La Mesa Healthcare Center
3780 Massachusetts Avenue, La Mesa, CA 91941 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 94 certified beds · (619) 465-1313 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- 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
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 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 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 5.8% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.4% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 7.6% | 7.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.3% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 0.0% | 9.8% | 16.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.2% | 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 | 0.9% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 5.1% | 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 table | 5.0% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 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 | 25.3% | 23.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.2% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.76 | 2.25 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.25 | 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.
58.8% 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 252 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 75.6% 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 131 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 0.85 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 95% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs 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 | 58.8%CMS range 53.9–64.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.3%CMS range 7.8–13.3 | 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 | 75.6% | 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 | 71.0% | 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 | 59.5% | 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 | 98.8% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.5% | 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 | 7.5%CMS range 5.2–11.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.32 | 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 94 beds and averages 89.5 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 4.12 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.61 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 3.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.25 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% 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
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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-06 · 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 a care plan to protect Resident 1 from further claims of lost personal funds when the resident alleged his cash was stolen from his personal locked safe.As a result, Resident 1 was potentially exposed to feeling decreased sense of security.Findings:On 5/5/26 at 12:25 P.M., an onsite investigation was conducted to investigate a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) regarding an alleged stolen cash of $3000 from Resident '1 personal safe. A review of Resident 1's admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder - a mental health condition triggered by experiencing or witnessing a terrifying, life-threatening event). A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, a comprehensive assessment tool) dated 3/5/26, indicated the resident's BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) was 15 out of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact (no memory, focus, or judgment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff adhered to infection prevention and control practices for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2) when:Resident 2's urinary catheter and tubing (a flexible, hollow tube inserted into the bladder to drain and collect urine) was touching the floor and was not placed inside the catheter bag (fabric bag used to conceal urinary collection bag). This failure had the potential for cross-contamination (spread of germs and bacteria) and posed an infection to residents, staff, and visitors.Findings:A review of admission Record for Resident 2 indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included Acute Kidney Failure (kidneys suddenly can't filter waste products from the blood). During a facility tour on 4/29/26 at 11:10 A.M., Resident 2 was observed inside the room with a Foley catheter drainage bag touching the floor beside the bed where it remained for an undetermined amount of time. On 4/29/26…
