Southern Inyo Hospital D/p Snf
501 E Locust St., Lone Pine, CA 93545 · Government - Hospital district · 33 certified beds · (760) 876-5501 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2024
- it did not file the payroll staffing data CMS requires — its 1 of 5 staffing rating is the rating CMS assigns for not reporting, not a measure of how many nurses are on the floor
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 23.5% | 10.2% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 12.9% | 4.0% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 8.9% | 1.2% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.4% | 7.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.9% | 1.6% | 3.3% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.1% | 9.8% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.8% | 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 | 4.3% | 4.3% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 5.8% | 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 | 6.6% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.41 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 7.44 | 1.57 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.03 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 1% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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
No payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours are on file for this home — and the record suggests that is because it did not report them. CMS rates its staffing 1 of 5, which is the rating CMS assigns when a home does not report. Every Medicare-certified nursing home is required to submit its actual payroll data quarterly, and that submission is what makes staffing numbers auditable rather than a claim. A home that does not file is not the same as a home with no data yet: ask this home directly what its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage are, why its payroll data is not filed, and weigh the independent health-inspection score heavily in the meantime.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-29 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the services of a registered nurse (RN) were provided for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week, for the facility. This failure had the potential to result in delays in clinical assessment, changes in resident conditions not being identified timely, and increased risk for adverse outcomes due to lack of RN oversight.Findings: During an interview on April 27, 2026, at 8:23 AM, with Licensed Vocational Nurse 1 (LVN 1), LVN 1 stated there are times when an RN is not available. LVN 1 further stated there are about two or three full-time RN staff available overall in the facility. During an interview on April 28, 2026, at 1:33 PM, with the Director of Staff Development (DSD), the DSD stated the facility does not consecutively have a registered nurse scheduled for eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week. The DSD further stated there are currently total of three full-time registered nurses, but they are not always available…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-29 · 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 a safe environment and implement interventions to prevent accidents related to smoking for four of 12 sampled residents (Residents 1, 4, 11, and 29), when smoking materials were not maintained in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure (P&P). These failures had the potential to result in serious injury, including burns, fire hazards, or harm to residents, staff, and the facility environment. Findings: 1a. During a review of Resident 1's face sheet (FS- a document with resident demographics, brief medical history, and emergency contacts), the FS indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus (condition where the body does not use insulin properly, causing high blood sugar) with diabetic neuropathy (type 2 diabetes that has caused nerve damage) and primary osteoarthritis (condition where the cartilage in the joints slowly wears down over time). 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 · E2026-04-29 · 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 an effective, and active system wide infection control program for the prevention, control, and investigation of infections and communicable diseases for a universe of 23 residents, when: 1. The facility failed to keep its infection prevention and control policies updated annually. 2. For three Residents (Resident 3, 28 and 4), the facility did not implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP- infection control measures for nursing homes, requiring staff to wear gowns and gloves during high-contact care to stop the spread of infection) specifically for residents with multidrug-resistant organism (MDROs- bacteria and other microorganisms that have developed resistance to multiple classes of antimicrobial drugs, making them difficult to treat), indwelling catheter (medical instruments designed to remain inside the body for a prolonged period), or chronic wounds. These failures had the potential to result in cross-contamination (spread…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-29 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a physician's medication order was completed and administered in accordance with acceptable nursing standards of practice for one of 12 sampled residents (Resident 28), when nursing staff administered ceftriaxone sodium (Rocephin-an antibiotic used to treat severe infections) without clarifying the physician's order for the intravenous (IV) administration method and the appropriate diluting agent (liquid solution to mix medication). This failure had potential to cause medication administration error (preventable events from inappropriate medication