La Sierra Care Center
2424 M Street, Merced, CA 95340 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 68 certified beds · (209) 723-4224 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 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 | 4.1% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.3% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.3% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 10.4% | 7.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.9% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.0% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.1% | 13.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.5% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 15.7% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.0% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 5.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.6% | 23.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.0% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.01 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.26 | 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.
52.2% 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 62 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 36.0% 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 25 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 0.11 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 7% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 46% 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 | 52.2%CMS range 42.8–62.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 7.5–15.7 | 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 | 36.0% | 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 | 40.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 32.0% | 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 | 97.9% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.1% | 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 | 6.5%CMS range 4.0–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.95 | 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 68 beds and averages 65.8 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.93 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.53 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 3.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.04 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-23 · tag F0801 — patternEmploy 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 a Registered Dietitian (RD) comprehensively and frequently evaluated the effectiveness of food service operations when lapses in the delivery of services associated with meal accuracy and nutritional value of menus, as well as food safety (cross reference F 803, F 806, and F 812) occurred.This failure resulted in lack of sufficient oversight from the RD, which placed 62 out of 65 residents who received food from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness (illness caused by food contaminated with bacteria, viruses, parasites, or toxins) and/or altered nutritional intake, both of which had the potential to result in death and/or nutritional related medical complications.During an interview on 1/22/26 at 5:00 p.m. with the Registered Dietician (RD), the RD stated she had been a remote full-time RD for the facility since 6/2025. The RD stated she visited the facility in 6/2025, 8/2025 and 11/2025. The RD stated she only had a documented onsite kitchen audit for 11/11/25. The RD stated the primary focus of her duties were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-23 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure 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, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure five out of five residents on pureed diets (pudding-like consistency food, requiring no chewing and easy to swallow) received the correct serving scoop size for lunch on 1/21/26 when stir fried chicken was served with a #8 scoop (1/2 cup) instead of the required recipe #6 scoop (2/3 cup).This failure resulted in the wrong serving size of a menu item which could result in weight variances, inaccurate nutritional monitoring and lead to serious medical conditions.During a review of the facility's document titled, Diet Type Report, dated 1/22/26, the document indicated five residents at the facility received pureed diet textures.During a review of the facility's menu recipe document titled, Stir Fried Chicken, dated 2026, the recipe indicated, .suggested portion # 6 SCP [scoop].During a review of the facility's menu recipe document titled, Stir Fried Chicken Method, undated, the recipe indicated, .puree.serve with a # 6 scoop .During a concurrent observation and interview on 1/21/26 at 11:47 a.m. with [NAME]…
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 · E2026-01-23 · 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 provide appealing and nutritional alternative menu items to 62 out of 65 residents eating at the facility when there was no posted or designated alternative meal menu and the kitchen only designated peanut butter and jelly, grilled cheese and ham and cheese sandwiches as an alternative meal option.This failure resulted in residents having no designated appealing and nutritional alternative meal options, and had the potential to result in decreased satisfaction and resident food intake.During an observation on 1/20/26 at 9:14 a.m. no alternative meal menu was posted outside the kitchen on the menu wall.During an observation on 1/20/26 at 9:16 a.m. no alternative meal menu was posted inside the kitchen.During an observation on 1/20/26 at 11:53 a.m. no alternative meal menu was posted inside the two dining rooms.During a concurrent observation and interview on 1/20/26 at 10:37 a.m. with Resident 20, in Resident 20's room, no alternative meal menu was posted or provided. Resident 20 stated he had a copy of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food and beverages were stored, distributed, and served safely in accordance with professional standards of food service safety for 62 out of 65 residents eating at the facility when: Four 48 fluid ounce (fl oz- a unit of measurement) prune juice bottles were not labeled with a received-on date label. The dry food storage room did not have a temperature record log. The food preparation sink did not have an air gap (space between the end of sink pipe and top of sink to prevent backflow). These failures had the potential to result in the serving of expired, spoiled, or contaminated food and beverage items which could result in foodborne illness (illness caused by food contaminated with bacteria, viruses, parasites, or toxins).1.During a concurrent observation and interview on 1/20/26 at 9:26 a.m., in the dry food storage room, with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), four 48 fl oz prune juice bottles were observed with no received-on date label. The CDM stated the four prune juice bottles did not have…
