Hayward Hills Health Care Center
1768 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 74 certified beds · (510) 538-4424 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 11.2% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.0% | 4.0% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.4% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.1% | 1.6% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.7% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.7% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.4% | 4.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.6% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 15.2% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.6% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.7% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.28 | 2.25 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.75 | 1.57 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
45.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 65.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 29 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 45.8%CMS range 31.8–60.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.8%CMS range 6.0–15.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 65.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 65.5% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 65.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 85.7% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 6.7% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.9%CMS range 3.9–15.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.33 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 74 beds and averages 66.4 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.21 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.64 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.60 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 3.99 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.30 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.59 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gdisputed · IDR2024-07-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement measures to safely transfer one of two sampled residents (Resident 1) when a staff transferred Resident 1 from bed to a shower chair using a Hoyer lift (mechanical device that lifts a resident for transfer, the resident will be suspended in the air in a sling while being move from a bed to a chair) without assistance from another staff member. This failure resulted in Resident 1 falling and sustaining multiple injuries: Multiple rib fractures (broken ribs), Trace Right-Sided Pneumothorax (presence of air in the space between the lung and chest wall leading to breathing difficulty and chest pain), Left Femur Peri-Prosthetic Fracture (broken bone around the artificial joint of the left thigh); and caused Resident 1's pain, emotional trauma, and an increased fear in Hoyer lift transfers. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's Face Sheet, printed July 2024, the Face Sheet indicated Resident 1 was a long-term resident since September 2014 and was readmitted to the facility in October 2023 with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to meet professional standards of quality for one of two sampled Residents (Resident 7) when nursing staff did not follow the physician's order for Resident 7's oxygen therapy. This failure had the potential to cause health complications to Resident 7. Findings: During a review of Resident 7's face sheet, undated, indicated Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].During a review of Resident 7's Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment tool), dated 4/20/26, indicated Resident 7 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- assessment tool used by facilities to screen and identify memory, orientation, and judgement status of the resident) score of 2 out of 15. Meaning, Resident 7 had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS also indicated Resident 7 had multiple diagnoses that included anemia (when a body doesn't have enough healthy red blood cells to carry oxygen to organs and tissues) and interstitial pulmonary…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of two sampled residents (Resident 27 and 80) received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice when:1. Direct Care Staff did not follow physician's orders to assess Resident 27 for bleeding and did not follow up with Resident 27's physician regarding her orders to hold or to restart Eliquis (an anticoagulant medication used to prevent and treat blood clots, and lower stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation, an irregular and often very rapid heart rhythm) for a period of over six months. Resident 27 experienced extensive deep vein thrombosis (DVT), through the bilateral (having two sides) common femoral veins (a major deep blood vessel in the groin) through the popliteal veins (a major deep vein located behind the knee responsible for carrying oxygen-depleted blood away from the lower leg).2. Facility staff did not explain and/or document the risks and benefits of refusing to receive acute care at the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store and label medications and enteral feeding supplements for nutrition in accordance with professional standards when:1a. Expired, discontinued, and compromised drugs and biologicals in medication storage room were not disposed.1b. Pharmaceutical waste container filled with unused drugs was not labeled with date of first use and dispose of by.1c. Two full drug buster (medication disposal system) containers were not discarded.2. Enteral feeding supplements, nutritional shake and meal replacement products were not stored within the required storage room temperature range of 59 F to 77 F (Fahrenheit - temperature scale)3. Medication cart 4 was left unlocked and unattended on two separate occasions.4. Four of five medication carts observed had multiple loose unidentified pills scattered inside the drawers.Findings: 1a. During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/9/26 at 3:13 p.