Avondale Villa Post-Acute
788 Holmes Street, Livermore, CA 94550 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 37 certified beds · (925) 447-2280 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- 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 (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 held steady at 4 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 | 1.5% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 10.2% | 4.0% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 1.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 3.3% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.2% | 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 | 2.1% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 9.2% | 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 | 10.1% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.1% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.2% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.3% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
* 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.
61.2% 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 139 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 59.6% 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 52 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 70% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 | 61.2%CMS range 52.9–68.6 | 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 | 9.6%CMS range 7.2–13.5 | 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 | 59.6% | 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 | 67.3% | 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 | 61.5% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 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 | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.2%CMS range 4.6–11.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 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 37 beds and averages 33.9 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.32 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.35 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 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 3.88 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.50 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.36 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-10 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure an injury of unknown origin was reported as required by law for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure resulted in Resident 1' s facial bruise, which was of unknown origin, not being reported to California Department of Public Health (CDPH), local law enforcement and Ombudsman. Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan), dated 12/29/25, indicated, Resident 1 was severely cognitively impaired. MDS also indicated, Resident 1 required substantial assistance from caregivers (caregiver does more than half the effort to complete task) with eating, oral hygiene and moving in bed and was totally dependent on caregivers (caregiver does all of the effort to complete task) for toileting, showering and transferring to a wheelchair.During a concurrent observation and interview on 3/10/26 at 1:50 p.m. in Resident 1's room, Resident 1 laid in bed, was awake, alert and continuously spoke…
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 before2025-05-16 · 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 proper infection prevention and control practices when: 1. Shared Hoyer Lift used by 7 of 7 sampled residents was not maintained in the designated clean and dirty area in Utility Room. 2. The facility failed to properly clean and disinfect the glucometer (a device used to measure blood sugar) according to the manufacturer's guidelines, and facility's policies and procedures (P&P) between resident use. 3. Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) protocol was not followed when providing direct care to Resident 239. These failures had the potential to result in transmission of infection to Residents and Staff throughout the facility. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/14/25 at 3:15 p.m. with Infection Preventionist (IP) in the Utility Room, there were 2 Hoyer Lifts (a mechanical device used to safely transfer individuals with limited mobility). One of the two Hoyer Lift base was within a red taped rectangular…
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 · D2025-05-16 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff safely handled hazardous drug (HD-drugs that pose short- or long-term harm upon exposure to human via skin or inhalation) in accordance with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC- a federal agency leading the science-based, data-driven, service organization that protects the public's health) and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH-a federal agency that is part of the CDC; NIOSH conducts research and makes recommendations for the prevention of work-related hazards, injury and illness) guidelines and facility's Policies and Procedures (P&P) for the safe handling of Hazardous Drugs with resident census of 35. This failure had the potential to pose health risk to the nursing staff and residents. Findings: During a medication pass observation with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 2, on 05/13/25 at 8:43 a.m., LVN 2 administered one tablet of finasteride (drug used to treat prostate disease) to Resident 6. LVN 2 with bare hands, removed the tablet from 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 · Dcited before2025-05-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document disposition and destruction of the non-narcotic (non-opioid) prescription medications with resident census of 35. This failed practice could contribute to the risk of drug diversion (unlawful use of prescription drug by unauthorized individuals) and unsafe disposition practices. Findings: During a concurrent inspection of the facility's medication room and interview with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 2, on 5/13/25, at 9:50 AM, LVN 2 could not locate any documentation record for prescription drug destruction and was not sure how non-narcotic prescription medications were stored and/or destroyed. LVN 2 stated the medication room did not have a storage section for resident's discontinued medications. In an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 5/14/25 at 9:42 PM, the DON stated the facility allowed the nurses to destroy the discontinued prescription medications. The DON stated the facility did not have a system of documentation with a witnessed signature. The DON stated the facility did not have an option…
