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

Hayward Gardens Post Acute

1628 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 75 certified beds · (510) 582-4636 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (510) 582-4636 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Resident-funds citation (F0565)1 actual-harm citation
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (31% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
Eastbay0.2 mi
1782 B St · (510) 885-1956 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1652 B St · (510) 200-9984 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
22660 Vermont St · (510) 881-8020 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased7.4%10.2%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.8%4.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.4%1.2%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms4.7%7.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.4%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%1.6%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened7.1%9.8%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.6%13.7%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.4%4.3%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control3.3%10.2%21.2%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table1.1%12.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.1%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.3%93.2%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.1%23.0%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.6%11.2%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.382.251.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.121.571.80better

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

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

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

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

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

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

62.9% 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 94 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

62.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
88.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.58U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.40hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 88.2% 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 68 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 0.58 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 87% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 41% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF62.9%CMS range 54.3–71.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.9%CMS range 5.9–13.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge88.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge86.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge77.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified99.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge96.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization10.6%CMS range 7.5–16.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.451.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.77
RN hours/ resident / day
1.01
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.49
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.27
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.51
RN hoursweekends
30.6%
Total nursing turnover
27.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 75 beds and averages 71.4 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.27 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.49 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 3.77 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.47 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.51 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-05-07)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-05)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

32 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2023-06-09 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, document review, and interviews, the facility failed to comprehensively assess and implement nutritional interventions for one resident (Resident 59), who lost a total of 39.6 pounds over a period of 28 weeks. The facility failed to follow the weight loss policy and procedure including providing recommended nutritional interventions, having interdisciplinary committee meetings to provide an analysis of identified weight loss, and calculating adequate estimated nutritional needs by the registered dietitian. This failure had the potential to result in unintended weight loss which is strongly correlated with increased morbidity (the condition of suffering from a disease or medical condition) and mortality (death) in the older adult for one resident (Resident 59) out of a facility census of 65. Findings: Review of a Practice Paper published by the American Dietetic Association, dated 2010, indicated In older adults, a 5% or more unplanned weight loss in 30 days often results in protein-energy…