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 · D2025-09-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Deficient Practice StatementBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff report an allegation of financial abuse one of two residents (Resident 1) reviewed for abuse. As a result, Resident 1's report of stolen money was not reported to the Department in a timely manner, which delayed the investigation. Findings:On 8/15/25 at 11:52 A.M., The department received a complaint regarding Resident 1's money for the amount of $ 4700 dollars stolen by an unknown certified nursing assistant (CNA) and that the facility Administrator (ADM) told Resident 1 the facility was not responsible.On 8/15/25 a review of the Facility's admission Record (AR) was conducted. The facility AR indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Aftercare following Joint Replacement.On 8/21/25 at 12 noon, an interview with Resident 1 was conducted. Resident 1 stated he took out his $ 3200 dollars total in large $100 bills from the business office on 5/30/25 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 · E2025-03-27 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — patternProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility staff failed to consistently monitor and document urine output (UO) per the facility's policy, for four of six sampled residents (7, 10, 11 and 12) with a urinary catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to aid in urine flow). In addition, there was no urinary catheter care order for Residents 7, and 12. These failures had the potential for residents 7, 10, 11 and 12 to have urinary retention and develop urinary tract infection (UTI). Findings: 1a. Resident 7 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included sepsis (a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection), per the facility's admission Record. Resident 7's attending physician completed Resident 7's history and physical (H & P) dated 2/13/25. The H & P indicated, Resident 7 was not able to make own decisions. On 3/24/25 at 9:32 A.M., an observation and an interview of Resident 7 was conducted in her room. A urinary catheter was attached 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 · Ecited before2025-03-27 · 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 ensure safe and sanitary measures were met in the kitchen during dietary operations, according to standards of practice when: 1. One outdated container of sour cream was not discarded and still stored for use and consumption. 2. Personal clothing items that belonged to staff were hanging on the food container carts. These failures had the potential to expose residents to unsafe and unsanitary food practices that could lead to widespread foodborne illnesses. Findings: 1. On 3/24/25 at 8:19 A.M., a concurrent observation and interview was conducted with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM). One container of sour cream was labeled with a use by date (when food should be consumed) of 3/22/25. The CDM stated the sour cream container should have been thrown away on or before the use by date to prevent residents from developing any foodborne illness if they consumed food items past the use by date. On 3/25/25 at 10:01 A.M., an interview was conducted with the Registered Dietitian (RD). The RD acknowledged that 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 · D2025-03-27 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to address resident's needs for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2) when Resident 2's lower denture was not applied during meals. This failure had the potential to affect Resident 2's well-being, comfort, and safety while dining. Findings: Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included a history of dementia (loss of memory), muscle weakness, and communication deficit, per the admission Record. A review of Resident 2's nursing care plan (NCP; document that outlines the nursing care required for a specific patient) dated 12/21/21, indicated that Resident 2 had upper and lower dentures that needed to be worn during meals, and removed at night. An observation was conducted on 3/24/25 at 9:34 A.M. inside Resident 2's room. Resident 2 was eating without her dentures in place. A lower denture was observed inside a denture cup placed on the table. A follow-up observation and interview was conducted 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 · D2025-03-27 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the central venous catheter (a tube inserted into a large vein near the heart to allow for long-term access to the bloodstream for medications, fluids, blood draws, and other treatments) was changed and monitored for two of two sampled residents (292 and 297). This failure had the potential for complications related to intravenous (IV - method of delivering fluids, medications, or nutrients directly into the bloodstream through a vein) therapy. Findings: Per the facility's admission record, Resident 292 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included right ankle and right foot osteomyelitis (infection of the bone). A review of Resident 292's physician's orders indicated, on 3/20/25 an order was made to change IV dressing every day every Sunday. On 3/24/25 at 10:45 A.M., an observation and interview were conducted with Resident 292 in her room. Resident 292 had an IV line on the right upper arm. Resident 292 stated a nurse…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-27 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 interventions to prevent the redevelopment of pressure injuries (skin damaged by lack of movement for staying in a position for too long) and accurately assessed residents for skin injury for two of three residents reviewed for pressure injuries (Resident 16 and Resident 20). As a result, Resident 16 redeveloped a pressure injury on her left buttock and Resident 20 developed a new pressure injury on her left buttock. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 16's admission Record indicated Resident 16 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included generalized muscle weakness. Resident 16's attending physician completed Resident 16's history and physical (H&P) dated 6/14/24. The H & P indicated Resident 16 was able to make own decisions. Resident 16's minimum data set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool), completed on 1/30/25, indicated Resident 16's brief interview for mental status (BIMS, ability…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe environment related to activity of daily Living (ADL - everyday task) for one of three sampled residents (Resident 59) when Resident 59 used a disposable razor while unsupervised. This failure had the potential to affect Resident 59's safety and well- being. Findings: Resident 59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included right eye vision loss and heart failure. A review of Resident 59's physician order dated 4/17/24 indicated, Aspirin (ASA- medication that can cause bleeding) one tablet by mouth, every day for cerebrovascular accident (CVA-blockage of the brain) prophylaxis (prevention). A concurrent observation and interview was conducted on 3/24/25 at 9:23 A.M with Resident 59. Resident 59 was observed shaving her chin with a disposable razor. Resident 59 stated that she shaved her chin everyday by herself. An interview and record review was conducted with licensed nurse (LN) 1 on 3/25/25 at 3:53…
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 · D2025-03-27 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 ensure oxygen (O2) was administered per physician's order for one of three sampled residents (Resident 19) reviewed for O2 therapy. This failure had the potential to affect Resident 11's respiratory health. Findings: A review of Resident 19's admission Record indicated Resident 19 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, respiratory illness that limits airflow into and out of the lungs). A review of Resident 19's history and physical (H &P) dated 6/19/24 was conducted. Resident 19's attending physician documented Resident 19 had severe COPD and required to continue O2 therapy. Per the H&P, Resident 19 had history of cognitive impairment. A review of Resident 19's physician order dated 2/14/25 indicated the following order: Continuous O2 at 2 liters per minute (LPM) via nasal cannula (NC, a tubing that delivers O2 connected to the O2 tank or O2 concentrator through…
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 28 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-27 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to indicate the appropriate and measurable target behavior of antidepressant (medication used to treat depression, sad mood and lack of interest) for one of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary psychotropic (mind-altering medications) medication use (Resident 11). This failure had the potential for unnecessary psychotropic medication use, its side effects, and a decline for residents psychological and mental well-being. Findings: A review of Resident 11's admission Record indicated Resident 11 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). A review of Resident 11's physician order dated 9/27/24 indicated the following order: Venlafaxine (antidepressant) tablet for depression. AEB [sic, as evidenced by]: teary eyes. During an observation and an interview with Resident 11 in his room, on 3/25/25 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-27 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 an inhaler was labeled after it was opened and used for one resident (300). This failure had the potential for the resident to receive an ineffective medication. Findings: Per the facility's admission record, Resident 300 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic respiratory failure (chronic lung disease). A review of Resident 300's medication orders indicated on 3/5/2025, the physician ordered, Fluticasone Furoate Vilanterol Inhalation (medication used to treat respiratory disease) - 1 puff inhale orally one time a day for shortness of breath (SOB)/wheezing . On 3/27/25 at 9:49 A.M., a joint observation and interview was conducted with LN 11 of the medication (med) cart. In the med cart, an opened box of Fluticasone furoate inhaler was found with no open date. LN 1 stated she opened the box yesterday and forgot to label it. LN 1 stated it should have been labeled with the opened date. On 3/27/25…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide proper resident cohorting (the grouping of individuals with the same condition in the same location) for one resident (298) when Resident 298 was admitted into a room that was on isolation transmission-based precautions related to Resident 54's exposure to Influenza A (flu-respiratory infectious disease). This failure had the potential for Resident 298 to be exposed to an infectious disease. Findings: Per the facility's admission record, Resident 54 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a left femur (the long bone located in the thigh) fracture. Per the facility's admission records, Resident 298 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included mild intermittent asthma (a respiratory disease). On 3/24/25 at 8:36 A.M., an observation was conducted of room [ROOM NUMBER] with a with a signage posted outside of the room isolation contact precautions. On 3/24/25 at 9:25 A.M., an interview and record review were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three residents ' (Resident 1) written