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 · D2025-05-16 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to address and prevent duplicate use of two similar medications used to treat severe form of stomach heartburn known as Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD-a condition of stomach acid flowing back into the esophagus and can contribute to stomach bleeding) in one out of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary drugs (Resident 28) when: Resident 28 received two drugs called pantoprazole (or Protonix) and omeprazole (or Prilosec) simultaneously, which had belonged to the same class of drug called Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs-medications that reduce the production of stomach acid and help relieve symptoms like heartburn or GERD). The duplicate use of two PPI could contribute to adverse drug consequences and cause further health problems. Findings: During a review of Resident 28's electronic medical record (HER), titled Diagnosis, dated 5/14/25, the record indicated Resident 28 had GERD with recent hospitalization, diabetes (blood sugar disease), kidney disease, and heart issues among others. During a concurrent…
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 · D2025-05-16 · 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 safe medication administration practices when medication error rate was more than 5% (% or percentage- number or ratio that expressed as a fraction of 100) with resident census of 35. Medication administration observations were conducted over multiple days, at varied times, in random locations throughout the facility. The facility had a total of three errors out of 43 opportunities which resulted in a facility wide medication error rate of 9.52% in three out of 7 residents (Resident 26, Resident 29, and Resident 31) observed for medication administration as follows: 1. Resident 26 was administered wrong cough medication called Robitussin DM (a brand name combinations liquid medicine containing Guaifenesin [an expectorant that helped loosen and thin mucus] with Dextromethorphan [a cough suppressant]) when the doctor's order indicated to give plain Robitussin (or guaifenesin, which thin and loosen mucus and made it easier to clear chest congestion). 2. Resident 29 was given a laxative drug called Senna (a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure safe storage of medication and medical supplies in the active storage areas of treatment cart (a mobile cart where medication and supplies for wound and skin care are stored) and the medication room (a locked room used to store medications and supplies) with census of 35 when: 1. Facility's medication room stored expired vaccine, expired testing products, expired supplies, and co-mingled supplies for IV (Into the Vein) medication use on residents that were no longer in the facility. 2. Treatment cart stored expired supplies and opened products that were marked sterile and for one time use in the active storage areas. These failures could contribute to unsafe storage and use of spoiled medication and supplies that could affect the well-being of vulnerable elderly residents. Findings: 1. During a concurrent interview and inspection of the facility's medication room on 5/13/25 at 9:30 AM, accompanied by Licensed Vocational Nurse and Director of Staff Development (DSD), the small room stored both…
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 · D2025-05-16 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to implement their policy regarding food for residents brought in by family or other visitors for one of 27 sampled residents (Resident 31) when Resident 31's two bottles of outdated apple juice were stored in the facility refrigerator. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 31 to consume drinks that were out of date which could cause avoidable gastrointestinal upset. Findings: During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled: Bringing in Food for a Resident, dated 3/24/25, the P&P indicated .Food or beverages that are past the manufacturer's expiration date will be thrown away. Food or beverage items without a manufacturer's expiration date will be dated upon arrival in the facility, and thrown away three days after the date marked, or if frozen in 30 days .Refrigeration can occur in the designated resident food refrigerator. Unused food will be discarded within three days, and if kept frozen, within 30 days . During a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-01 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to employ a qualified nutrition professional to manage the food and nutrition services when; 1. The Dietary Services Supervisor (DSS) did not work in the facility on a full-time basis and the Registered Dietitian (RD) worked part-time. 2. DSS did not know the cool down method for a leftover meat sauce and Pozole soup. 3. DSS did not ensure that time and temperature monitoring was performed by kitchen staff during thawing of frozen food items. 4. DSS did not ensure residents were served palatable food when food was served at a low temperature, tasted bland, and was a poor texture. 5. DSS did not ensure food was fortified (adding protein, fat, and/or carbohydrate to foods) for 15 out of 15 residents on fortified diet. 6. DSS did not ensure six out of six residents on Consistent Carbohydrate (CCHO - a diet that helps keep blood sugar levels stable) diet received a Regular diet instead of the CCHO diet. 7. DSS had not communicated to RD 1 that most residents did not like milk for lunch and for other meals which…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-01 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespreadProvide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure food and nutrition staff had the appropriate competencies and skills set when: 1. Staff did not follow correct procedure for thawing frozen food item. 2. Staff did not appropriately demonstrate how to check the sanitizer strength used for the dish machine. 