    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 · E2026-05-07 · tag F0847 — pattern
    Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that Resident 79's binding arbitration agreement was explained to and signed by Resident 79's designated representative.This deficient practice has the potential to result in residents and/or resident representatives not being aware and/or fully understanding the implications of arbitration agreements.Finding:During a record review of Resident 79's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated, Resident 79's diagnoses included a history of transient ischemic attack (TIA, a brief interruption of blood flow to the brain causing temporary stroke like symptoms and is considered a warning sign for possible future stroke), heart failure and weakness. During a record review of Resident 79's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated that Resident 79's healthcare decision maker was his daughter.During a record review of Resident 79's Arbitration Agreement, on 05/05/2026 at 4:33 PM, the signatory on the document indicated Resident 79's signature and not Resident 79's daughter.During an interview on 05/05/2026, at 3:50 PM, with 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-05-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program when:Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 4 handled contaminated linen from Resident 33, who is on contact precautions for MRSA, without wearing the required PPE. The contaminated linen was not bagged prior to being placed in the laundry hamper.CNA 1 handled Resident 29's soiled linens and garbage disposal bag without gloves worn and did not perform hand hygiene. Two lighters were found stored in an opened full box of Tegaderm dressings in the medication storage room (Tegaderm is a thin, see through plastic dressing used to cover wounds, scrapes and surgical incisions. It acts as a protective, germ-proof barrier that keeps dirt out of the skin).License Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1 did not perform hand hygiene before preparing and giving medications to Resident 37.These failures placed the residents at increased risk of healthcare-associated infections. 1.During an observation on 5/4/26, at 9:49 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA 4) came out of Resident 33's room.…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff protected dignity and maintained personal privacy for one of one resident (Resident 29) during preparation and transport for a scheduled shower. This failure resulted in Resident 29 being exposed and insufficiently covered while being moved through the hallway, creating risk for embarrassment, loss of dignity, and violation of personal privacy.Findings:During a record review of Resident 29's admission Record (AR)printed on 5/07/26, the AR indicated, Resident 29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The AR indicated Resident 29 was a [AGE] year-old female with diagnosis of limitations of activities due to cerebral aneurysm (also called a brain aneurysm, is a weak, bulging area in the wall of a blood vessel in the brain. If the blood vessel ruptures, it can leak blood into the area around the brain. This type of bleeding is life-threatening and requires emergency medical treatment), cognitive communication deficit (trouble…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-07 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care to one of 20 sampled residents when Resident 38's order for incentive spirometer (a handheld, plastic device used after surgery or illness to help exercise the lungs, encourage deep breathing, and prevent lung complications like pneumonia or lung infection) was not followed.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 38 experiencing respiratory distress and a decline in health status.During a review of Resident 38's admission record indicated the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included bronchiectasis and respiratory failure [bronchiectasis is a long-term lung condition where the airways (the tubes that move air in and out of your lungs) become permanently widened, scarred, and inflamed; respiratory failure is a life-threatening condition where the lungs cannot get enough oxygen into the blood or cannot remove enough carbon dioxide (waste gas) from the body].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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure foley catheter (a thin, flexible, indwelling tube inserted through the urethra into the bladder to drain urine into a collection bag) care, monitoring and assessment were documented within the electronic health record (EHR) for one of seven sampled residents (Resident 72). This failure caused a lack of information to facilitate communication among the interdisciplinary team (IDT-a collaborative group of healthcare professionals from diverse specialties who work together to manage complex resident care) and to provide resident-centered care for Resident 72. During record review of admission record, printed on 5/7/26, Resident 72 was admitted on [DATE].During record review of Resident 72's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to guide care), dated 4/23/26, indicated Resident 72's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool used to assess mental status) score was 15 out of 15, and indicated Resident 72's cognition was…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a qualified and competent director of nursing had oversight of the facility when Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), who did not have a Registered Nursing license, assumed the director of nursing duties and during the survey, assigned Registered Nurse Supervisor/Director of Nursing (RNS)/[DON], who was not trained nor competent in the role, as director of nursing. The facility was previously cited for assigning ADON as the director of nursing and did not follow their plan of correction which was submitted to the state agency on 12/12/2024.This failure resulted unqualified nursing leadership for 15 months which resulted in nursing staff failing to follow provide adequate mental health services to Resident 1 after Resident 1's suicide attempt (see F tag 742).During a record review of facility statement of deficiencies document titled, Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Statement 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure, for residents 1-11, the scheduled (controlled medication, narcotic) medication record system was complete (all documents available) and accurate (data match). The record system included Shipping Manifests (pharmacy delivery receipt), Controlled Substance Accountability Sheets (CDR, Controlled Drug Record), Medication Administration Records (MAR, record of medication administration), and destruction logs (Narcotic Take Back Log). The facility did not have complete records. The facility did not have accurate records.These failures resulted in the potential for undetected loss and diversion (theft). During an interview, on 8/7/25 at 9:20 a.m., Medical Record Director (MRD) was asked to describe the scheduled medication accountably (records of narcotic use) procedure. Her description included pharmacy Shipping Manifests and CDRs were scanned (electronic copies). The scanned copies were retained. The scanning process started on 3/23.During a concurrent observation and interview, on 8/7/25 at 10:20 a.m., at…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0742 — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
    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 adequate and timely mental health services for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1) who attempted suicide by strangulation when facility:1. allowed Resident 1 access to the same ligature implement used in their suicide attempt for more than three months and, 2. did not provide Resident 1 with adequate follow up care when the Assistant Director of Nursing, who had been acting as director of nursing, provider and police were not informed of Resident 1's suicide attempt.This failure resulted in Resident 1's continued thoughts of suicide without appropriate care or follow up interventions for more than three months.A review of Resident 1's admission record indicated Resident 1 was admitted for hemiplegia (loss of muscle function on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (relatively mild loss of strength in the arm, leg and sometimes face on one side of the body) following cerebral infarction (death of an area of brain tissue when there, low back pain, weakness, and history of falling.During a record…