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON) in medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain safe frozen and refrigerated food storage practices for two out of two freezers and three out of three refrigerators in the kitchen. Facility did not store foods in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for three of three residents (Resident 22, 30 and 53) when foods from outside sources was stored in one of four facility refrigerators.Freezer 1 had no documented temperature for two mornings (AM) and six evenings (PM) and meat freezer, produce refrigerator, vegetable refrigerator and refrigerator 1 did not have a documented temperature.These failures had the potential to result in foodborne illnessFindings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/8/26 at 9:33 a.m. with the Dietary Manger (DM), in the kitchen, one unlabeled freezer was observed with a document titled Freezer Temperature Log for Ice Cream/Supplement, dated 6/26, posted on the refrigerator door. There were no temperature logs posted on the meat freezer, produce refrigerator, vegetable refrigerator and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0813 — patternHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store foods in accordance with its policy on food brought in from outside for three of three sampled residents (Resident 22, 30 and 53). Resident 22's food was unlabeled with date stored, Resident 30's food was labeled only with room number and was stored longer than 72 hours and Resident 53's food was stored longer than 72 hours in resident food refrigerator.These failures placed Resident 30, 53 and 22 at risk for food borne illnesses.During an interview on 6/9/26 at 3:20 p.m. with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 6, CNA 6 stated CNAs and nurses were responsible for storing food from outside sources in the refrigerator. CNA 6 stated CNAs and nurses were also responsible for writing the resident's name and date the food was received on the container. During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/9/26 at 3:22 p.m. with CNA 6, a paper printed with the words RESIDENT FOOD ONLY. ALL FOOD MUST BE DATED AND LABELED. FOOD OLDER THAN 48 HOURS OR UNLABELED WILL BE THROWN OUT! was posted on the black refrigerator…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program when:1.Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA 5) did not perform hand hygiene when serving meals to two of five sampled residents (Resident 47 and 60) after touching the doorway stop banner (a bright yellow, high visibility banner with a red STOP message that mounts across doorways or halls using quick release straps or Velcro to visually deter wandering while staying collapsible for safety).2. Restorative Nursing Assistant (RNA 2) did not perform hand hygiene after touching Resident 47's finished plate then touching Resident 60's top part of her cup. 3. Infection Preventionist (IP 1) did not provide outbreak (sickness that is being spread to one or more people in a short span of time) daily line list (a list of affected persons used to track the outbreak) per public health recommendations.4. The silent knight pill crusher (a medical-grade device used to grind solid pills into a fine powder) on top of medication cart 5 had gray and white powder that has dried into a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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, facility failed to complete and maintain documentation for three of five sampled residents (Residents 14, 28 and 46) for Influenza (commonly known as Flu, a highly contagious viral infection that attacks your nose, throat, and lungs) and Pneumonia (PNA, an infection in one or both lungs that causes the tiny air sacs to become swollen and filled with fluid) vaccination (getting a shot to help the body safely build a defense against a specific harmful disease) This failure of having incomplete documentation had a potential of missed or delayed vaccinations to Residents 14, 28 and 46.Findings: During a record review of Resident 14's undated Resident Face sheet indicated Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record review of Resident 28's undated Resident Face sheet indicated Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record review of Resident 46's undated Resident Face sheet indicated Resident 46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0887 — patternEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 three of five sampled residents (Residents 14, 46, 29) had complete and accurate records for COVID- 19 (highly contagious illness of the lungs caused by virus) immunization (getting a shot to help the body safely build a defense against a specific, harmful disease). This failure resulted in incomplete immunization records for Resident 14, 46 and 29; and placed them at risk for not having been immunized for COVID-19. Findings: During a record review of Resident 14's undated Resident Face sheet indicated Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record review of Resident 28's undated Resident Face sheet indicated Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record review of Resident 46's undated Resident Face sheet indicated Resident 46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a concurrent interview and record review on 6/9/26 at 1:52 p.m., with Infection Preventionist (IP 1), Electronic Health Record (EHR)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-11 