecting the public's health and helps shape positive health outcomes for individuals, families and communities) and the California Department of Healthcare Access and Information (HCAI, a government agency for the State of California in charge of safety regulations for health care facilities, provide financial assistance to health care institutions, collecting healthcare data and more). This failure placed residents, staff, and visitors at risk for injury and/or death in the event of a fire. During a concurrent observation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive, person-centered care plan was developed and implemented to meet the identified needs for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1 was assessed as being a high fall risk with poor safety awareness and a known behavior of not calling staff for assistance and the facility did not develop and implement effective care plan interventions including assistance and supervision to prevent falls. This failure resulted in Resident 1 ' s unwitnessed falls on 3/15/25 and 3/16/25 sustaining a fracture of the left greater trochanter (a type of hip fracture [broken bone] where the femur [upper thigh bone] meets the pelvis) causing pain and decreased mobility which required transportation to the emergency department (ED) for assessment and treatment of his injury. Resident 1 had a third fall on 3/17/25 which placed the resident at risk for further serious injury. (Cross reference F689) Findings: During a review 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 · D2024-11-01 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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 the physician-prescribed therapeutic diet (a diet order as part of treatment for a disease or clinical condition to decrease or increase specific nutrients in the diet) for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1) when, during lunch on 11/1/24, Resident 1, who has physician prescribed No Added Salt (NAS) diet Mechanical Soft texture, was served a piece of uncut country-fried steak. This failure had the potential to result in a choking episode and further compromise the nutritional and medical status of Resident 1. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), dated 11/1/24, the AR indicated, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had a diagnosis which included Anemia (a condition where the body does not have enough healthy red blood cells), Muscle Weakness, Heart Failure (a heart disorder which causes the heart to not pump the blood efficiently, sometimes resulting in leg swelling), Hypertension…
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 · D2024-08-08 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff reported an allegation of abuse for 1 (Resident #55) of 1 resident reviewed for abuse. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation - Reporting and Investigating, revised in 2023, revealed, 1. If resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property or injury of unknown source is suspected, the suspicion must be reported immediately to the administrator and to other officials according to state law. The policy revealed, 3. 'Immediately' is defined as: a. within two hours of an allegation involving abuse or result in serious bodily injury; or b. within 24 hours of an allegation that does not involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #55 on 08/01/2023. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of palliative care, hemiplegia and hemiparesis (weakness on one side of the body) following a cerebral…
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 · D2024-08-08 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was not greater than 5 percent (%). The facility had 2 medication errors out of 27 total opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 7.41%, affecting 2 (Resident #78 and Resident #43) of 5 residents observed during medication administration. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Medication Administration General Guidelines, dated 01/2021, revealed the section titled Medication Preparation: included 3. Prior to administration, review and confirm medication orders for each individual resident on the Medication Administration Record [MAR]. Compare the medication and dosage schedule on the resident's MAR with the medication label. If the label and MAR are different, and the container is not flagged indicating a change in directions, or if there is any other reason to question the dosage or directions, the prescriber's orders are checked for the correct dosage schedule. Apply a 'direction change' sticker to label if directions have changed…
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 · D2024-04-25 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the Long Term Care Ombudsman office (LTC-Ombudsman, a resident advocacy agency) of transfer to the hospital for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when the facility failed to send a copy of Resident 1's transfer and discharge notification to the local LTC-Ombudsman office. This failure resulted in the LTC-Ombudsman not aware of Resident 1's discharge circumstances should appeals be filed by the resident or his representative. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR, documents containing resident demographic information and medical diagnosis), undated, the AR indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Metabolic Encephalopathy (a disorder caused by a buildup of toxins in the brain that can happen with advanced liver disease), Pneumonia (lung infection caused by bacteria), Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (a disorder in which blood sugar or glucose levels are abnormally high),…
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 before2023-11-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive, person centered care plan for one of three sampled residents (Residents 1) when Resident care plan intervention to have auto locks to wheelchair (device used to automatically lock the wheels whenever the person stands or sits) was not implemented to prevent falls. This failure placed Resident 1 at risk for falls. Findings: During an observation on 11/3/23, at 9:35 a.m., in Resident 1's room, a wheelchair with Resident 1's name on the back of the wheelchair was next to her bed. No auto lock device was attached to the wheelchair. During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (document containing resident demographic information and medical diagnosis) undated, the admission record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included weakness and history of falling. During a concurrent interview and record review on 11/3/23 at 9:44 a.m., with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 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 · F2019-12-06 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespreadProvide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