care plan for activities of daily living (ADL, self-care activities such as moving in bed and toileting) was completed within seven days of the Minimum Data Set Assessment (a comprehensive assessment). As a result, Resident 1 ' s ADL care plan did not match the comprehensive assessment and there was the potential for the resident to receive care that was not individualized to meet her needs. Findings: A review of Resident 1 ' s admission Record indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include hemiparesis and hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis) affecting the left side of the body following a stroke. A review of Resident 1 ' s MDS assessment dated [DATE], indicated the resident required: -Extensive assistance (resident involved in activity, staff providing weight bearing support) provided by two or more staff for bed mobility (how resident moves from lying…
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 · D2023-10-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care was provided in a safe and comfortable manner for one of three residents (Resident 1) when activities of daily living (ADL, self-care activities such as moving in bed) were preformed by one staff instead of two staff as was required on the resident ' s Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, a comprehensive assessment). As a result of this deficient practice, Resident 1 experienced discomfort and felt the care provided to her was rough. Findings: A review of Resident 1 ' s admission Record indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include hemiparesis and hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis) affecting the left side of the body following a stroke. A review of Resident 1 ' s MDS assessment dated [DATE], indicated the resident required extensive assistance (resident involved in activity, staff providing weight bearing support) provided by two or more staff for bed mobility (how resident moves from…
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 before2021-12-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control policies were followed when: 1. Oxygen tubing was not changed weekly for three of three residents reviewed for oxygen therapy (17, 52, and 53), 2. A Licensed Nurse (LN) did not perform hand hygiene between glove changes and did not ensure scissors were clean and sanitized before use during a dressing change for one sampled resident (21). These deficient practices had the potential for cross-contamination, and placed the residents, staff, and visitors at risk for facility acquired infections. Findings: 1a. On 11/29/21 at 10:42 A.M., an observation was conducted with Resident 53. Resident 53 was on the bed and actively receiving oxygen therapy. Resident 53 had nasal cannula placed in her nostrils and the oxygen tubing had a label dated, 11/15/21. In addition, the oxygen tubing was attached to the empty humidifier bottle. 1b. On 11/29/21 at 10:54 A.M., an observation of Resident 17 was conducted. Resident 17 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-12-02 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 three of three residents (14, 36, and 47) were assessed for self-administration of medication when medications were left unattended at the bedside. As a result, Residents 14, 36, and 47 were at risk for unsafe medication administration. Findings: 1. Resident 14 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis (joint inflammation), per the facility's Resident Face Sheet. On 11/29/21 at 10:07 A.M., an observation and interview was conducted with Resident 14. Resident 14 was on the bed with the bedside table in front of her. On top of the bedside table, there were two medicine cups which contained an opaque white cream. There was no staff observed in the room. Resident 14 stated the licensed nurse (LN) left the creams so she can apply it any time. Resident 14 further stated she applied the cream to her hands, elbows and knees where it hurts. A review of Resident 14'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 · D2021-12-02 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 Physician's Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST- an Advanced Directive legal document that indicated a person's wishes about end-of-life treatment) was current for one of 22 residents sampled for Advanced Directives (189). This failure had the potential to provide care contrary to the resident's preferences. Findings: On [DATE] at 1:29 P.M., Resident 189's health record was reviewed. Resident 189 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Parkinson's Disease (a brain disorder that affects movement) according to the Resident Face Sheet. An assessment conducted on [DATE] indicated Resident 189 had the ability to communicate needs and understood others. The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a screening test used to assess cognitive function) indicated mild cognitive impairment. Resident 189 required limited assistance from staff with most activities of daily living, and extensive assist with ambulation 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 · Dcited before2021-12-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for two of three residents (36 and 82) reviewed for Low-Air-Loss (LAL- pressure relieving air mattress) when their air matress were not programmed based on resident's weight. As a result, Resident 36's level of comfort and positioning was