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 of two sampled residents (Resident 28) was free from physical abuse when Resident 59 grabbed Resident 28's left arm in the facility hallway. This failure resulted in Resident 28 having a bruise (when blood pools under your skin after an injury, causes discoloration) and pain on the left arm. During a record review of Resident 28's admission record, the record indicated Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The record indicated Resident 28 has diagnoses of dementia (a loss of brain function affecting memory, thinking, language, judgment, or behavior). During a record review of Resident 28's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool used in identifying problems to be addressed in plan of care), dated 03/15/26, the MDS indicated, Resident 28 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, is a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status in regard to attention, orientation, and ability to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-11 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide a contracture (permanent tightening and shortening of muscles, tendons, ligaments, or skin) assessment and range of motion (ROM, full movement potential of a joint) exercises for one of five sampled residents (Resident 26) when Resident 26 was not screened for left and right hands contractures on an ongoing basis.This failure placed Resident 26 at risk for further decline in range of motion of left and right hands. Findings:During a review of Resident 26's Face Sheet, dated 6/11/26, the Face Sheet indicated, Resident 26 was admitted in the facility on 9/20/24 with a diagnosis of parkinsonism (an umbrella term for a group of nervous system disorders that cause motor symptoms like tremors, slowed movement, rigid muscles, and balance issues), dementia (an umbrella term for a decline in mental ability severe enough to interfere with daily life) and personal history of other diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue (a documented past medical record of conditions affecting bones, joints,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 23 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain complete and readily accessible medical records for one of three sampled residents (Resident 81), when Resident 81's medical record lacked required physician documentation at the time of review.This failure had the potential to result in staff not having essential information needed to understand Resident 81's overall care needs, which could delay or compromise safe and effective care.During a record review of Resident 81's Face Sheet, the Face Sheet indicated Resident 81 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 4/18/26.During a record review of Resident 81's medical record, Resident 81's medical record contained no physician progress notes or a History and Physical (a doctor's complete health report or assessment of the patient) for Resident 81's stay at the facility.During a concurrent interview and record review on 6/11/26 at 3:30 p.m., with facility's Regional Director of Clinical Operations (RDCO), Resident 81's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-16 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — widespreadEnsure 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 reviews the facility failed to ensure the Pharmacy Consultant (PC) provided the Medical Regimen Review (MRR) recommendations and Executive Summary to the facility within the timeframes established in the facility's policies and procedures for four out of four months and the facility did not act on the reports within 30 days for five of 10 sampled residents (Residents 56, 26, 2, 66, and 54). This failure had the potential to result in Residents not receiving therapeutic recommendation on drug therapies. Findings: During a telephone interview on 8/15/24 at 9:19 a.m., with PC and Regional Supervisor (RS), PC stated that PC visits the facility once a month and completes the MRR for the month and submits the report within 48 hours. During a telephone interview on 8/15/24 at 11:17 a.m., with the Medical Director (MD), MD stated the MRR reports and recommendations were being submitted late. MD also stated it is important to get the MRR reports in a timely manner so, medical and nursing staff can have informed recommendations regarding Resident's medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-16 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to clean dishes in a safe and sanitary method when the dishwasher did not reach the required temperature. This failure had the potential to result in 65 residents being served food on dishes that were not sanitized, which could lead to the spread of disease. Findings: During an observation on 8/13/24 at 10:41 a.m. in the kitchen, the highest temperature reached by the dishwasher was 110 degrees (°) Fahrenheit (F, a unit to measure temperature). During a second observation on 8/13/24 at 10:44 a.m., the highest temperature reached by the dishwasher was 110°F. During a concurrent observation and interview on 8/13/24 at 11:11 a.m. with the Dietary Manager (DM), it was observed that the highest temperature reached by the dishwasher was 110°F. The Dietary Manager stated she would run the dishwasher again. During the second run of the dishwasher, the highest temperature reached was 110°F. The DM stated that the minimum safe temperature for the dishwasher is 120°F. During a concurrent interview and record review on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of residents by failing to ensure the proper storage and destruction of narcotic (a drug that relieves pain and induces drowsiness) medication and the delivery of the correct dose of medication as ordered by the physician when: 1. Narcotic medication was stored in an unlocked drawer in Director of Nursing (DON) office, with 7 missing narcotic medications. 