    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 · Ddisputed · IDR2026-01-02 · 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 one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of care when:Facility did not monitor Resident 1's rash on bilateral breast fold for increased spread or signs of infection according to care plan.Facility did not promptly notify Resident 1's representative that Resident 1 had rash in multiple areas, bilateral breast fold. These failures caused Resident 1 to not receive appropriate care and services to meet needs and the potential to prevent Resident 1's emotional distress and Resident 1's representative their right to be informed. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment and care guide tool), dated 6/5/25, the MDS indicated Resident 1 had no skin problems but was at risk of developing pressure ulcers/injuries. Resident 1 was confined to bed and diagnoses included End-Stage Renal Disease (a condition in which the kidneys lose the ability to remove waste and balance fluids).During an 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-05 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct an accurate assessment of one resident's functional capacity when Resident 42's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) was coded incorrectly for dental condition. This failure had the potential to cause health decline, and to inhibit or delay proper care planning and treatment. Findings: During a record review of admission Record, printed December 5, 2024, Resident 42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD, refers to a group of diseases that cause airflow blockage and breathing-related problems. It includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis), Aphasia (a brain disorder that affects how you speak and understand language) following Cerebral Infarction (death of an area of brain tissue when a blocked blood vessel prevents delivery of an adequate blood and oxygen…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 21 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-05 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to refer one resident with a serious mental disorder for level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR- a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals who have a mental disorder or intellectual disabilities are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care. PASARR requires that 1. all applicants to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility be evaluated for a serious mental disorder and/or intellectual disability; 2. be offered the most appropriate setting for their needs [in the community, a nursing facility, or acute care setting]; and 3. receive the services they need in those settings. Regulations governing PASARR are found at 42 CFR §483.100-138) screening when Resident 57's Level 1 PASARR did not accurately show the resident's diagnosed psychiatric condition. This failure had the potential for the resident to receive inappropriate or ineffective care, treatment, or services. Findings: During a record 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one out of five sampled residents (Resident 38) received the necessary services to maintain good grooming, and personal hygiene when Resident 38's shower schedule was not consistently followed and reason for refusals were not documented and acted upon. This failure resulted in Resident 38 having unmet physical, physiological, and psychological needs. Findings: A review of Resident 38's face sheet indicated Resident 38 was admitted with diagnoses that included end stage kidney disease, dependence on kidney dialysis, diabetes, and generalized muscle weakness. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to guide care), dated 10/24/24, the MDS indicated, a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS, a brief scanner to help detect cognitive impairment) score of 15 indicated no cognitive impairment. The MDS also indicated, Resident 1 required partial/moderate assistance from staff for shower/bathe self. During…

    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 · Ecited before2024-11-25 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Director of Nursing (DON) was a registered nurse (RN) for seven months. This failure resulted in an unqualified nurse being designated the DON and had the potential for inadequate supervision and management of the facility residents and nursing staff. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/25/24, at 10:04 a.m., with the DON, the DON was wearing a badge indicating they were the Director of Nursing. The DON stated they had been the DON since 3/2024 as the acting DON. The DON stated they had just finished school to be a RN and was waiting to take the National Clinical Licensure Examination (NCLEX, an examination to become a RN) to be a RN. During a concurrent phone interview and record review on 11/25/24, at 11:15 a.m., with the Administrator (Admin), the facility ' s job description for the DON was reviewed. The Admin stated the job description indicated the DON is a registered nurse who oversees and supervises the care of all residents .minimum requirements to perform this…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-17 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled resident ' s (Resident 1) brief was changed with two people helping to turn Resident 1 in the bed. This failure resulted in Resident 1 falling off the bed and suffering a right femur fracture (broken right upper leg bone). Findings: During a review of Resident 1 ' s Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool used to plan care for the resident), dated, 1/4/2022, MDS indicated two people were required to move Resident 1 to and from lying position, to turn side to side, and to position body in the bed. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/12/2023, at 10:37 a.m. in Resident 1 ' s room with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1, CNA 1 stated, CNA 1 was changing Resident 1 ' s brief on 3/21/2022, when Resident 1 fell off the bed. CNA 1 stated, Resident 1 was in her bed with side rails up at the head of the bed only. CNA 1 stated, CNA 1 was standing on one side of the bed. CNA 1 stated, she assisted Resident 1 to roll up on her side, while Resident 1 was holding the side rail…