negatively impacted when the mattress was hard and shortened, and Resident 82 had the potential for skin breakdown to worsen. Findings: 1. Resident 36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal fixation device of spine, per the facility's Resident Face Sheet. On 11/29/21 at 12:01 P.M., an observation and interview was conducted with Resident 36. Resident 36 was laying in bed on a LAL mattress with the head of the bed slightly elevated. Resident 36's was under a blanket with a silhouette of his heels together and knees bent outward. Resident 36 stated he was six feet and four inches tall, 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 · D2021-12-02 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5 % (percent) or greater. Two (2) medication errors out of 28 opportunities were identified during medication (med) administration for three randomly observed residents (78, 79, 139). The medication error rate was 7.14 %. As a result, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered according to the manufacturer's instructions and physician's orders. Findings: 1a. On 11/30/21 at 8:00 A.M., a medication pass observation was conducted. Licensed Nurse (LN) 6 prepared ten oral medications and inhalers for Resident 139 for administration which included: 1. Amlodepine 2.5mg (milligram), 1 tablet 2. Austedo 12mg, 1 tablet 3. Divalproex 500mg, 1 tablet 4. Metformin ER 500mg, 1 tablet 5. Naproxen 500 mg, 1 tablet 6. Quetiapine Fumarate 200 mg, 1 tablet 7. Ropinirole 2mg, 1 tablet 8. Senna plus 8.5mg/50mg 2 capsules 9. Symbicort 4.5 mcg (microgram)/puff, 2 puffs 10. Combivent Respimat 20-100 mcg/actuation, 1 puff LN 6 put the tablets and capsules on separate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-05-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to treat six of six residents with respect and dignity (Resident 15, Confidential Resident 1, Confidential Resident 2, Confidential Resident 3, Confidential Resident 4, Confidential Resident 5). These failures had the potential to result in psychosocial harm for Resident 15 and Confidential Residents 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Findings: During a record review of Resident 15, the Resident Face Sheet indicated Resident 15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include reduced mobility, and muscle weakness. Resident 15's MDS, Section C, dated 4/26/19, indicated Resident 15's BIMS Summary Score was 15 out of 15 (attention, level of orientation, and ability to recall information is intact). During an interview with Resident 15 on 5/6/19 at 9:56 A.M., Resident 15 stated CNA 35 was often assigned to her room during the night shift. Resident 15 stated CNA 35 was rude, and unprofessional. Resident 15 stated when CNA 35 entered her room, CNA 35 would not…
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 before2019-05-09 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 did not ensure 3 out of 3 residents were clinically appropriate for self-administration of medications. This deficient practice put Residents 22, 54 and 74 at risk for unsafe medication administration. Findings: 1) Per the facility's Resident Face Sheet, Resident 54 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia (a decline in memory or other thinking skills severe enough to reduce a person's ability to perform everyday activities). On 5/6/19 at 9 A.M., Resident 54 was observed sitting on the side of her bed. Resident 54's bedside table was in front of her. On the bedside table, there was a medicine cup containing 5 pills, another medicine cup with applesauce, and a cup of apple juice. Resident 54 was observed scooping the applesauce with a spoon into the cup with the pills. She put the spoon of pills and applesauce in her mouth and sipped apple juice to swallow them. There were no staff observed in the room or outside of the room. 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 · D2019-05-09 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 accommodate and support the residents right for self-determination for one of 18 residents reviewed for choices (175). The facility failed to promote Resident 175's right to choose their pain medication. Findings: Per the Resident Face Sheet, Resident 175 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis which included muscle weakness and difficulty in walking. On 5/6/19 during an interview at 10:10 A.M., Resident 175 stated he was admitted to the facility for physical therapy after having undergone a hip replacement. Resident 175 stated, I'm getting better but I would like to stop taking the Oxycodone (narcotic pain medication) and just take Tylenol (acetaminophen) for pain. Resident 175 further stated, I would like to go home with just Tylenol and not the strong pain medications. On 5/7/19 at 12:55 P.M., LN 53 and Resident 175 were observed during Medication administration. LN 53 was observed entering Resident 175's room. LN 53…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not provide a clean, comfortable and homelike environment when a resident bathroom sink was clogged. This deficient practice created unsanitary conditions for 5 residents (17, 34, 58, 65, 68) who used the sink. Findings: On 5/6/19 at 9:30 A.M., Resident 65's family members (FM 1 and FM 2) were interviewed. FM 1 stated, My mom's sink has been clogged for a long time. It drains very slowly and sometimes the sink is filled with dirty water and we can't wash our hands or wet