2. Narcotic medication was missing during a random narcotic audit for two of three sampled residents (Residents 24 and 64). 3. Resident 24 was undermedicated with diazepam (medication used to treat anxiety, muscle spasms, seizures, and alcohol withdrawal). 4. Resident 29 received the incorrect dose of Lactulose (medication used to treat constipation and to lower ammonia level in the blood for patients with liver disease). These deficient practices had the potential to result in drug diversion (illegal distribution or abuse of prescription drugs or their use for unintended purposes) and inaccurate drug dosages…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-16 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure it was free from medication error rate of 5% or greater during the medication pass observation. The facility had a cumulative medication error rate of 30% consisting of nine errors where medications were not administered in accordance with physician's orders, in a sample size of 30 opportunities for error. These deficient practices had the potential to result in adverse consequences. Findings During an observation on 8/12/24 at 4:18 p.m. with Registered Nurse (RN) 1, RN 1 prepared medication for Resident 29 to be delivered via gastrostomy tube (G-tube, a tube inserted through a surgically created hole through the abdomen to deliver food/medications/fluids directly into the stomach) during evening medication schedule. During preparation, RN 1 placed clonazepam 1.5 milligrams, Ducolax stool softener 100 milligrams, Calcium 500 milligram oyster shell, Senna tablet 8.6 milligram, multivitamin with iron and folic acid, and Vitamin B1 100 milligrams and placed in a plastic bag and pounded the medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the safe storage, labeling, open date, expiration date, and disposal of medications and vaccinations. Medications and vaccines were not stored and maintained within standards for safety when: 1. Over the counter eye drops were not labeled with resident's name. 2. Two open inhalers did not have opened dates and one open inhaler was expired and still being used. 3. One aplisol multidose TB vial opened without a documented open date with instructions to discard product after 30 days of being opened. 4. Twenty-one vaccine syringes, stored in medication refrigerator, expired 6/30/2024. 5. Intravenous (IV) heparin flushes were expired 7/20/24 in the emergency kit (E-kit is a limited supply of medication and intravenous supplies for urgent use in a sealed box.) 6. One e-kit was unsealed and had a documented open date of May 2024. 7. Medication/vaccine refrigerator temperature was not monitored twice daily and not consistently monitored…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards of food service safety when: 1. Expired chocolate pudding was observed in the refrigerator. 2. Uncovered frozen soup with white crystals on top was observed in the freezer. These failures had the potential to result in food-borne illnesses or unpalatable food. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 8/12/24 at 9:39 a.m., frozen soup that was not securely covered was observed in the freezer. DM stated that the soup was open and appeared freezer burned. DM stated that a potential consequence of freezer burned food is that it might affect the taste of the food when served. During a concurrent observation and interview with the DM on 8/12/24 at 9:52 a.m., chocolate pudding was observed in the refrigerator with a preparation date of 8/4/24 and a use by date of 8/10/24. DM stated that the chocolate pudding is expired. DM stated that expired foods should not be in the refrigerator or served to residents.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-16 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report alleged abuse or mistreatment for Resident 32 to the appropriate authorities. This failure had the potential to result in the event not being investigated completely, which could lead to further events of abuse or mistreatment. Findings: During an interview on 8/14/24 at 9:41 a.m. with Resident 32, Resident 32 stated approximately one year ago, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CAN) 1 touched her in a way that she felt was inappropriate. Resident 32 stated she felt very, very uncomfortable about the incident and she reported the event to facility staff a short time after it happened. Resident 32 stated after the event, she did not like having CNA 1 near her because she felt uncomfortable. During a record review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for Resident 32, the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) was reviewed. The MDS, dated 7/21/23, indicated Resident 32 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-16 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete the required 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) for one of three sampled residents (Resident 63). 