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 before2026-01-23 · 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 medical records were complete and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice for three of eight sampled residents (Resident 4, Resident 9, and Resident 31) when Resident 4, Resident 9 and Resident 31's copy of Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST - a medical order signed by both the patient and medical provider that specifies the types of medical treatment a patient wishes to receive toward the end of life) were incomplete.This failure had the potential for Resident 4, Resident 9, and Resident 31's decisions regarding treatment options and end of life wishes to not be honored.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on [DATE] at 10:20 a.m. in Resident 31's room, Resident 31 was observed dressed, lying in bed. Resident stated he did not remember how long he had been at the facility or why he was at the facility.During a review of Resident 31's admission Record (AR - 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 · Ecited before2026-01-23 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review during the survey period of 1/20/26 through 1/23/26, the facility failed to provide the minimum of at least 80 square feet per resident in 19 of 23 multiple resident rooms (rooms 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 23).This failure had the potential for residents to not have reasonable accommodations for privacy or adequate space for care to be rendered.Findings:Resident rooms 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 23 did not meet the required square footage requirements. However, variations were in accordance with the particular needs of the residents. The residents had privacy, there was sufficient room for nursing care and resident ambulation. Wheelchairs and toilet facilities were accessible. The closets and storage space were adequate. Bedside stands were available. The waiver will not adversely affect the health and safety of residents. Room Beds Square Feet1 3 220 2 3 2203 3 2204 3 220 5 3 2106 3 2207 3 22010 3 232 11 3 21612 3 22013 3 22014 3 22815 3 22516 3…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-23 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide reasonable accommodation to meet the needs of one of eight sampled residents (Resident 28) when Resident 28, whose vision was severely impaired (no vision or sees only light, colors or shapes column eyes do not appear to follow objects) and dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADL- a basic skill needed to carry out tasks of everyday life), call light was not within reach.This failure resulted in Resident 28 to be unable to communicate with facility staff for help when needed and be at risk for falls and injury.Findings:During a review of Resident 28's admission Record (AR - a summary of information regarding a patient which includes patient identification, past medical history, insurance status, care providers, family contact information and other pertinent information), dated 1/22/26, the AR indicated, Resident 28, was admitted to the facility on [DATE], acute care hospital and had diagnoses that included . Legal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan for one of eight sampled residents (Resident 28) when Resident 28's whose vision was severely impaired (no vision or sees only light, colors or shapes column eyes do not appear to follow objects) and did not have care plan interventions that were specific to her vision needs.This failure resulted in staff not assisting with meal set up, cue (a gentle hint or signal) and prompting (an act of assisting) of meals, and assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) care and had the potential for Resident 28 specific needs to be unmet.During a review of Resident 28's admission Record (AR - a summary of information regarding a patient which includes patient identification, past medical history, insurance status, care providers, family contact information and other pertinent information), dated 1/22/26, the AR indicated, Resident 28, was admitted to the facility on [DATE], acute care hospital and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-23 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to meet professional standards of practice for three of seventeen sampled residents (Resident 13, Resident 19 and Resident 35) when:Resident 13 was administered hydrocodone-acetaminophen (opioid pain medication used to treat moderate to severe pain) 12 times outside of ordered administration parameters from 1/15/26-1/22/26.Resident 19 was administered tramadol HCL (opioid pain medication used to treat moderate to severe pain) 48 times outside of ordered administration parameters from 11/1/25-1/22/26.These failures had the potential to result in inadequate pain management practices of Resident 13 and Resident 19 which had the potential to lead to adverse consequences such as complications, overdose, misuse or death. 3. Resident 35 did not receive oxygen (O2- a colorless, odorless and tasteless gas essential for life) therapy as ordered by the physician on 1/8/26.This failure placed Resident 35 at risk of excessive oxygenation and respiratory…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-23 · 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 drugs and biologicals (a substance such as vaccines or drugs derived from a living organism used for treatment) were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional standards and practice when one of eight bottles of prescription eye drops (physician prescribed medication used in the eyes) were not labeled with the resident's name, directions for use, or expiration date.This failure placed residents at risk of receiving the wrong medication which could lead to medication adverse (resulting in negative or harmful effect) reactions.