    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 · F2023-06-09 · tag F0801 — widespread
    Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interviews, and review of facility documents, the facility failed to comply with Federal regulations related to the oversight of food service operations when the facility did not have a full-time dietitian and the requirements were not met as specified in established standards (California Code, Health and Safety Code - HSC § 1265.4) for food service managers which required, employment of a full-time, qualified dietetic supervisor when the dietitian was not full time. The lack of a qualified, competent, full-time supervisor resulted in staff not having adequate supervision, training, and knowledge to carry out Food and Nutrition Services in a safe and sanitary manner. The lack of full-time, competent oversight of food and nutrition staff placed 61 residents who received food from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness (illness caused by food contaminated with bacteria, viruses, parasites, or toxins) and/or decreased nutrient intake which had the potential to result in death and/or nutritional related medical complications. Findings: 1. There was no…

    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 · F2023-06-09 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespread
    Provide 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 observation, interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure the competency of staff when: 1. a staff did not know how to read a freezer thermometer correctly; 2. staff did not know how to test the food-contact surface sanitizer correctly; 3. staff did not know how to sanitize juice machine according to posted cleaning instructions; and 4. a staff did not label a chemical containing container. These failures had the potential to result in the kitchen not being maintained in a safe and sanitary manner leading contamination of food and utensils, and/or reduced quality of food for 61 residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/6/23, at 9:55 a.m., [NAME] 2 (C2) stated she was responsible for documenting freezer temperatures when she arrived for her shift in the morning. She stated she used the internal thermometer in the reach-in freezer to determine the temperature. Stated the freezer temperature had to be at least negative one. C2 demonstrated how she read the thermometer and showed she…

    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 · F2023-06-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespread
    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, staff interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure the planned menu was followed when: 1. Milk was not provided as shown on the lunch menu for 55; 2. Incorrect servings of food were served to10 residents who received a pureed, minced and moist, or a mechanical soft diet. These failures had the potential to result in not meeting the nutritional needs of the residents and compromising the nutritional status of the residents. Findings: Review of the policy and procedure titled Menus dated 2001, showed menus are developed following established national guidelines for nutritional adequacy. Menus meet the nutritional needs of residents in accordance with the recommended dietary allowances. Menus provide a variety of foods from the basic daily food groups and indicate standard portions at each meal. If a food group is missing from a resident's daily diet, the resident is provided an alternate means of meeting his or her nutritional needs. 1. Review of the Week 2 Therapeutic Spreadsheets dated Monday Cycle 2 2023, showed milk was listed for…

    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 · F2023-06-09 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespread
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were served palatable food when food was bland and at a low temperature. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk of decreased nutrient intake leading to weight loss and/or nutritional medical complications for 61 residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings: During observation on 6/5/23 at 1:10 p.m., a meal delivery cart holding resident trays and two test trays left the kitchen. During an observation and interview with Dietary Manager (DM) on 6/5/23 at 1:16 p.m., a regular and puree texture meal was sampled immediately following the delivery of the last resident tray. The regular tray contained chicken parmesan with marinara sauce and pasta. The puree tray contained pureed chicken parmesan and pureed zucchini. Temperatures of the food were measured with the surveyor's calibrated thermometer. The pureed chicken was 113 Fahrenheit (°F), and the pureed zucchini was 104.9 °F. The regular chicken parmesan was dry and regular pasta was very bland and dry. The pureed chicken…

    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 · F2023-06-09 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — widespread
    Ensure 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 provide: 1. an alternate for gluten (a protein found in wheat, barley, and rye) containing food for one resident (Resident 288) who had a documented gluten allergy and a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (a condition in which the lining of the large intestine (colon) and rectum become inflamed). 2. an alternate for garlic bread at a lunch meal for 61 residents who received food from the kitchen. This deficient practice had the potential to result in decreased nutrient intake leading to weight loss and/or nutrient related medical complications. Findings: Review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Menus, dated October 2017, showed if a food group is missing from a resident's daily diet, the resident is provided an alternate means of meeting his or her nutritional needs. 1. Review of the admission Record showed Resident 288 was admitted on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of ulcerative colitis. On 6/5/23 in an interview with…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-06-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for safety when: 1. Stored equipment in the kitchen was dirty and ready for use; 2. Kitchen storage areas, floors, and vents were dirty; 3. A fan in use in a food storage area was dirty; 4. Floor tiles were in poor condition; 5. Food was stored without identifying use-by-dates; 6. The ice machine was dirty. 7. A food preparation sink drain did not have an airgap (a gap between the sink drain and the drain that leads to sewage drain. This gap prevents a back-up of non potable water and/or bacteria into the sink). These failures had the potential for contamination of food resulting in food borne illness for 61 residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings: 1. An observation and interview with [NAME] 1 (C1) during the kitchen's initial tour, on 6/5/23, at 9:23 a.m., showed a blender stored on a preparation table. The blender lid had black, slimy residue on the removeable plastic insert. In addition, there was significant black slimy…