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.) This failure had the potential to result in residents not receiving appropriate care for their mental disorders or intellectual disabilities. During a review of Resident 63's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 63 was initially admitted to the facility in January 2024 with multiple diagnoses, including developmental disorder of scholastic skills (a type of intellectual…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 of two sampled residents (Resident 2) was free from abuse when: There was no care planning intervention developed, implemented, and monitored for effectiveness after the first incident of physical abuse to Resident 2 by Resident 1. This failure resulted in further physical abuse to Resident 2, 21 days after the initial abuse by Resident 1. This failure also had the potential to expose other residents to an environment lacking protection and safety from abuse that may result in injuries and psychosocial distress, compromising their health and safety. During a review of face sheet for Resident 1, the face sheet indicated, Resident 1 was originally admitted [DATE], re-admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included stroke with R sided weakness, hypertension, and depression. During a review of the Minimum data set (MDS, a resident assessment tool) dated 11/29/23, the MDS indicated a brief interview for mental status (BIMS, a short…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-06 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop an individualized comprehensive care plan with measured objectives and specific interventions for one of two sampled residents (Resident 2) when there was no care plan to address the physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing of Resident 2 after two cases of abuse. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 2 ' s needs not to be identified and negatively impact his physical, mental, and psychosocial functioning. Findings: During a review of Resident 1 ' s Face Sheet, the Face sheet indicated Resident 1 was originally admitted [DATE] and re-admitted in February 2023 with diagnoses that included stroke with right sided weakness, high blood pressure, and depression. During a review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan.), dated 11/29/23, the MDS indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, is a scoring system used…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADLS,Activities of daily living are those needed for self-care and mobility and include activities such as bathing, dressing, grooming, oral care, ambulation, toileting, eating, transferring, and communicating.) to one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), when Resident 1 did not receive schedules showers for nine weeks and fingernails were long with brown matter underneath the nail. This failure placed Resident 1 feeling not cared for and neglected. Findings: During a review of Resident 1 ' s Face Sheet, dated October 2023, the Face sheet indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in October 2023 with diagnoses to include left sided weakness. During a review of Resident 1 ' s Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan.), dated 1/6/24, the MDS indicated, Resident 1 ' s Brief Interview for Mental (BIMS, is a scoring system used to determine the resident ' s cognitive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-06-23 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had a safe and comfortable environment when; 1. Resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]'s room temperature was above 81 degrees Fahrenheit (F). 2. Resident 59's bed was broken. 3. Closet doors for 12 of 70 residents (Residents 56, 36, 60, 41, 64, 13, 118, 119, 40, 62, 48, 10) did not close. 4. Built in dresser drawers for 12 of 70 residents (Residents 53, 36, 60, 41, 12, 18, 118, 119, 40, 62, 48, 10) were covered in thick, textured paint making them difficult to open and close and were dirty inside. 5. The automatic patio door in lobby was non-operational. These deficient practices did not ensure a homelike environment and had the potential to cause discomfort from high environmental temperatures inside the facility. Findings: 1. During an interview on 6/21/22 at 10:25 a.m., Resident 52 stated the temperature in room [ROOM NUMBER] was too hot., and the Air-conditioning (AC) system was not working properly. Resident 52 further…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-06-23 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide four (Residents 2, 23, 26 and 29 ) sampled residents restorative nursing care (RNA). No RNA services were provided for Resident 2's lower extremities and contractures (hardening or shortening of a muscle) and no splint was applied for Resident 23's left hand. For Resident 26, no ambulation was provided or Resident 29's range of motion (ROM) to the upper extremities, all of which were ordered by the physician and according to the residents' plan of care. These deficient practices had the potential to cause a decrease in Residents 2, 23, 23, and 29 ROM. Findings: 1. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment screening tool used to guide care) dated 3/5/22, indicated Resident 2's Basic Interview of mental status (BIMS) score was 8 (meaning moderate cognitive impairment). Resident 2 had limited ROM and impairment to the upper (shoulder, elbow, wrist, and hand) and lower extremity hip knee, ankle and foot. The diagnoses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-06-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards of food service safety when: 1. Dietary Aide (DA) 1 did not wear a hair net while inside the kitchen. 2. An opened container of syrup was stored inside the refrigerator beyond its use-by date. 3. Storage bins for rice, lentils and food thickener had dusty covers. 4. Soft and sprouted potatoes were stored. 5. A dented seven-pound can of chocolate pudding was stored together with non-dented canned food items in the dry storage area. These failures had the potential to result in food-borne illnesses. Findings: During initial kitchen tour observation and concurrent interview with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) on 6/20/22 at 10:25 a.m., the following were observed; 1. DA 1 did not wear a hair net while inside the kitchen. 2. There was an opened container of syrup with a use-by date of 5/6/22. CDM stated she was responsible in checking the refrigerators making sure all food items beyond their use-by dates were thrown out. CDM further stated 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.