3. Staff recorded dish wash machine temperature inaccurately. These failures had the potential for inappropriate food preparation and dishwashing procedure that could result in food borne illness. Findings: 1. During a concurrent kitchen observation and interview on 2/26/24 at 9:25 a.m., with [NAME] 1, an unlabeled plastic package of tan colored frozen meat was in the freezer. It was also noted in the bottom of the plastic bag there was a frozen clear, pink tinged fluid. [NAME] 1 identified the item as frozen chicken and stated that product was received frozen and staff generally thawed meat in the food production sink by running water over the product. [NAME] 1 acknowledged it…
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 26 citations
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-01 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and record review, the facility failed to provide food items according to the menu when nine of 30 sampled residents receiving a regular diet order (Residents 4, 6, 13, 15, 16,17, 29, 186, and 188) were not served with one teaspoon (tsp) of margarine at lunch. This failure had the potential for residents to receive and/or consume inadequate caloric intake. See also tag F 808. Findings: During a review of the facility document, Diet Type Report, dated 2/28/24, the document indicated Residents 4, 6, 13, 15, 16,17, 29, 186, and 188 were on a regular textured diet that allowed margarine consumption. During a lunch tray line observation, on 2/26/24 at 12:11 p.m., there was no margarine served on any resident lunch tray, including the lunch trays of Residents 4, 6, 13, 15, 16,17, 29, 186, and 188. During a review of the facility document, Winter Menus, dated 2/26/24, the Menu indicated one tsp of margarine should be included on the lunch tray for all regular textured diets, excluding the low/fat, low cholesterol diet. During a review of the facility's P&P titled, Diet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-01 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were served palatable food when food was served at a low temperature, tasted bland, and had poor texture. These failures had the potential for 30 of 30 residents to consume a decreased amount of nutrients leading to weight loss and/or nutrient related medical complications. Findings: During an interview on 2/26/24 at 10:28 a.m., Resident 1 stated the meals served at the facility were often cold and not palatable. Resident 1 stated the same menu was served repeatedly. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), a Resident Assessment and care guide tool, dated 1/25/24, indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 1's Basic Interview of Mental status (BIMS) score was 13 (meaning cognitively intact). Resident 1's diagnoses included hypothyroidism (a condition in which the thyroid gland that regulates metabolism doesn't produce enough thyroid hormone). Review of the resident council meetings' minute,s dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve foods in a sanitary manner that prevents foodborne illness for the facility when: 1. Cool down method was not performed for a leftover meat sauce and Pozole soup in the refrigerator. 2. Frozen food items were incorrectly thawed and refrozen. 3. A box of cherry tomatoes in the refrigerator was covered with white fuzzy material and dark spots. 4. A bag of cooked chicken was stored together in the same compartment with frozen raw meat and poultry. 5. Multiple unlabeled and undated food items were found in the freezer. 6. Staff did not handle drinkware in a manner to protect the drinkware from contamination. 7. The ice machine evaporator plate had black build-up residue, the evaporator cover had white mineral build-up, and the cleaning and sanitizing procedures was not followed according to the manufacturer's instruction. These failures had the potential for residents to be exposed to food borne illness. Findings: 1. During an observation on 2/26/24 at 10:12 a.m., 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 · Ecited before2024-03-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent falls and implement appropriate interventions for one (Resident 16) of 12 sampled residents when, Resident 16 had repeated unwitnessed falls. The facility did not implement Resident 16's need for supervision with stand-by assistance during transfers. These failures caused Resident 16 to sustain repeated falls and had the potential to result in injuries. Findings: Review of the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT, consists of staff members from different departments) progress notes, dated 2/26/24, indicated Resident 16 had an unwitnessed fall in the dining/activity room. Resident 16 called out for help and was seen sitting on the dining room floor in front of a wheelchair and facing a regular chair that he was previously sitting in. Review of the Significant Change in Status-Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment screening tool used to guide care), dated 9/8/23, indicated Resident 16 was admitted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-01 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and record review, the facility failed to ensure pureed food was the appropriate consistency for six out of 30 residents. This failure had the potential for residents on pureed diet to aspirate (draw food into the lungs) and/or negatively impact the resident's dining experience resulting in poor food intake and compromising their nutritional status. Findings: During the tray line observation, on 2/26/24 at 11:30 a.m., the pureed chili had the texture of a thickened cream soup and pureed cornbread was a thin pudding texture. Both foods did not hold their shape and spread out when placed on the resident lunch plate. During a follow up tray line observation, on 2/27/24 at 11:23 a.m., the pureed beef roast and zesty spinach were plated. Each were runny and spread out on the plate. During a review of the Diet Type Report, dated 2/28/24, the document indicated, six residents were on pureed diet order. During a review of the undated Regular Pureed Diet document from the facility's Registered Dietician (RDs) for Healthcare diet manual, the document indicated, 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 · E2024-03-01 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure 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: 1. Offer a substitute of equal nutritive value when milk on the planned menu was routinely not provided when milk was on the planned menu for all diets. 