administer) from IV delivery methods between IV push (IVP-a rapid, direct injection of medication into a vein) and IV piggy back (IVPB-slow medication administration into a vein), and incompatible solution mixture, which could negatively affect Resident 28's health from reduced medication effectiveness, local reddening, pain at the site, and lead to actual physical harm.Findings: During…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public when four staff members complains of black material on ceiling and water leaks stains in the resident's activity room, front office, control room and ADON's (Assistant Director of Nursing) office. This failure has a potential to put residents, staff and visitors. health, safety and wellbeing at risk. Based on Interview with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN 1), on April 2, 2025, at 10:00 AM. LVN1 stated that there's water leak spots in some areas of the building, most especially in the activity room. LVN 1stated I have not seen the black materials on the ceiling, but our ADON has it in her office. I believe it has been reported to maintenance . She also stated I was sick 3 weeks ago with Flu- Coughing, sneezing, wheezing, weakness, fatigue, body aches, nasal congestion and fever. The IPN (Infection Preventionist Nurse) tested me for covid,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect and prevent residents from an inappropriate resident-to-resident sexual contact for two of two residents (Resident A and Resident B) when Resident A was seen hovering over Resident B and kissing. This failure resulted in Resident A and Resident B engaging in resident-to-resident sexual contact while under the supervision of the facility ' s staff which had the potential to cause unsafe environment such as unsafe sexual activity that could negatively affect Resident A and Resident B ' s health and safety. Findings: During a review of Resident A ' s History and Physical (H&P), the H&P indicated, Resident A is a [AGE] year old male with medical histories which included epilepsy (neurological disorder characterized by recurrent, unprovoked seizures [sudden burst of abnormal electrical activity in the brain which can cause a wide range of symptoms depending part of the brain]), severe intellectual disabilities, and diabetes (medical condition that…
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 before2024-07-12 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was available onsite at least eight (8) hours a day, seven (7) days a week for all admitted residents from April 1, 2024, through July 11, 2024 when the facility did not have RN onsite for 17 days and had fewer RN hours than eight (8) hours requirement for three (3) days. This failure had a potential to negatively affect residents care from an oversight of RN which may increase risk of avoidable resident safety events such as medication errors or delayed in comprehensive assessment that could jeopardize residents' health, safety, and lead to actual harm. Findings: During an observation on July 11, 2024, from 8:00 AM, through 10:00 AM, there was no RN working in the unit. During an interview on July 11, 2024, at 11:10 AM, with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) 1, the ADON 1 stated that besides the Director of Nursing (DON) 1 as an RN, they have two other RNs (RN 1, RN 2). The ADON 1 claimed that there was no RN scheduled for today, and the facility was aware of the policy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-12 · 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 protect residents from food contamination for a universe of 29 residents when one kitchen staff was not wearing a hair net during food preparation. This failure had the potential to contaminate food, equipment, and utensils. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on July 8, 2024, at 02:08 PM, in the kitchen, Kitchen Aide (KA) 1 was not wearing a hair net while preparing food. When pointing out the absence of a hair net on, she then walked to the kitchen entrance and put on a hair net. KA 1 stated she should have put a hair net on, and the facility have said many times that staff are to wear hair net while in the kitchen. During an interview on July 12, 2024, at 11:07 AM, with the Dietary Services Supervisor (DSS) 1, the DSS stated staff should wear the hair net due to potential contamination of food, equipment, or utensils. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Hair nets & personal permitted in FNSD (Food and Nutrition Services Department), dated September 2023,…
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 · E2024-07-12 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — patternProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 nursing staff were certified and kept current in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (first aid technique to help a person who has stopped breathing) for five (5) of 18 Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) (CNA 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) when the facility was unable to provide documented evidence of current CPR certification. This failure had the potential to negatively affect residents' care due to unqualified or incompetent staff during emergencies at the facility. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on [DATE], at 11:10 AM, with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) 1, and the Director of Staff Development (DSD) 1, CNA 1's file, undated, was reviewed. There was no CPR's certification on file. The ADON 1 and DSD 1 explained that when CNA 1 was hired on [DATE], the facility failed to check if the CNA 1 had a CPR card. The DSD 1 further stated that for the last six months, he has not kept track of the staff CPR certification status. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-12 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a safe operating equipment for one (1) of 29 residents (Resident 27) when Resident 27's bedrail had sharp edges on it. This failure resulted in Resident 27 sustaining an abrasion on her right elbow from the sharp edges which may cause an infection and putting Resident 27's health in jeopardy. Findings: A review of resident 27's admission Record (which contains demographic and medical information), indicated, Resident 27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included elevated white blood cell count, abnormality of albumin (a protein in your blood plasma), insomnia (difficulty falling asleep, staying asleep, or both), and weakness. During a concurrent observation and interview on July 8, 2024, at 4:14 PM, Resident 27's right elbow was observed in wound dressing. Resident 27 stated, she got a cut from a sharp edge of her bedrail. Upon closer inspection, the right-side bedrail's far end was found to have sharp…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure their post-fall protocol and prevention was implemented in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1 had a fall incident on December 2, 2023. This failure had the potential to place Resident 1 at risk for further falls and injuries. Findings: During an observation on Resident 1, on January 4, 2024, at 12:15 PM, in Resident 1's room, Resident 1 was lying in bed with the head of the bed elevated. A review of Resident's 1's admission Record (a document that gives summary of the resident's information) indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnoses that included dementia(a general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life), mood disturbance (feeling of distress or sadness, or symptoms of depression and anxiety), and anxiety(feeling of fear,…
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 before2023-05-18 · 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 ensure safe and sanitary food preparation and storage practices in the kitchen when: 1.There was no air gap (a separation between the water supply and potentially contaminated [dirty] water in a sink or other plumbing fixture) found at the food preparation sink. When installed and maintained properly, the air gap works to prevent drain water from backing up into the sink and possibly contaminating the area used for washing food.), which had the potential for back flow from the drain to contaminate the sink. This had the potential to cause foodborne illness (stomach illness acquired from ingesting contaminated food). 2.The bench can opener (counter mounted) had dried crusted food on the shank (blade) which could transfer to residents' foods. This had the potential to cause foodborne illness. The facility's failures to ensure a safe and sanitary kitchen resulted in the increased risk of resident harm from food-borne illness to a population of 28 immuno-compromised (decreased ability to fight off infections and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
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 Minimum Data Set (MDS-a computerized clinical assessment tool ) Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA-a comprehensive assessment that must be completed when the resident meets the significant change guidelines for either major improvement or decline) within 14 days, for one of six sampled residents (Resident 24) who was reviewed for a fall with fracture (broken bone) of first lumbar vertebra (backbone within the lower back). This failure had the potential to delay in identification and implementation of necessary interventions to address the resident's care and support needs. Findings: During a review of Resident 24's admission Record (contains demographic information), indicated, Resident 24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnoses included dementia (loss of cognitive functioning with thinking, memory which affects a person's daily activities), current pathological fracture of vertebrae and depression . 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 · D2023-05-18 · tag F0926 — failed to keep the home smoke-free / fire-safe — isolatedHave policies on smoking.
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 follow their policy and procedure (P&P) for smoking for one of six sampled residents (Resident 10) when the facility did not perform a Smoking Risk Assessment of Resident 10. This failure had the potential to delay in identification and implementation of necessary interventions to address the resident's care and which could jeopardize the health and safety of the other residents in the facility. Findings: During a review of Resident 10's admission Record (clinical record of resident's admission information) indicated, Resident 10 was admitted on [DATE]. During a concurrent observation and interview with Resident 10, on May 16, 2023, at 4: 42 PM, Resident 10 was awake alert, able to verbalize her needs. Resident 10 stated, she uses six to seven regualr cigarettes per day. During a review of Resident 10's admission Smoking Safety Evaluation, dated June 3, 2022, at 6:46 PM, indicated, Resident 10 utilizes tobacco. During a review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLANIGAN, KEVIN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 08/18/2025 |
| SOUTHERN INYO HEALTHCARE DISTRICT | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 01/01/1966 |
| FARRER, TODD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/10/2018 |
| KENNEDY, JASON | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 06/30/2024 |
| PERKINS, MARITZA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 12/01/2017 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
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 555527. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-29, 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.