Los Banos Post Acute

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

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.

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.

49.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 123 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 64.3% 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 56 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 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 40% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 59 beds and averages 53.4 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 6 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 4.06 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.31 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.55 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 3.60 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.24 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.36 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

24 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 14 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2025-08-08 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
  Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) provided services for at least 8 consecutive hours a day for eight (5/3/25, 5/10/25, 5/31/25, 6/22/25, 6/24/25, 6/28/25, 7/6/27, 8/3/25) of 90 days sampled. This failure had the potential to result in residents not receiving services required to be provided by an RN . During an interview on 8/6/25 at 3:46 p.m. with the Staff Coordinator (SC), the SC stated no registered nurses (RN)were on working on 5/3/25, 5/10/25, 5/31/25, 6/22/25, 6/24/25, 6/28/25, 7/6/27, 8/3/25. The SC stated she was not responsible for making the schedule for the registered nurses. The SC stated the Director of Nurses (DON) was responsible for the nurse's schedule. During an interview on 8/7/25 at 4:33 p.m. with the DON, the DON stated it was hard to hire an RN. The DON stated having RN on schedule daily could have provided better quality of care for the residents. The DON stated it is important to have RN working. The DON stated a RN could have provided better quality of care to residents and assessments. The DON…

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

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-08-08 · tag F0801 — widespread
  Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 58 out of 58 sampled residents had complete nutrition-focused physical exams (NFPE) completed when RD did not follow current standards of practice and the facility's job description titled, Registered Dietitian Nutritionist when she was a part-time remote employee.These failures resulted in incomplete nutrition-focused physical exams and placed residents at risk to not be accurately assessed by identifying nutritional needs.Findings: During an interview on 8/6/25 at 1:03 p.m. with the Dietary Services Manager (DSM) the DSM stated the RD was working remotely and came to the facility one time a month. The DMS stated the RD was not available in person and was available by phone or email. The DSM stated she communicated with the RD through email. The DSM stated the RD did not attend the interdisciplinary team meetings (IDT- a collaborative meeting involving various healthcare professionals to discuss and coordinate residents care) and she did not speak to residents and family members. The DSM stated she was responsible…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-08-08 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespread
  Provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] (DC) 1 was competent to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition services safely and effectively for 55 of 58 residents who received food from the kitchen when DC 1 could not demonstrate recalibration of the kitchen a thermometer according to the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) title, Thermometer Use and Calibration. This failure resulted in the facility to serve and prepare food without the food temperature taken on a calibrated thermometer for residents who obtained food from the kitchen and had the potential to cause foodborne illness (caused by consuming contaminated foods or beverages). Findings: During an observation and interview on 8/5/25 at 9:10 a.m. in the kitchen with Dietary [NAME] (DK) 1, DC 1 grabbed a cup filled the cup with ice water and inserted a thermometer into the cup with the stem (long narrow part) touching the bottom of cup. DC 1 stated it was fine for the stem of the thermometer to touch the bottom and the side of the cup when calibrating 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-08-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe, sanitary food preparation, and storage practices were followed for 55 of 58 sample residents when:1.There was not an air gap (an unobstructed vertical space between the water outlet and the flood level of a fixture), under the food preparation sink. This failure had the potential to result in residents being exposed to contaminated water which could ultimately result in residents getting food born illness.2. A bin of dried macaroni pasta, an open bag of sausage, an open bag of tortillas and a prepared fruit salad were not labeled with open or used by date.3. The resident refrigerator had food that had been brought into the facility that was not labeled with a resident name, an open or used by date.These failures had the potential to cause food-borne illness (known as food poisoning, diseases caused by consuming food or beverages contaminated with harmful bacteria) and hospitalization for all residents receiving food from the kitchen. 1.During a concurrent observation and interview on 08/04/2025…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-08-08 · tag F0868 — widespread
  Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