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 support personnel were competent to effectively carry out the function for food and nutrition services when two of two sampled Maintenance Assistants (MA 1 and MA 2) did not clean and sanitize the facility ice machine in accordance to the manufacturer's recommendations. (Cross reference F908.) This failure had the potential for the ice machine to not function properly, cause contamination of the ice, and lead to resident illnesses. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on 12/4/19, at 8:18 a.m., with MA 1 and the Housekeeping & Maintenance Supervisor (HMS), MA 1 stated he had been cleaning and sanitizing the ice machine once a month since 9/2019. MA 1 stated he followed the manufacturer's guidelines located inside the ice machine binder. MA 1 stated he diluted a cleaner with two gallons of room temperature water, flushed the machine twice, and allowed the machine to make ice three times. MA 1 stated he would discard the ice three times and would consider the ice machine clean once these steps were…
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 · Fcited before2019-12-06 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure 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 nutritional needs of residents were being met in accordance with established dietary national guidelines when the Registered Dietitian Nutritionist (RDN) did not sign to demonstrate approval of the facility's food menus. This failure placed the residents at risk for not receiving adequate nutrition which could further compromise their medical status. Findings: During a review of the facility's menu titled, Week 3 [Sunday through Saturday] (01-05) Cycle 4 2019 Therapeutic Spreadsheets on 12/3/19, at 3:15 p.m., the signature line for all seven days was left blank with dates below the line for signatures to be obtained on 10/6/19, 11/3/19, 12/1/19, and 12/29/19. During an interview on 12/4/19, at 11:03 a.m., with the RDN, the RDN stated the facility used an outside contractor to provide the menus for the facility. The RDN stated it was her responsibility to make nutritional analysis of menu items and it was her responsibility to approve the menus. The RDN stated she had been working at the facility as…
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 · Fcited before2019-12-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when multiple food items available for resident consumption were stored without being covered and without open dates inside Freezer 1, walk in refrigerator, kitchen dry food storage areas and inside refrigerators in nursing station 1 and 3. These findings had the potential to cause gastric upset from the consumption of improper stored food. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 12/3/19, at 8:27 a.m., with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), in the Freezer 1, one large cardboard box was left open with multiple individual butter pats (squares). The DS stated the box of butter pats should have been closed or placed inside a sealed container to prevent freezer burn. During a concurrent interview and record review on 12/3/19, at 9:21 a.m., with the DS, the DS reviewed the facility policy and procedure titled, Sanitation and Infection Control Subject: Freezer Storage dated 2018, the DS stated the policy indicated all foods…
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 · F2019-12-06 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain the ice machine in accordance with manufacturer's instructions for use when the ice machine was not cleaned and sanitized per manufacturer's guideline. (Cross reference F802.) This failure had the potential for the ice machine to not function properly, cause contamination of the ice, and lead to resident illness. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on 12/4/19, at 8:18 a.m., with Maintenance Assistant (MA) 1 and the Housekeeping & Maintenance Supervisor (HMS), MA 1 stated he had been cleaning and sanitizing the ice machine once a month since 9/2019 and followed the manufacturer's guidelines in the ice machine binder. MA 1 stated he diluted a cleaner with two gallons of room temperature water, flushed the machine twice, let the machine make ice three times and threw the ice away, then considered the ice machine clean and sanitized. MA 1 stated MA 2 trained him to clean and sanitize the ice machine. MA 1 retrieved the binder for logging the cleaning and sanitizing of the ice machine. MA 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-12-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed professional standards of practice for two of two sampled residents (Resident 22 and Resident 45) who used indwelling urinary catheters (a flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) when Resident 22's and Resident 45's urinary catheter tubing was not secured to prevent discomfort and accidental dislodgment of the catheter. This failure had the potential to cause discomfort, injury to the urethra (duct that leads from the bladder and transports urine out of the body) and accidental dislodgment of the indwelling catheter. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 12/3/19, at 10:09 a.m., with Resident 22, Resident 22 was in bed, her urinary catheter bag hung on the right side of her bed frame. Resident 22 pointed to the urinary catheter tubing after she removed her blanket. Resident 22's catheter tubing hung loose and was not secured to her leg. During a concurrent observation 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 · Ecited before2019-12-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to establish an environment free from accidents and hazards for two of 27 sampled residents (Resident 13, 96) when: 1. Resident 13 and Resident 96 smoked in an area without smoking fire safety accommodations to ensure the residents remained safe while they smoked. This failure potentially placed Resident 13 and 96 at risk for smoking related injuries. 2. Resident 59 was not accommodated with staff assistance when ambulating to the restroom as indicated in her plan of care. This failure had the potential for Resident 59 to fall and sustain injuries from fall. Findings: 1. During an interview with Resident 96 on 12/3/19, at 8:42 a.m., Resident 96 stated he smoked every day. Resident 96 stated he smoked without supervision and he was able to access his cigarettes that he kept at his bed side. During an observation of Resident 96 on 12/3/19 at 8:47 a.m., Resident 96 announced to his nurse that he was going out to the patio area to smoke. Resident…