a wash cloth because we're afraid it will overflow. FM 2 stated, We've been having problems with the sink for about 4 months now. On 5/6/19 at 9:35 A.M., The sink in Resident 65's room was observed. The sink had about 3 inches of standing water in the bowl. Upon observation, there was no plug or any other object blocking the drain in the bowl of the sink. There was a clear glass vase which contained 2 inches of gray water positioned under the sink's drain pipe below the sink's counter. On 5/06/19 at 10 A.M., a concurrent observation and interview…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 provide a written notice of the facility's bed hold policy (a policy of reserving a resident's bed while a resident was out of the facility for hospitalization or therapeutic leave) prior to, or within 24 hours of the resident's transfer to the acute hospital for one of three residents (276) reviewed for bed hold notices. This failure resulted in the potential for Resident 276 and/or the resident's responsible party to be unaware of their right to reserve a bed in the facility during the resident's first seven days of being admitted to the acute hospital. Findings: On 5/9/19, Resident 276's medical record was reviewed. Resident 276 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of hepatic (liver) failure and diabetes (body's ability to produce or respond to the hormone insulin), per the Resident Face Sheet. A nurses note, dated 3/12/19 at 8:50 P.M., indicated Resident 276 was transferred to the acute care hospital emergency room. There 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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the MDS assessment section for nutrition was accurately coded for one of four tube fed residents (Resident 38) reviewed for tube feeding. This failure had the potential to affect the nutritional plan of care and ultimately the overall quality of life for Resident 38. Findings: Resident 38 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and new gastrostomy (GT a tube inserted through the abdomen that delivers liquid nutrition directly to the stomach) site per the registered nurse (RN) admission note. On 5/7/19 at 9:26 A.M., an interview was conducted with the SLT. The SLT stated when Resident 38 came back from the hospital in August of 2018, she was dependent on tube feeding for nutrition because of her dysphagia. The SLT stated Resident 38 had failed several swallowing evaluation attempts and she had provided treatments to Resident 38 off and on between August of 2018 and March 2019. On 5/7/19,…
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 before2019-05-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure written care plans were developed timely or consistently implemented for two of 18 residents (22 and 47) reviewed for care plans. These failures had the potential to put residents at risk by not providing appropriate, consistent, and individualized care. Findings: 1. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included gastrostomy (opening into the stomach from the abdominal wall, made surgically for the introduction of food), per the facility's Resident Face Sheet. On 5/6/19 at 10:34 A.M., an interview was conducted with Resident 22. Resident 22 stated he self-administered his own g-tube feedings (food formula administered through a tube that goes into the stomach) and medications through his g-tube. Resident 22 stated he has been self-administering for months. A record review was conducted on 5/6/19. Resident 22's physician's orders, dated 2/19/19, indicated, Able to self administer medication through…
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 before2019-05-09 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 nursing staff completely and thoroughly assessed pressure injuries (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying tissue that occurs over a bony prominence as a result of prolonged pressure) according to professional standards for one of two residents (275) reviewed for pressure injuries. In addition, Resident 275 was not provided a low air loss mattress (LAL, uses alternating pressure to prevent and treat pressure injuries). These failures had the potential for Resident 275's pressure injuries to be misidentified and mistreated, and for wounds to deteriorate. Findings: Resident 275 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include displaced fracture of neck of left femur (hip fracture), per the facility's Resident Face Sheet. On 5/6/19 at 11:17 A.M., an interview was conducted with Resident 275 via an interpreter. Resident 275 stated she had wounds on both heels, and her heels felt sore when they touched 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 · D2019-05-09 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a medical device (hand roll) for one of three residents (Resident 5) reviewed for limited range of motion. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 5 to have further decreased range of motion (ROM) in her left contracted hand. Findings: During a record review for Resident 5, the Resident Face Sheet, indicated Resident 5 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include hemiplegia (weakness of one entire side of body) following cerebrovascular disease (condition where blood vessels of the brain are damaged affecting the supply of oxygen to the brain). During an observation in Resident 5's room on 5/6/19 at 10:12 A.M., Resident 5 was seen lying in bed. Resident 5's left hand was in a fist, and there was no hand roll. During an observation in Resident 5's room and concurrent interview with Resident 5's family member on 5/6/19 at 2:55 P.M., Resident 5 was observed sitting in a wheelchair, without a hand roll in the left…