    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 · F2023-06-09 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespread
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to maintain the reach in freezer in safe operating condition. This failure had the potential for food stored in the freezer to remain frozen at all times leading to decreased food quality and food safety for 61 residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings: An observation on 6/5/23, at 9:54 a.m., showed a two-door reach-in freezer located by the dry food storeroom. There was ice build-up on inside door surface and on upper inside surface with icicles hanging. A rubber gasket on the inside of one door had over 12-inch segments at the side and bottom of the door that were separated from the door and ripped. During an interview on 6/6/23 at 12:30 p.m., with Maintenance Supervisor (MS), MS stated he was aware of ice build-up and ripped gaskets in reach-in freezer 1 for a couple of months. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Refrigerators and Freezers, dated November 2022, the P&P indicated supervisors inspect refrigerators and freezers monthly for gasket condition…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-09 · tag F0638 — pattern
    Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, for ten (Resident 19, 20, 23, 28, 53, 59, 60, 64 and 65) of twelve sampled residents that were reviewed for resident assessments, the facility failed to complete quarterly Minimum Data Set assessments (MDS) in a timely manner. (MDS is a resident assessment tool used to guide care). These failure had the potential to result in the delay of assessment of residents' needs, goals of care and inability to monitor each residents' decline and progress over time. Findings: During a record review of the following Residents' Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - a standardized assessment and screening tool), Resident 15's MDS indicated the last quarterly MDS with assessment reference date (ARD) 4/25/23 was completed 6/2/23 (37 days after ARD). {ARD is the last day of the observation period that the assessment covers for the resident, the ARD is the date of the assessment}. During a record review record review of Resident 19' Quarterly MDS, the MDS indicated, the last quarterly MDS…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
    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 resident's monthly Resident Council Meeting (RCM-a scheduled meeting where residents voice concerns and grievances to the facility, to improve residents' quality of life). This failure had the potential for residents to not be able to exercise their rights to have a monthly resident council meeting and for the facility to address the residents' concerns Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review with the Social Services Director (SS) on 6/5/23, at 10:30 AM, the SS stated, she was the previous activities director of the facility, and just recently hired to be the social services director. The SS reviewed the Resident Council Minutes (RCM) and acknowledged that RCM was not done for the month of April and May 2023. The SS confirmed the RCM should be done monthly. She stated, the facility department related to any issues or concerns were the responsible for addressing the resident's concerns. The SS acknowledged some of the issues in RCM in March 2023 were not resolved. The SS was not able to provide…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    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 develop and implement a baseline and/ or comprehensive care plan for two of two sampled resident (Resident 82, and 81) to include resident-centered plan of care within 48 hours of their admission to the facility. This failure resulted in Resident 82, and 81 to not have a baseline and/or a comprehensive plan of care during her stay at the facility. Findings: 1. During a record review of Resident 82's admission Record dated 06/06/23, the record indicated, Resident 82 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a review of Resident 82's Physician Discharge Summary dated 04/07/23, the record indicated, Resident 82 course of treatment was skilled nursing and rehabilitation and that she expired in the facility on 04/07/23. During a concurrent interview and record review with Director of Staff Development (DSD) on 06/09/23, at 8:16 a.m., Resident 82's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) including Care plans, Miscellaneous/Scanned documents were reviewed. DSD…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
    Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure one (Resident 63) of three sampled resident a non English speaker was provided functional system consistent to meet communication needs when; staff did not consistently used a qualified interpreter or translator to help Resident 63 communicate better. This failure had the potential to cause Resident 63 emotional distress. Findings: During a concurrent interview and observation on 6/5/23 at 11:19 a.m., Resident 63 was seating up in bed in her room awake, pleasant unable to communicate in English. Resident 63's husband was present at bedside. Resident 63's husband stated, they do not speak English. Resident 63's husband called daughter-in-law by phone to translate for surveyor. Daughter in-law stated, she is Resident 63's responsible party and will translate conversation between Resident 63 and surveyor during this interview process. Resident 63 stated, staff did not understand what she needed most of the time because staff used gestures to communicate with her. Resident 63 stated, nursing staff will say…