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 · E2019-12-06 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard 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 maintain medical records that were complete and accurately documented for three of 27 sampled residents (Resident 110, Resident 43, and Resident 45) when: 1. The physician's visit and assessment of Resident 110 was not documented on the progress note for [DATE]; and the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST-a summary of medical orders to be followed during a medical emergency and end of life wishes) dated [DATE], was not revised by the physician to reflect end of life wishes. This failure had the potential for end of life wishes not to be respected in the event of an emergency. 2. Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS - a standardized assessment and care screening tool) coding requirements were not followed for two of 27 sampled residents (Resident 43 and Resident 45) when aspirin medications were coded under the classification of anticoagulant (medication used to stop the formation of blood clots) and should not have been. This failure…
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 before2019-12-06 · 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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure the minimum square footage was maintained for 25 of 47 resident rooms (100, 102, 104, 106, 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, 118, 120, 122, 200, 204, 206, 208, 210, 212, 214, 216, 304, 306, 308, 310, and 314), and three of 25 sampled resident rooms (104, 216, and 304) did not provide residents and staff with enough space to accommodate resident needs when: 1. Staff had limited space and difficulty providing resident care in room [ROOM NUMBER]. 2. Resident 96 was not able to exit or enter his room when care was being given to his roommates in room [ROOM NUMBER]. 3. Resident 59 was not able to easily and safely ambulate herself to and from the restroom or store her wheelchair in room [ROOM NUMBER]. This failure resulted in inadequate space for staff to deliver care and the potential to impact the residents' safety and quality of life. (Cross reference F588.) Findings: 1. During an observation on 12/5/19, at 2:10 p.m., in the facility,…
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 · D2019-12-06 · 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, the facility failed to provide reasonable accommodations to meet the needs and preferences for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 59) when Resident 59 did not have the bedroom set up in a manner that provided sufficient space to easily and safely navigate to and from her restroom and to keep her wheelchair within easy reach. This failure had the potential to result in injury to Resident 59. Findings: During an observation on 12/3/19, at 10:15 a.m., Resident 59's room was a three-person room, with three beds in the room. Resident 59's bed was the first bed in the room and was located across from the restroom entrance adjacent to the bedroom. Resident 59's wheelchair was parked next to her bed, approximately two feet from the wall. Resident 59's bedroom door was opened wide and blocked access to and the ability to open the restroom door. Resident 59 was inside the restroom and struggled to open the restroom door which was blocked by the bedroom door. Resident…
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 · D2019-12-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 maintain an infection control program to prevent the transmission of infections for one of six sampled residents (Resident 11) when an oxygen humidifier (a device that introduced moisture to a gas) and a nasal cannula (NC) tubing were not replaced after five days and continued to be used for 13 days. This failure placed Resident 11 at risk for developing respiratory infections. Findings: During an observation on 12/3/19, at 10:32 a.m., in Resident 11's room, Resident 11 was resting in bed with her NC tubing attached to a humidifier next to the bed. There was no date on the NC tubing and the water bottle attached to the humidifier was dated 11/20/19. During a concurrent observation and interview on 12/3/19, at 10:44 a.m., with licensed nurse (LN) 4, LN 4 observed Resident 11's humidifier and NC tubing and stated there was no date on the NC tubing and the date on the humidifier was 11/20/19. LN 4 stated the facility's policy was to change the humidifier and NC tubing every five days to prevent respiratory…
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 before2024-08-08 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms measured at least 80 square (sq.) feet (ft.) per resident in 26 (Rooms 100, 102, 104, 106, 108, 110, 112, 200, 204, 206, 208, 210, 212, 214, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 404, 406, 408, 410, 412, and 414) of 40 resident rooms in the facility. Findings included: A Client Accommodation Analysis, undated, revealed documentation of room sizes indicated the following resident rooms and corresponding square footage (sq. ft.): - In room [ROOM NUMBER], the total floor area measured 212 sq. ft. and three beds occupied the room, which provided 70.7 sq. ft. of space per resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], the total floor area measured 213.9 sq. ft. and three beds occupied the room, which provided 71.3 sq. ft. of space per resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], the total floor area measured 200.5 sq. ft. and three beds occupied the room, which provided 66.8 sq. ft. of space per resident. - In room [ROOM NUMBER], the total floor area…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.
- 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. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-05-03 for 3 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to WEST HARBOR HEALTHCARE — 8 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 | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.1 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.3★, per CMS)
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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WEST HARBOR HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/10/2022 |
| GALBASINI, KEVIN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 40% | since 05/10/2022 |
| GILL, DANIEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | 40% | since 05/10/2022 |
| ROSENHAN, CAMERON | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 20% | since 05/10/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $3.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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
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 055410. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-10, 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.