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 before2019-05-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not supervise a resident (47) while smoking cigarettes. This failure put all residents at risk for potential fires and burns due to Resident 47's unsupervised smoking. Findings: Resident 47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], per the facility's Resident Face Sheet. On 5/6/19 at 4:35 P.M., an observation was conducted. Resident 47 was entered the facility by self-propelled wheelchair from the back patio which was adjacent to the resident's room. Resident 47 smelled strongly of fresh cigarette smoke. On 5/7/19 at 7:45 A.M., an interview was conducted with Resident 47 in the resident's room. Resident 47 stated he did not smoke cigarettes because smoking was not allowed at the facility. Resident 47's room smelled strongly of cigarette smoke. On 5/7/19 at 7:52 A.M., an interview was conducted with CNA 51. CNA 51 stated Resident 47 sneaks smoking, even though he is not allowed. CNA 51 stated Resident 47 kept cigarettes in his room and smoked…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess and manage pain for one of three residents reviewed for pain management (Resident 56). This failure resulted in Resident 56 not receiving prescribed medication for pain. Findings: During a record review for Resident 56, the Resident Face Sheet, indicated Resident 56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include muscle weakness. During a record review for Resident 56, the MDS assessment (an assessment tool), Section C, dated 3/29/19, indicated Resident 56's BIMS Summary Score was 13 out of 15 (attention, level of orientation, and ability to recall information was intact). During an observation and concurrent interview with Resident 56 on 5/6/19 at 9:46 A.M., Resident 56 stated he was having pain in his right knee. Resident 56 pointed to his right knee, and stated the pain is right here. During an observation on 5/6/19 at 9:47 A.M., in Resident 56's room, Resident 56 used his call light to request pain 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 · Dcited before2019-05-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 and interview the facility failed to ensure one of four carts containing medications was not left unattended or unlocked when reviewed for drug storage. In addition, medications were kept at the bedside for one resident (74). As a result, the medications were not safely stored and were easily accessible to residents, staff, and visitors. Findings: 1. On 5/8/19 at 10:05 A.M., a treatment cart on the west unit, was observed to be unlocked and unattended in the hallway outside the DSD's office. There were several residents in the area at that time. There were multiple medicated creams, powders and sprays, scissors and various treatment supplies in the cart. The cart was unlocked and unattended for seven minutes. On 5/8/19 at 10:12 A.M., an observation and interview was conducted with LN 16. LN 16 observed the unlocked treatment cart. LN 16 stated the treatment cart should have been locked. LN 16 stated there were many residents with dementia that could have gotten into it. On 5/8/19 at 10:17…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — isolatedProvide 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 document review, the facility failed to ensure Dietary Services department staff effectively performed kitchen tasks safely, competently, and in a sanitary manner when: 1. A staff member was unable to accurately describe the correct method for thermometer calibration. 2. A staff member incorrectly washed produce in a 3-compartment sink used for washing, rinsing and sanitizing dishware. 3. A staff member was unable to verbalize and demonstrate the correct techniques related to testing sanitizer solution in the red buckets. These practices had the potential for residents to be exposed to food borne illness due to unsanitary practices related to lack of knowledge of kitchen tasks demonstrated by staff. Findings: On 5/6/19 at 9:05 A.M., the initial facility kitchen tour was conducted with the RD/DSS. 1. On 5/6/19 at 9:15 A.M., an interview was conducted with the [NAME] (CK 1) on thermometer calibration. CK 1 was unable to verbalize what the correct reading on the thermometer should be when calibrating or how often the thermometer should be calibrated.