    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 · D2023-06-09 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    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, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure one of four sampled resident ( Resident 49) received treatment services to address decline in range of motion to lower extremities. This failure had the potential to cause Resident 49 pain, injury, difficulty with transfers, turning and repositioning. Findings: During an observation on 6/6/23 at 9:14 a.m., Resident 49 laid in bed, awake non communicative. Resident 49 observed to have contractures (shortening of the muscles, tendons or other tissue often leading to deformed and stiff joints) of lower extremities. During a review of the Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment screening tool used to guide care) dated 12/26/21,the MDS indicated, Resident 49 had limited range of motion and impairment on one side lower extremity, hip, knee, ankle and foot. Resident 49 had diagnoses that included Traumatic Brain Injury. During a review of the Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], the MDS indicated Resident 49 had limited range of motion 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure one of one sampled resident (Resident 17) received treatment and services when; - Resident 9's Tube Feeding (TF) was not administered as ordered by the physician. - Dietician recommendation to increase Resident 17's tube feeding was not acted upon. - The facility's policy and procedure titled, Food and Nutrition Services, revised October 2017 did not addressed who, when and how should nursing staff follow up with dietician recommendations. These failures had the potential to result in residents decline and weight loss. Findings: During a review of the Minimal Data Set (MDS - an assessment screening tool used to guide care), dated 3/31/23, the MDS indicated, Resident 17's diagnosis included Dysphagia Oropharyngeal phase (swallowing problems occurring in the mouth and or the throat) and Gastrostomy status (a surgical procedure used to insert a tube, often referred to as a G-tube, through the abdomen and into the stomach. During an…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record review, for one (Resident 9) of four sampled residents the facility failed to ensure pain assessment was completed before the administration of as needed (PRN) pain medication according to professional standard of practice when; Licensed Nurses did not assess and document Resident 9's pain characteristics that included location, severity, duration and timing of pain before the administration of PRN hydromorphone pain medications. Licensed Nurses did not document the adverse side effects of hydromorphone pain medication administered to Resident 9. According to manufacturer Hydromorphone belongs to a class of drugs called opioids, it has a rapid onset of action. Unless using for severe acute pain, opioids are not considered a drug of choice in older patients. The elderly may be particularly susceptible to respiratory and CNS depression, as well as the constipating effects of opioids {Reference: [NAME].com}. These failure had the potential to cause residents unrelieved…

    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 · D2023-06-09 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to act upon the Consultant Pharmacist's (CP) Medication Regimen Review (MRR) report for two (Resident 23 and 63) of five sampled residents when; - Resident 23 CP recommendation for the physician to consider initiating ACE inhibitor such as Lisinopril 2.5 mg daily as first-line therapy for individuals with hypertension (high blood pressure) and Diabetes Mellitus (high blood sugar) was not acted upon. - Resident 63's CP recommendation to clarify erythromycin eye ointment (an antibiotic medication) to include a stop date was not acted upon. - The facility policy and procedure titled, Medication Regimen Review, revised May 2019 did not addressed who, when and how to follow up with CP medication regimen reviews and recommendations. These failure had the potential for residents to receive unnecessary drugs and suffer adverse medication side effects. Findings: During a review of the Minimal Data Set (MDS-an assessment screening tool used to guide care), dated 4/20/23, the MDS indicated, Resident 23's diagnosis included 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe and secure storage and accurate labeling of drugs when multiple loose medication pills was observed inside drawers for one of three medication carts inspected. This failure had the potential for loss or misuse of medications and the potential to jeopardize the residents' health and safety and could cause delay in the delivery of treatment services. Findings: During an inspection and concurrent interview on 6/8/23, at 9:54 a.m., of back wing medication cart with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 2, multiple loose medication was observed scattered inside drawer 2 and drawer 3. LVN 2 then removed the loose pills from the drawers and placed in medication cups for destruction. LVN 2 stated, this was not acceptable practice. LVN 2 also stated, there was a potential risk if residents got a hold of the medications if it falls out of the drawer during medication pass. LVN 2 further added, residents can can also run out of medications before they are due for refills. During an interview on 6/8/23, at 10:25…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolated
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    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 appropriate use of antibiotic (medication for infection) for one of two sampled residents (Resident 63) when facility did not monitor and reviewed antibiotic eye ointment for a stop date. This failure had the potential for Resident 63 to take unnecessary antibiotics which could lead to antibiotic resistance. Findings: During a review of the order summary report dated 5/22/23, the order summary report indicated, physician prescribed Resident 63 to receive Erythromycin Ophthalmic Ointment 5mg/gm instill 0.5 inch in right eye three times a day for eye infection. During a review of the Medication Administration Records (MRRs) for the month of May and June 2023, MRRs indicated, Resident 63 was administered Erythromycin eye ointment in right eye three times a day for eye infection from 5/22/23 through 6/7/23. During a review of the Consultant Pharmacist's (CP) Medication Regimen Review (MRR), dated 5/1/23 and 5/27/23, MRR indicated, Resident 63 had an order for erythromycin ointment that was subject to stop order policy.…