2. Effectively maintain a system to ensure the resident's food preferences were accurately recorded on their individual tray cards. These failures had the potential for 30 of 30 residents who received food from the kitchen to not receive the nutrients intended by the planned menu and not receive foods according to resident preferences. Findings: 1. During a review of the winter menus, dated 2/26/24 and 2/27/24, the menu indicated, milk was the beverage to be served to residents on all diets. During the tray line observation, on 2/26/24 at 12:11 p.m., meal trays were prepared, placed on a food delivery cart, and were transported to residents for lunch. One 4 oz cup of water and one 4 oz cup of cranberry juice were on 29 lunch trays. One meal tray had one 4 oz cup of water and one 4 oz cup of yellow sugar-free beverage. Over 20 trays did not include milk.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-01 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — patternEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the physician- prescribed therapeutic diet (a diet order as part of treatment for a disease or clinical condition to decrease or increase specific nutrients in the diet) when: 1. Six of six sampled residents (Residents 4, 6, 13, 15, 16,17) on a Fortified diet (a diet with added protein, fat, and/or carbohydrate to increase calories) did not receive supplemental food items as ordered. 2. Three of three sampled residents (Residents 5, 28, 21) on a Consistent Carbohydrate diet (CCHO - a diet that promotes stable blood sugar levels) received a regular diet instead of the CCHO diet. 3. One of one sampled resident (Resident 16) with a diet order for extra protein did not receive extra meat as ordered. These failures had the potential to result in weight loss and/or unstable blood sugar for the residents who did not receive their therapeutic diets as ordered. See also tag F 803. Findings: 1. During a review of the facility document, Diet Type Report, dated 2/28/24, the document indicated Residents 4, 6, 13,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-01 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation of medication administration for three (Residents 5, 13, and 16) of five sampled residents when two nursing staff (Director of Nursing and Licensed Vocational Nurse 3) failed to document multiple medications' administration on four separate days (2/2/24, 2/11/24, 2/14/24, 2/17/24) These failures had the potential to result in unnecessary duplication of medication administration, and prevented accurate analysis of effectiveness of medication due to lack of clarity as to whether or not the medication was administered. Findings: During a review of the facility admission Record, undated, the admission Record indicated Resident 5 was admitted to the facility in 2022. During a review of Resident 5's Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated February 2024, the MAR indicated no entries for administration of the following scheduled medications: 2/11/24 at 9 a.m.: amiodarone (to treat high blood pressure), amlodipine (to treat…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-01 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure one out of the one facility dishwashing machine was able to maintain water temperatures during the wash and rinse cycles within the manufacturer's recommended water temperature range of 120 degrees Fahrenheit (ºF) and 140 ºF. This failure had the potential for dishware used by residents to not be sanitized sufficiently to prevent food borne illness. Findings: During a continuous observation on 2/27/24 at 10:13 a.m., in the kitchen, Dietary Aide (DA) 2 placed dishes in the dishwashing machine and began the dishwashing cycle. During the wash cycle, the dishwashing machine water temperature gauge reached a maximum of 106 degrees Fahrenheit (ºF), the water temperature gauge remained at a temperature of 106 ºF during the rinse cycle. During an interview on 2/27/24 on 10:15 a.m. with DA 2, DA 2 stated she had checked and recorded the dishwashing machine water temperature earlier in the Dish Machine Temperature Log. During a concurrent interview and record review on 2/27/24 at 10:20 a.m. with DA 2, the Dish…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission and provide three (Resident 187,185, and 188) of 12 sampled residents and their representatives with a summary of the baseline care plan. This failure did not ensure the residents or their representative were informed of the plan for the provision of care. Findings: Review of the admission Record indicated Resident 187 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (muscle weakness or partial paralysis on one side of the body) and was discharged home on 2/26/24. During a review of Resident 187's clinical records and concurrent interview on 2/29/24 at 11:57 a.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON), DON stated the baseline care plan was not developed for Resident 187 within 48 hours of admission. DON further stated Resident 187 had been discharged home without a baseline care plan. Review of the admission Record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, for one (Resident 6) of two sampled resident, the facility failed to implement its Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy and procedure when there was no care plan developed to address Resident 6's risk of aspiration with appropriate interventions This failure had the potential to result in Resident 6 develop aspiration, pneumonia and respiratory infection and for residents' not receiving appropriate care and treatment. Findings: Review of Resident 6's admission record, dated 9/1/21, indicated Resident 6 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses included dysphagia orophapharryngeal phase (difficulty in swallowing). Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS), Resident Assessment and care guide tool, dated 12/22/23, indicated Resident 6's Basic Interview of Mental status (BIMS) score was 05 (meaning poor cognition). Resident 6 had swallowing disorder related to holding food in mouth/cheeks or residual food in mouth after meals. Resident 6 diagnoses included dysphagia and Non-Alzheimer's Dementia (a group of diseases…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to assess one sampled resident (Resident 16) when the resident experienced a severe weight loss. This failure had the potential to result in continuous, unplanned weight loss for one of 13 sampled residents. Findings: Review of the document titled, Weight Change Protocol dated 2023, showed Early identification of a weight problem and possible cause(s) can minimize complications. Assessment of residents experiencing weight changes should be completed in a timely manner . Residents will be weighed monthly and weekly for those newly admitted and those deemed to be at high risk for weight changes . Variances are calculated from monthly and weekly weights that are obtained by facility staff. Residents who experience significant changes in weight or insidious (continuous weight loss that does not necessarily meet the significant/severe weight loss guidelines) weight loss will be assessed by the Facility RD [Registered Dietitian]. The following criteria define…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · 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 ensure two (Resident 2, 16 ) of five sampled residents were free from unnecessary drug when psychotropic medications were administered without adequate clinical indication and monitoring for its use when; 1. Resident 2 was administered Ziprasidone HCL (hydrochloride), an antipsychotic medication at bedtime for dementia and depression manifested by hitting, striking out during care and mobility. Resident 2 was administered Ziprasidone without adequate monitoring of target behaviors. 2. Resident 16 was administered Zyprexa, an antipsychotic medication for altered sensorium (inability to think clearly or concentrate), throwing objects, hitting/punching staff. Resident 16 was administered Trazadone, an antidepressant for sleep without adequate monitor of hours of sleep. Resident 16 was administered PRN (as needed) Lorazepam (Ativan), an antianxiety medication without the implementation of non-pharmacological interventions first before offering…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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 consider alternative recommendations for the use of the provale cup assistive device (helps prevent choking by delivering a measured amount of liquid. Cups vary with different delivery amounts) while allowing the patient to eat and drink independently, for one (Resident 6) of 12 sampled residents. Resident 5 was identified at risk for aspiration (food or liquids enters the windpipe). This failure resulted in staff not using an assistive device with meals or consulting with the Speech Therapist for recommendations when Resident 5 refused using the provale cup. This had the potential to result in aspiration and the development of pneumonia. Findings: During an observation on 2/26/24 at 12:56 a.m., Resident 6 was seated at the dining table in the dining area and fed by the Restorative Nursing Assistant (RNA 1). Resident 6 coughed repeatedly when fed corn bread and salad. When Resident 6 coughed, RNA 1 gave Resident 6 water to drink from a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-21 · 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 interview and record review, for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), the facility failed to ensure Resident 1 was provided supervision when staff were unaware of Resident 1's whereabouts for two eight-hour shifts (16 hours). This failure had the potential to result avoidable accidents while Resident 1 was not in the facility unsupervised. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, abnormal posture, difficulty walking, anemia (when your blood produces a lower-than-normal amount of healthy red blood cells), depression (persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest and can interfere with your daily life), anxiety disorder (feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that are strong enough to interfere with one's daily activities), end stage kidney disease (kidneys are no longer able to work at a level needed for day-to-day life) and was dependent on hemodialysis…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), the facility failed to maintain medical records on Resident 1 that were accurately documented and complete when; - Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1 did not document Resident 1's whereabouts for the entire afternoon/evening shift. - LVN 1 signed off Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicating medications were administered to Resident 1 while Resident 1 was actually not in the facility. These failures resulted in inaccurate medical records and falsification of medication administration. Findings: During a concurrent interview and review of clinical records with Director of Nursing (DON) on 11/8/23 at 11:20 a.m., Resident 1's progress notes were reviewed. DON stated Resident 1 went to dialysis clinic on 10/25/23 for treatment and did not return to the facility. DON stated Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1, during the afternoon shift, did not document the incident and did not notify the incoming night shift that Resident 1 was not in the building. On the following day after being unable 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 · D2023-08-18 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1), the facility failed to ensure Resident 1 received care and services with reasonable accommodation when the bathroom did not have a grab bar on the left side to assist Resident 1's toileting needs. This failure had the potential to result in decreased independence to perform activities of daily living (ADLs). Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record dated 8/8/23, the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in June 2022 with diagnoses that included aphasia (loss of ability to understand or express speech, due to brain damage), hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), muscle weakness, osteoarthritis (type of arthritis when cartilage/ flexible tissue at the end of the bones wear down) and the need for assistance with personal care. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) dated 7/27/23, the MDS indicated Resident 1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment…