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 1/23/2026 at 11:03 a.m. with Registered Nurse (RN) 2 at Station 2, the medication cart was examined. One of eight prescription eye drop bottles was observed without a label of the resident's name or ordered administration instructions for use. RN 2 stated the bottle should have been labeled in case it came out of its container box so staff would know which resident it was for and so it was not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program during medication administration for three of 15 sampled residents (Resident 9, Resident 5, and Resident 35) when:1. During a blood glucose check (a process for measuring the concentration of glucose in the blood) and medication administration to a resident on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms [bacteria that have become resistant to certain antibiotics] that requires gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities), Registered Nurse (RN) 2 placed a tray containing supplies for patient care on Resident 9's bedside table who was on EBP, then placed the tray in the medication cart without sanitizing it after providing care and medication administration to Resident 9.2. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was not worn during care for Resident 35 and Resident 5.…
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 · D2025-11-19 · 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 develop and implement a baseline care plan (a personalized, written document that outlines a resident's health needs, goals, and the specific actions and services to be provided) for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1 was a known elopement (a resident who leaves a nursing facility without authorization or staff knowledge) risk and did not have a care plan in place for elopement.This failure resulted in Resident 1 not having a care plan with interventions in place to prevent elopement and led to Resident 1 eloping from the facility on the evening of 11/16/25.During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR - a summary of important information regarding a patient which includes patient identification, past medical history, insurance status, care providers, family contact information and other pertinent information), the AR indicated, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia (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 before2025-04-03 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to follow facility's policies and procedures that meet professional standards of quality when: 1.) One of three sampled Residents (Resident 1) did not have nursing documentation in the progress notes for 346 times that he was found on the floor and head-to-toe assessments were not complete. This failure result in no head-to-toe assessments completed and had the potential for delay in care of for Resident 1 and missed opportunity for updating his care plan. 2.) Two of five Certified Nursing Assistant ' s (CNA) working during the afternoon shift were not wearing any identification badges identifying themselves as staff. This failure had the potential for facility residents to not know who was providing care to them, and if they worked in the facility. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR) (document containing resident demographic information and medical diagnosis), dated 3/24/2025, the AR indicated Resident 1 was originally…
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 · E2024-10-23 · tag F0800 — patternProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
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 assess dietary preferences for seven of ten (Resident 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) sampled residents when they were not assessed for food preferences within 48 hours of admission. This failure resulted in Resident 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10's food preferences to not be considered when the facility provided meals. Findings: During an interview on 10/23/24 at 9:57 a.m. with Resident 1, Resident 1 stated she told staff multiple times she doesn't drink milk. Resident 1 stated even though she told multiple staff members, they keep bringing her milk. Resident 1 stated no one has asked her preference regarding any dietary foods. During a concurrent interview and record review on 10/23/24 at 11:30 a.m. with the Registered Dietitian (RD), Resident 1's, 3's, 6's, 7's, 8's, 9's, 10's Electronic Medical Record (EMR-digital version of the paper charts which contains the medical and treatment history of the patient/resident), dated 10/23/24 were reviewed. The EMR's indicated, Resident 1, 9, and 10 Dietary Profile/Preference was not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-23 · 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
During an interview on 08/20/2024 at 12:55 PM, Resident #29 stated they took one look at the lunch meal and could not eat it, so they asked for chicken noodle soup instead. During an interview on 08/20/2024 at 2:02 PM, Resident #58 stated the lunch was cold and the meat was dry but at least they got protein. According to an admission MDS, with an ARD of 06/27/2024, Resident #58 had a BIMS score of 13, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Based on observation, interview, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to provide palatable meals. This failure had the potential to affect all residents who received meals from the facility's kitchen. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Food and Nutrition Services, revised in 10/2017, revealed, Each resident is provided with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs, taking into consideration the preferences of each resident. The policy also revealed, 7. Food and nutrition services staff will inspect food trays to ensure that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-23 · 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 facility document and policy review, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff did not document lunch meal service temperatures prior to placing the food items on the steam table for meal service and failed to ensure dietary staff utilized proper hand hygiene during meal service. These failures had the potential to affect all residents who received meals from the facility's kitchen. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Food Preparation and Service, revised 10/2017, revealed, Food and nutrition services employees shall prepare and serve food in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. The policy also indicated, 5. Food preparation staff will adhere to proper hygiene and sanitary practices to prevent the spread of foodborne illness. The policy also indicated, 6. Bare hand contact with food is prohibited. Gloves must be worn when handling food directly. However, gloves can also become contaminated and/or soiled and must be changed between tasks. 1. During an initial tour of the facility's kitchen, on 08/19/2024 at 9:40 AM,…