  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 quality assessment assurance (QAA) committee consisted of the minimum required members when the Medical Director did not attend QAA committee meetings for three consecutive quarters (1/9/25, 4/18/25, and 7/16/25). This failure had the potential to affect the overall medical care provided to all the residents in the facility because the Medical Director was not informed and did not participate in oversite activities that included identifying, analyzing and correcting problems in resident care policies and resident care areas in the facility.Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on 8/8/25 at 12:11 p.m. with the Administrator (ADM) the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) reports, dated 2025 were reviewed. The administrator stated the QAPI committee met every second Tuesday of the month, and the Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) committee met every quarter. The ADM stated the CQI committee was the same as 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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had a right to a dignified existence when three of 16 sampled residents (Resident 9, Resident 36, and Resident 43) did not have a dignity covering (a bag or holder designed to conceal and protect the catheter drainage bag [a bag that collects urine from a catheter, a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine], restoring a sense of privacy and dignity for the user) on their catheter drainage bag. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 9, Resident 36, and Resident 43 experiencing embarrassment or shame due to loss of privacy and dignity. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 8/4/2025 at 8:25 a.m. in Resident 9's room, Resident 9 was observed in bed wearing a gown. Resident 9 stated he had been in the facility for a couple of years. Resident 9 stated he had problems with his hands and knees. Resident 9 had hand contractures (a permanent tightening of the muscles, tendons, skin, 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-08 · tag F0552 — pattern
  Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
  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 five out of 16 sampled residents (Resident 4, Resident 8, Resident 11, Resident 28, and Resident 40) were informed, in advance, by the physician or other practitioner, of the risks and benefits of proposed treatment when: 1. Resident 8, Resident 11, Resident 28 and Resident 40 were receiving antipsychotic (a class of medications primarily used to treat psychosis, a mental state where individuals lose touch with reality, experiencing symptoms like hallucinations or delusions) and psychotropic (a drug or other substance that affects how the brain works and causes changes in mood, awareness, thoughts, feelings, or behavior) medications and did not sign an informed consent (a process in which a healthcare professional educates a patient about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of a given procedure or intervention). 2. Resident 4 and Resident 40 did not have a listed diagnosis on their consents for antipsychotic and psychotropic medications, 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive person-centered care plan (CP - a detailed approach to care customized to an individual resident's needs) was developed and implemented for five of 16 residents (Resident 8, Resident 15, Resident 28, Resident 40, and Resident 52) when: 1. Resident 8's care plan was not developed and implemented for the administration and monitoring of anti-psychotic medication (a class of medications primarily used to treat psychosis, a mental state where individuals lose touch with reality, experiencing symptoms like hallucinations or delusions). This failure had the potential to result in Resident 8 receiving inadequate medication efficacy (the ability to produce a desired or intended result) and potential side effects to go undocumented and had the potential for Resident 8 to not have his mental and psychosocial needs met. 2. Resident 15 and Resident 28 did not have an individualized care plan developed and implemented for the use…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-08 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to meet professional standards of practice for two of 15 sampled residents (Resident 4 and 64), when: 1. Resident 4's tube feeding (TF - a liquid form of nutrition that is carried through your body through a flexible tube) flush (water that is pushed through the feeding tube to keep it clean and prevent clogs) bag was not labeled with the date and time it was hung for administration. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 4 receiving an expired tube feeding flush and placed Resident 4 at increased risk of food born illness (any illness resulting from ingesting contaminated/spoiled foods or liquids) and infection. 2. Resident 64 had a 6.2-pound weight gain and the facility did not notify the Registered Dietician (RD) and physician. This failure had the potential for the RD and physician to not be updated and making changes and recommendations for Resident 64's weight gain. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-08 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — pattern
  Provide appropriate foot care.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  F687 - Foot Care Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide foot care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice for two of 16 sampled residents (Resident 32 and Resident 48) when Resident 32 and Resident 48 were diabetic (a condition where the body doesn't properly regulate blood sugar levels) and had long, overgrown toenails. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 32 and Resident 48 cutting their skin with their long toenails, leading to poor wound healing, infection, and hospitalization. Findings: During a review of Resident 32's admission Record (AR-a document that provides resident contact details, a brief medical history, level of functioning, preferences and wishes), dated 8/6/25, the AR indicated Resident 1 had a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic condition where the body doesn't properly use insulin, leading to elevated blood sugar levels). During a review of Resident 32's Minimum Data Set (MDS-resident assessment tool which indicates physical and cognitive abilities), the MDS…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to KALESTA HEALTHCARE GROUP — 19 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

About 73% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $396K 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