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 · D2023-08-18 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1), the facility failed to ensure assessment accurately reflects Resident 1's status when the Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) coded a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus without supporting documentation. This failure had the potential to result in uncoordinated care. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, dated 8/8/23, the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included aphasia (loss of ability to understand or express speech, due to brain damage), hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), muscle weakness, osteoarthritis, and diabetes mellitus (inappropriately elevated blood sugar levels). During a telephone interview with Family Member (FM) 1 on 8/7/23 at 7:09 p.m., FM 1 stated facility staff had been saying Resident 1 was diabetic and was filling out forms for Resident 1 incorrectly despite Resident 1 not having…
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 · D2023-08-18 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1), the facility failed to ensure Resident 1 received treatment in accordance with professional standards and Resident 1's choices when: 1. A long-standing skin rash was not treated in a timely manner. 2. Neurovascular Specialist's (one who has expertise in treating a variety of conditions and vascular malformations of the brain, spine, and peripheral nerves) recommendation for a 30-day heart function monitor was not followed up. This failure resulted in delayed management of care. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, dated 8/8/23, the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in June 2022 with diagnoses that included aphasia (loss of ability to understand or express speech, due to brain damage), hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), muscle weakness, osteoarthritis (type of arthritis when cartilage/ flexible tissue at the end of the bones wear down) and the need for assistance with personal care. During a review of Resident 1'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 · E2022-03-25 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the recommendations from the January 2022 medication regimen review (MRR, a review of all medications prescribed to each resident to check for provision of pharmaceutical services not consistent with accepted professional standards) for five (Resident 5, 6, 7, 11, 12) of 13 sampled residents were reviewed by the attending physician. This failure had the potential to result in the administration of unnecessary medications for the five residents during January 2022. Findings: A review of Resident 5's admission Record, undated, indicated he was admitted in 2021 with a diagnosis of depressive disorder (a mood disorder resulting in sadness and loss of interest in life). A review of Resident 6's admission Record, undated, indicated he was admitted in 2021 with a diagnosis of end stage renal disease. (ESRD, the stage of kidney impairment that appears irreversible and permanent and requires a regular course of dialysis or kidney transplant to maintain life.) A review of Resident 7's admission Record, undated, indicated she…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control policies and procedures were followed when: 1. Two scheduled nursing staff (Licensed Vocational Nurse 1, Certified Nursing Assistant 1), had no documented completion of pre-entry screening for symptoms of COVID-19 (COVID-19, a respiratory infection which can result in breathing difficulty and other complications, including death. Symptoms include fever or chills, cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headache, new loss of taste or smell, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, nausea or vomiting, diarrhea). Licensed Vocational Nurse 1 had no documented screening for 3/15/22, 3/16/22, 3/17/22, or 3/20/22. Certified Nursing Assistant 1 had no documented screening for 3/17/22. 2. Certified Nursing Assistant 3 (CNA 3) failed to perform hand hygiene after doffing gloves, and properly dispose of the soiled gloves, for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 14). 3. For two of 14 sampled residents (Resident 10, Resident 14), nursing staff moved an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-03-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Have a prescribed medication available for one (Resident 14) of eight residents. 2. Ensure one pill crusher and one pill cutter were cleaned after use. The failure to administer two consecutive doses of Resident 14's medication for reduction of fluid inside the eye had the potential to result in increased fluid pressure inside the eye causing nerve damage and impaired vision. The failure to remove medication residue from the pill crusher and cutter after use had the potential for administration of unordered medications or incompatible medications due to the mixing of different medications used in the pill crusher and pill cutter. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 14's admission Record indicated Resident 14 was admitted to the facility in 2017 with a diagnosis of diabetes (the body's inadequate production of the hormone insulin results in high blood sugar levels causing excessive urination and damage to body organs), eye disease related to diabetes, and glaucoma (a condition of increased eye pressure 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 · Dcited before2022-03-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two kitchen staff wore a head covering while working in the kitchen. This failure had the potential to result in food contamination from hair shed by staff and cause food to be less palatable and/or spread food borne illness. Findings: During an observation and concurrent interview on 3/24/22, at 10:36 a.m., in the kitchen, [NAME] 1(CK 1) was in the kitchen with no head covering. CK 1 stated he forgot to put on a hairnet when he entered the kitchen. CK 1 stated residents could get sick from hair shed onto their food. During an interview on 3/24/22, at 10:43 a.m., with the Dietary Manager (DM), DM stated, all staff were required to wear a hairnet upon entry into the kitchen. During a telephone interview on 3/24/22, at 12:14 p.m., with Registered Dietician (RD), RD stated all staff must wear a hairnet when inside kitchen so hair does not get on food. RD stated hair in resident food was both a potential source of foodborne illness, and was very unsanitary, unappetizing, and unappealing. A review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-05-16 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This requirement is NOT MET as evidenced by: Based on observation and interview, the facility had two resident rooms (rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]) that measured less than 80 square feet (sq. ft.) per resident for the eight residents (Resident 3, 5, 22, 9, 25, 8, 19, and 14) who occupied the rooms. This failure had the potential to result in a lack of adequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in room [ROOM NUMBER] and 18, or for storage of these residents' belongings. Findings: During an observation and interview with the Maintenance Director (MOD) on 05/14/25 at 11:36 a.m., MOD measured the size of the room. The following rooms and the corresponding square footage per resident were identified: room [ROOM NUMBER]: 19.83 feet x 15.58 feet = 308.95 sq. ft. The room was occupied by four residents giving each resident 77.24 square feet of living space. room [ROOM NUMBER]: 14.42 feet x 20 feet = 288.4 sq. ft. The room was occupied by four residents giving each resident 72.1 square feet of living space.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-03-01 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility had two resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]) with multiple beds that provided less than 80 square feet (sq ft) per resident who occupied these rooms. This deficient practice had the potential to result in inadequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in each room or for storage of residents' belongings. Findings: During an observation on 3/1/24 at 8:02 a.m., with the Administrator (Admin) and the Maintenance Designee (Maintenance) room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER] each had four resident bed spaces: room [ROOM NUMBER] measured 280 sq ft to equal 70 sq ft per resident; room [ROOM NUMBER] measured 286.6 sq f. to equal 71.65 sq ft per resident. During an interview on 2/28/24 at 8:29 a.m., with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA 2), CNA 2 stated there was enough space to provide care for residents. CNA 2 stated she had no problems going in and out with necessary care equipment. During an interview on 2/28/24 at 8:34…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2022-03-25 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide seven of seven residents in multiple resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] with at least 80 square feet per resident. This had the potential to result in inadequate space for resident needs and care provision. Findings: During an observation on 3/21/22 at 10 a.m., there were four beds each in rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. During an interview and concurrent record review on 3/21/22 at 9:38 a.m., with the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON), the previous approved room waiver was reviewed. The DON stated resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] each had four beds and that a request for a room waiver needed to be submitted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The DON stated the room measurements were as follows: Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] measured 20 feet by 16 feet. Usable resident space for four residents would provide 304.6 square feet or 76.1 square feet per resident. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] measured 20 feet 6 inches by 17 feet.…
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 LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP — 32 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 | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
The other 31 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| FORBRIGHT BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 03/01/2020 |
| FREANEL & SONS SOM LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| RODRIGUEZ, CURTIS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| TILFORD, TOBY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| LINKS SUPPORT SERVICES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| ANDERSON, CHAD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| BEARDSLEY, MARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| BERNHOLZ, VICTORIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| CARTER, MELISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| DEGUZMAN, MYRNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| FROJELIN, ANTONETTE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| KAUR, KARAMJIT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| MALANI, NARENDRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| PODEROSO, ISABEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| RAMIREZ, SHARON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| EIDE BAILLY LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
| SUBIA, ELLEN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2020 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $282K 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 555399. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-16, 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.