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 before2024-08-23 · tag F0912 — widespreadProvide 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, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents' rooms measured at least 80 square (sq) feet (ft) per resident in 19 (Rooms 1 through 7, Rooms 10 through 20, and room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 23 resident rooms in the facility. Findings included: A facility policy titled Bedrooms revised 05/2017, revealed, All residents are provided with clean, comfortable and safe bedrooms that meet federal and state requirements. The policy revealed, 2. Bedrooms measure at least 80 square feet of space per resident in double rooms, and at least 100 square feet of space in single rooms. The Client Accommodations Analysis, signed by the Maintenance Supervisor (MS) and dated 08/20/2024, revealed the following: - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 73.3 sq ft for each resident - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 73.3 sq ft for each resident - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 73.3 sq ft for each resident - In room [ROOM NUMBER], there was 73.3 sq ft for each resident - In…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-23 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5 percent (%). Observation of medication administration revealed the facility had 3 medication errors out of 28 total opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 10.71%, affecting 2 (Residents #9 and Resident #32) of 9 residents observed during medication administration. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Administering Medications, revised in 04/2019, specified, 4. Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame. The policy further specified, 10. The individual administering the medication checks the label THREE (3) times to verify the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right time and right method (route) of administration before giving the medication. 11. The following information is checked/verified for each resident prior to administering medications: a. Allergies to medications; and b. Vital signs, if necessary. 1. An admission Record 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 · E2024-08-23 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 3 (Residents #9, #32, and #19) of 12 residents reviewed during medication administration and for unnecessary medication were free from significant medication errors. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure physician ordered vital signs were obtained prior to administering medications for Resident #9 and Resident #32 and failed to hold Resident #19's medications when their blood pressure and/or pulse were outside of physician-ordered parameters for administration. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Administering Medications, revised in 04/2019, specified, 4. Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame. The policy further specified, 10. The individual administering the medication checks the label THREE (3) times to verify the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right time and right method (route) of administration before giving the medication. 11. The following information is checked/verified for…
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 · D2024-08-23 · 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, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurate for 2 (Resident #46 and Resident #69) of 17 sampled residents. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Resident Assessments, revised October 2023, revealed, 12. Information in the MDS assessments will consistently reflect information in the progress notes, plans of care and resident observations/interviews. 1. An admission Record revealed the facility Resident #46 on 08/12/2022. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of hypertensive heart disease and heart failure. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/08/2024, revealed that the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. The MDS revealed the resident used a hearing aid. A quarterly MDS assessment, with an ARD of 08/08/2024, revealed that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-23 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure an accurate Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was submitted for 1 (Resident #35) of 3 residents reviewed for PASRR. Findings included: During an interview on 08/22/2024 at 4:44 PM, Clinical Resource stated the facility did not have a policy for PASRR, but they followed the letter received from the State Department of Health Care Services dated 08/09/2023. The letter from the State Department of Health Care Services dated 08/09/2023, specified, Per Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) sections 483.100 through 483.138, individuals identified with a SMI [serious mental illness] and/or ID/DD/RC [intellectual disability/developmental disability/related conditions] must be screened and evaluated to determine whether SNF [skilled nursing facility] level of care and specialized services in the least restrictive setting that best meets their needs are required (PASRR Determination). All individuals, regardless of payer source, seeking admission to a Medicaid-certified…
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 · D2024-08-23 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to revise 1 (Resident #15) of 17 sampled residents' comprehensive care plan. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, revised in March 2022, revealed, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #15 on 03/09/2018. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage affecting the left nondominant side, flaccid hemiplegia affecting the left nondominant side, and contracted left hand. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/29/2024, revealed Resident #15 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status…
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 · D2024-08-23 · 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
Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide fortified food intended for nutritional supplement for 1 (Resident #19) of 4 residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Food and Nutrition Services, revised 10/2017, revealed, 1. The multidisciplinary staff, including nursing staff, the attending physician and the dietitian will assess each resident's nutritional needs, food likes, dislikes and eating habits, as well as physical, functional, and psychosocial factors that affect eating and nutritional intake and utilization. 2. A resident-centered diet and nutrition plan will be based on this assessment. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #19 on 11/10/2022. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included a diagnosis of protein-calorie malnutrition. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/07/2024, revealed Resident #19 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated the 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide proper monitoring during the administration of a nebulizer treatment for 1 (Resident #35) of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Administering Medications through a Small Volume (Handheld) Nebulizer, revised 10/2010, indicated, The purpose of this procedure is to safely and aseptically administer aerosolized particles of medication into the resident's airway. The section titled Steps in the Procedure included 8. Dispense medication into nebulizer cup. 12. Turn on the nebulizer and check the outflow port for visible mist. 13. Ask the resident to hold the mouthpiece gently between his/her lips (or apply face mask). 14. Instruct the resident to take a deep breath, pause briefly and then exhale normally. 15. Encourage the resident to repeat the above breathing patter until the medication is completely nebulized, or until the designated time of treatment has been reached. 16. Remain with the resident for the treatment. 17. Monitor…
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 · D2024-08-23 · 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, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure prescribed medications were available for 2 (Resident #2 and Resident #29) of 5 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Medication Ordering and Receiving From Pharmacy, effective 04/2008, specified, Policy Medications and related products are received from the dispensing pharmacy on a timely basis. The section of the policy titled, A. Ordering Medications from the Dispensing Pharmacy specified, 2) If not automatically refilled by the pharmacy, repeat medications (refills) are written on a medication order form/ordered by peeling the bottom part of the pharmacy label and placing it in the appropriate area on the order form provided by the pharmacy for that purpose and ordered as follows: a. Reorder medication five days in advance of need to assure an adequate supply is on hand. The policy also indicated, c. The refill order is called in, faxed, or otherwise transmitted to the pharmacy. 3) New medications, except for emergency or stat…
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 before2024-08-23 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders for vital signs were transcribed to medication administration records for 2 (Resident #9 and Resident #32) of 9 residents observed during medication administration. Findings included: 1. An admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #9 on 10/13/2017. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included a diagnosis of primary hypertension. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/22/2024, revealed Resident #9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #9's care plan included a focus area revised 01/30/2018 that indicated the resident had hypertension. Interventions directed staff to administer atenolol, an antihypertensive medication, as ordered by the physician to monitor for side effects such as orthostatic hypotension and increased heart rate (revised 06/10/2020), and to hold the atenolol if the resident's systolic blood…
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 before2023-10-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1's safety care plan intervention to not have Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1 [staff accused of providing rough care] was assigned to care for Resident 1 on 12/27/22. This failure had the potential for Resident 1 ' s safety to be compromised and potentially increase his emotional distress manifested by restlessness. Findings: During an interview on 12/27/22, at 1:05 p.m., with CNA 1, CNA 1 stated, [Resident 1] accused me of providing rough care early this month. I did not do it. After the reported incident, I was assigned to care for [Resident 1] several times, including today. I was not told by the Staffing Coordinator, the Charge Nurse or Director of Nursing that I can ' t be assign to care for [Resident 1]. During a concurrent interview and record review on 12/27/22, at 1:10 p.m., with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1, Resident 1's Care Plan, (CP), dated 12/10/22 was reviewed. The CP indicated, .…
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 · F2021-04-29 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assurance Committee performed annual review of the infection control manual . This failure has the potential for caregivers to lack access to current standards of practice for infection prevention and control needed to provide optimal care to residents. Findings: During an interview and concurrent record review on 4/28/21, at 9:00 a.m., the infection preventionist (IP) was unable to provide evidence the infection control manual had an annual review in the past 12 months. There was no evidence of a signature page indicating review or approval of the manual within the last 12 months in any form. During review of the facility Infection Control Committee Meeting Minutes, no evidence of the infection control manual as being reviewed or approved during any of the following meetings occurring in 2020 and 2021: 7/8/20, 8/14/20, 10/9/20, 1/31/21, 2/28/21, and 3/31/21. The IP confirmed these were all the meetings that have taken place in 2020 and 2021. During an interview and concurrent record review on 04/29/21,…
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 · E2021-04-29 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