- Potential for harm · E2022-06-23 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Air-conditioning (AC) system on A side was cooling when residents' rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] air temperature was 83 degrees. {Acceptable air temperature ranges between 71 degrees to 81 degrees Fahrenheit(F)} This deficient practice had the potential to cause residents discomfort and susceptible to heat exhaustion. Findings: During an interview on 6/21/22 at 10:25 a.m., Resident 52 stated that the temperature in rooms on A side was too hot. Resident 52 stated the AC system was not working properly, reported this to the nurse and was transferred to another room. Resident 52 further stated he was concerned for other residents. During rounds on A side on 6/21/22 at 11:55 a.m., and accompanied by the Regional Maintenance Director (RMD), rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]'s air temperature was 83 degrees F. RMD stated the facility had no maintenance supervisor and will check the AC for proper functioning. During an interview on 6/21/22 at 12:47 p.m.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-06-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement or develop the Comprehensive Plan of Care policy and procedure for the following three (Resident 37, 56 and 57) of 22 sampled residents when; -Resident 56's care plan was not developed to ensure safe smoking interventions were implemented. For example, an apron to protect clothing and self against burns. -Resident 57 did not have a care plan to address an impairment of the lower extremities. - Resident 37 had no care plan developed for range of motion. These deficient practices had the potential for residents to not receive care and treatment services based on care assessment needs. Findings: 1. During an interview on 6/22/22 at 8:18 a.m., Resident 56 stated he was a smoker and smoked cigarettes as scheduled. Review of Resident 56's Significant change in status Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment and care screening tool used to guide care), dated 11/7/21, indicated Resident 56's diagnoses included seizure disorder or epilepsy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-23 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review, the licensed nursing staff routinely administered pain medication in the absence of pain for one of 22 sampled residents (Resident 7). Resident 7 was ordered Morphine (an opioid/narcotic), twice a day for moderate pain. Staff routinely administered the narcotic when the resident denied having pain. Staff also continued to administer the medication when Resident 7 had become lethargic. This failure resulted in respiratory depression, and unnecessary admission to the hospital. Findings: Record review on 6/22/2022 of the document Resident Face Sheet showed the facility admitted Resident 7 on 3/22/2021. The diagnoses included arthritis. Record review on 6/23/2022 of the document, Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool for planning care) dated 3/14/2022, showed Resident 7 had clear speech, was able to express her ideas and wants and understood what was said to her. During the initial rounds on 6/20/2022 at 11:30 a.m., Resident 7 was observed awake, sitting up in bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-23 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, for one of one sampled resident (Resident 29) reviewed for dialysis (process when a machine filters the blood of wastes when the kidneys are not healthy enough to do it), the facility failed to ensure that a phosphate binder (binds/attaches to some of the phosphate in food reducing one's blood phosphorus levels) was administered as ordered by the physician. This failure had the potential to result in increased blood phosphorus (mineral) levels. Findings: Review of Resident 29's Resident Face Sheet indicated Resident 29 was initially admitted with diagnoses that included end stage kidney failure, diabetes mellitus (abnormal levels of blood sugar), and dependence on hemodialysis. Review of Resident 29's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) dated 4/19/22 indicated Resident 29 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool for resident's orientation to time and capacity to remember) score of 15, meaning cognitively intact. Furthermore, Resident 29 required staff supervision and set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-23 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure two sampled residents (Resident 2 and 29) were free from unnecessary drugs when; -Resident 2 was administered Clonazepam (Klonopin- antianxiety) without adequate monitoring of behavior manifestations and medication side effects. -Resident 29 was administered Remeron (antidepressant) medication without appropriate indication and gradual dose reduction. These failures had the potential for residents to receive unnecessary medications and adverse medication side effects. Findings: Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment screening tool used to guide care) dated 3/5/22 indicated Resident 2's Basic Interview of mental status (BIMS) score was 8 (meaning moderate cognitive impairment). Resident 2 had no behavioral symptoms. Resident 