    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

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

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 52.9+2.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Anchor Post AcuteAiken, SC 1 of 5Arbor Post AcuteChico, CA 1 of 5Artesia Palms Care CenterArtesia, CA 1 of 5Arvin Post AcuteArvin, CA 1 of 5Ashland Post AcuteAshland, OR 1 of 5Bakersfield Post AcuteBakersfield, CA 1 of 5Beachwood Post-Acute & RehabSanta Monica, CA 1 of 5Brookshire Post AcuteDenver, CO 1 of 5Brushy Creek Post AcuteGreer, SC 1 of 5Buckeye Care And RehabilitationLancaster, OH 1 of 5Carnegie Park Post AcutePittsburgh, PA 1 of 5Cascade Terrace Post AcutePortland, OR 1 of 5Centennial Post AcuteAnchorage, AK 1 of 5Chandler Creek Post AcuteGreer, SC 1 of 5Chehalem Post AcuteNewberg, OR 1 of 5Country Hills Post AcuteEl Cajon, CA 1 of 5Delhi Post-AcuteCincinnati, OH 1 of 5Dublin Post AcuteDublin, OH 1 of 5Edisto Post AcuteOrangeburg, SC 1 of 5Evan Terrace Post AcuteMcMinnville, OR 1 of 5Forest Acres Post AcuteColumbia, SC 1 of 5Grandview Post AcuteCookeville, TN 1 of 5Great Plains Post AcuteWichita, KS 1 of 5Hemet Hills Post AcuteHemet, CA 1 of 5Highland Hills Post AcutePittsburgh, PA 1 of 5Highline Post AcuteDenver, CO 1 of 5Johns Island Post AcuteJohns Island, SC 1 of 5Karcher Post AcuteNampa, ID 1 of 5Kennedy Care CenterLos Angeles, CA 1 of 5Kern River Transitional CareBakersfield, CA 1 of 5Lakeview Post AcuteFlorissant, MO 1 of 5Marion Valley Post AcuteMarion, OH 1 of 5Mirage Post AcuteLancaster, CA 1 of 5Monroeville Post AcuteMonroeville, PA 1 of 5Napa Post AcuteNapa, CA 1 of 5North Royalton Post AcuteParma, OH 1 of 5Northstar Post AcuteCarson City, NV 1 of 5Overland Park Post AcuteOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Pikes Peak Post AcuteColorado Springs, CO 1 of 5Ridgeway Post AcutePetaluma, CA

Showing 40 of 273; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
PROVIDENCE GROUP INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 01/11/2023
HADLEY, MATTHEWIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2023
APT, FREDERICKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/11/2023
HANCOCK, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/11/2023
MITCHELL, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/11/2023
MURRAY, JASONIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/11/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$11.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+4.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$584K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 5%Medicare 1%Other / private 94%

This home reported $584K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

$508per resident / day
operating cost
$15,456per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$530per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 055434. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-07, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next