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews and document review, the facility failed to ensure menus were followed to meet the needs of four of four residents on renal therapeutic diets. This failure negatively affected resident's nutritional needs and had the potential to further compromise their health status. Findings: On 5/6/19, a review of the therapeutic lunch menu spreadsheet for 5/6/19 was conducted. The lunch menu for the renal therapeutic diet indicated chicken with parmesan cheese, brown rice, seasoned broccoli and a wheat roll. On 5/6/19 at 11:30 A.M., a lunch tray line observation and interview with the [NAME] (CK 1) was conducted in the kitchen. On the steamtable, there were pans with: chicken with parmesan cheese, scalloped potatoes, spinach and wheat rolls. On the stovetop there were pots with carrots and brown rice. There were no pans with broccoli on the steam table or being prepared. CK 1 was asked if he had prepared all the food on the menu and he stated yes, he had everything prepared for the lunch menu that day. On 5/6/19 at 11:50 A.M., an observation was conducted in 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 · D2019-05-09 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an appropriate alternative meal option of similar nutritive value was provided to one resident (17). This failure had the potential to affect this resident's meal intake and ultimately nutritional and health status. Findings: On 5/7/19 at 3:20 P.M., an observation and interview was conducted with Resident 17 regarding food choices and her lunch meal. The lunch meal for 5/7/19 on the menu indicated: zesty lasagna, Italian green beans, garlic bread and a peanut butter cookie. Resident 17 stated she had been served a peanut butter and jelly sandwich for lunch that day because she did not like cheese. Resident 17 stated the food was horrible and mistakes were typically made with her meals. Resident 17 also stated the alternate food choices had been the same for years and were undesirable. A document review of the facility's Alternate Meal Options indicated alternative entrées such as hamburger, tuna or egg salad sandwich, grilled chicken sandwich, ham or turkey sandwich and chef salad. A peanut butter 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 · Dcited before2019-05-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary conditions were met in the kitchen when: 1. A serving scoop for mashed potato flakes had hard, brown dried crusted substances on it. 2. A microwave, used to reheat resident food, was not maintained in a sanitary manner. 3. An ice machine, providing ice to residents, was not maintained in a sanitary manner. 4. Expired cheese sticks were found in a reach-in refrigerator. 5. Dirty and wet utensils were stored in a drawer, with a broken handle, containing crumbs and black grime. 6. Several utensils with burned and broken handles were used to prepare residents meal trays on the tray line. 7. Dirty light fixtures were above the food production and meal tray line areas. 8. A dirty floor area had trash, black and brown grime, and other particles under the dish sink area. These failures had the potential to cause food-borne illness in 78 of 81 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. Cross Reference Tags 802 and 925 Findings: On 5/6/19 at 9:05 A.M., during the initial facility kitchen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility's QAA committee failed to identify, develop, and implement action plans related to Resident 47's unsupervised cigarette smoking and facility's staff awareness of ongoing non-compliance with the facility's non-smoking policy. (see F689) Findings: On 5/9/19 at 3:21 P.M., an interview was conducted with the ADM and DON regarding the facility's QAA committee. The ADM stated Resident 47's unsupervised smoking should have been brought to the QAA committee and addressed because it was an immediate safety concern that affected the entire facility. Per the facility's undated policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), . Purpose to ensure that a proactive approach is provided in the Quality Plan and Performance Improvement process is applicable to the resident's needs .
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-09 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure pest control recommendations and concerns were addressed. This failure had the potential to contaminate food stored in the kitchen and dining areas which could lead to widespread foodborne illness. The facility census was 81. Findings: On 5/6/19 at 2:35 P.M., an observation and interview was conducted with the RD/DSS of the kitchen. There were two dirty food carts outside the back screen door of the kitchen. Each cart contained 16 dirty food trays. There was also a coffee cart which contained a dirty food tray and six dirty plate lids outside the back screen door of the kitchen. The RD/DSS stated the CNAs left them there but should not have. The RD/DSS acknowledged the flies and stated flies get into the kitchen because the back door was not always closed. On 5/7/19 at 10:32 A.M., a fly was observed flying around the food preparation area where [NAME] 2 prepared pureed food. [NAME] 2 acknowledged the fly flying around the food preperation area. A review of the pest company invoice records from January…
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.
- 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 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 5 of 5 | 2.9 | +2.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| STEWART, JO ANN | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 01/01/2017 |
| WILCOX, CONNOR | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 06/01/2023 |
| APT, FREDERICK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| HANCOCK, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| JERGENSEN, JOSHUA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| MITCHELL, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $849K 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
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 055488. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-27, 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.