2 diagnoses included, anxiety disorder (a mental health disorder characterized by feelings of worry, anxiety or fear that are strong enough to interfere with one's daily activities). During an observation on 6/20/22 at 11:42 a.m., Resident 2 was in bed awake, verbal with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-23 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure 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, for one of three sampled residents (Resident 29) reviewed for food concerns, the facility failed to provide food at a safe and appetizing temperature when Resident 29 was served a lunch tray that had been sitting at the bedside for two hours or more. This failure had the potential to result in food borne illness and resulted in Resident 29 being served cold food. Findings: Review of Resident 29's Resident Face Sheet indicated Resident 29 had been known to the facility since 7/21/17 with diagnoses that included diabetes (abnormal levels of blood sugar), major depressive disorder (persistently depressed mood), and dependence on hemodialysis (treatment to filter water and waste from a patient's blood when the kidneys are not working normally). Review of Resident 29's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) dated 4/19/22 indicated Resident 29 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool for resident's orientation to time and capacity to remember) score of 15, meaning cognitively…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-23 · tag F0825 — isolatedProvide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensed staff did not provide the necessary rehabilitative services for one of 22 sampled residents. (Resident 25). Resident 25 had bilateral foot drop (inability to lift the front part of the foot causing the toes to drag on the ground which may be due to muscular problems or other underlying issues). Staff had not supported Resident 25's feet with a splint and there were no RNA (Restorative Nursing Assistant) visits documented in the clinical record. This failure resulted in the potential decrease in muscle strength in her feet and general range of motion. Findings: Record review on 6/22/2022 of the document, Resident Face Sheet showed diagnoses that included Joint Derangement (disturbance in the normal resting position of the joint that results in obstruction of movement). Review of the document, MDS 3.0 Nursing Home Quarterly . (resident assessment) dated 4/12/2022, showed Resident 25 was unable to walk, was bed-bound, and required extensive care from staff for dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. The Functional…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-06-23 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, for one of four (Resident 49) sampled residents reviewed for advanced directives, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete and accurate when Resident 49's Physician Order for Life -Sustaining Treatment (POLST, a form that gives seriously-ill patients control over end-of-life care decisions including medical care, prevents unwanted treatments and ensure patient's wishes are honored) was incomplete and not signed by Resident 49 or the Resident Representative. This failure had the potential to result in unwanted treatment and medical interventions and not honoring Resident 49's wishes for end-of-life care. Findings: Review of Resident 49's Resident Face Sheet indicated Resident 49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder (a mental illness), visual loss, history of breast cancer, congestive heart failure (progressive disorder affecting pumping power of the heart muscle), and dyspnea (difficult or labored…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to MARINER HEALTH CARE — 17 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 4.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 16 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GC OPERATING COMPANY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/09/2019 |
| GRANCARE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/21/2005 |
| MARINER HEALTH CARE INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/21/2015 |
| MHC HOLDING COMPANY | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/21/2005 |
| MHC WEST HOLDING COMPANY | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/21/2005 |
| NATIONAL SENIOR CARE, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/21/2005 |
| GRUNSTEIN, EMILY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/06/2019 |
| AGAPAY, ERIKA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/06/2025 |
| SARCAUGA, DENNIS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/06/2025 |
| YAP, EDWINDA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2023 |
| UTRATA, PETR | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/09/2017 |
| HAYWARD HILLS OPERATING COMPANY GP LLC | Organization | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 12/21/2005 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
7 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 84% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 056447. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-11, 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.