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 grievances identified during Resident Council (a group of residents that meet on a monthly basis to discuss issues/concerns within the facility) were addressed. This failure has the potential for no action and resolution of residents grievances which might affect their overall care. Findings: During the Resident Council meeting on 4/27/21, at 3:05 p.m., a resident (Resident 6) was asked how the facility addresses resident council concerns and grievances. Resident 6 stated, I don't know if the staff is receptive or not, they don't follow through and they pass the buck. During an interview on 4/28/21, at 3:20 p.m., with Activities Supervisor (AS 1), AS 1 indicated the resident council uses the Resident/Family Council Response form to document concerns and or grievances. When asked if the facility keeps a log of the Resident/Family Council Response forms, AS 1 was silent and unable to provide documentation. During an interview on 4/29/21, at 10:36 a.m., with Social Worker (SW 1), SW 1 was asked if the facility keeps 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 · E2021-04-29 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 music activity designed to encourage resident participation and interests was provided for two of three sampled residents (Resident 24 and Resident 34). This facility failure had the potential to result in decreased psychosocial well-being. Findings: During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Activity Programs, dated 2018, the P&P indicated, Activity programs are designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental and psychosocial well-being of each resident . Our activity programs are designed to encourage maximum individual participation and are geared to the individual resident's needs . Adequate space and equipment are provided to ensure that needed services identified in the resident's plan of care are met. During an observation on 04/26/21, at 10:09 a.m., in Resident 24's room, Resident 24 was observed lying in bed, in fetal position. The activity calendar posted on the wall, 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 · E2021-04-29 · 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: 1. Hot water temperatures in the resident's environment was safely monitored and maintained. 2 . Accident hazards in a resident accessible area for four of four sampled residents (Resident 7, 22, 24, and 34) and three unsampled residents (Resident 5, 36, and 39) were identified. These failures had the potential to cause accidents and injuries. Findings: During an observation on 4/26/21, starting at 10:32 a.m., in Resident rooms [ROOM NUMBER], the bathroom hot water was noted to feel too hot to touch. During a concurrent interview and record review on 4/28/21, at 2:45 p.m., in the maintenance room, with a maintenance supervisor (MS 1), MS 1 stated the water temperature is kept at 118-120 Fahrenheit (F). MS 1 further stated he monitors the water temperature weekly at about five different locations. The temperatures are recorded on the, Facility Water Temperature, (FWT) log. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-04-29 · 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 ensure 19 of 23 resident bedrooms (room [ROOM NUMBER], 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 23) provided and maintained the required square footage of 80 square feet (Sq. Ft.) per resident. This failure had the potential for residents to not have reasonable privacy or adequate space. Findings: During an interview on 4/26/21 at 9:38 a.m., the director of nursing (DON) indicated there was no renovation done on the residents room since the last survey. During the initial tour observation on 4/26/21 at 10:00 a.m., the following rooms did not provide minimum square footage as required by regulation. The facility has maintained resident privacy, there was sufficient space for staff and residents to walk around the room. Closets and bathroom was adequate. Room # Sq. Ft. Number of Residents 1 220 3 2 220 3 3 220 3 4 220 3 5 210 3 6 220 3 7 220 3 10 232 3 11 216 3 12 220 3 13 220 3 14 228 3 15 225 3 16 234 3 17 217 3 18 224…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-04-29 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure call lights were within residents reach for one sampled resident ( Resident 21) and two un-sampled residents (Resident 33 and 11). This failure had the potential for the residents' calls for assistance to be not timely met. Findings: According to Fundamentals of Nursing - 9th Edition ([NAME] et al; Elsevier: 2017, p. 391) indicated, call lights are additional safety features found in health care settings. During an observation on 4/26/2021, at 9:36 a,m., inside the rooms of Residents 33, 11, and 21, the call lights were draped over the overhead lights and not within the reach. During another observation and concurrent interview on 4/26/2021, at 10:33 a.m.,inside the rooms of Resident 33, 11 and 21, the call lights were draped over the overhead lights and not within reach. Resident 21 stated, I have to yell all the time but would like to use the call light they hang it and I can't reach it. During an observation and 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 · Dcited before2021-04-29 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure acceptable standards of clinical documentation was implemented for one of 14 sampled residents ( Resident 29) when symptoms of depression were not accurately monitored as ordered . This failure has the potential for continued medication administration with no justification. Findings: According to Nursing Fundamentals by [NAME], [NAME] and [NAME], Second Edition, 2010, page 322, Documentation is the professional responsibility of all health care practitioners. It provides written evidence of the practitioner's accountability to the client, the institution, the profession and society. During a review of the clinical record for Resident 29, the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for April 2021 indicated a physician order dated 3/22/21 for Remeron (Mirtazapine medication used to treat symptoms of depression), 15 milligram (mg) 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for eating less than 50% r/t (related to) major depressive disorder. During a 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 · Dcited before2021-04-29 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure unsealed, open medication bottle with the open date/time and expiration date was labeled. This failure has the potential for staff to continue using the medication beyond its' expiration date. Findings: During an observation and concurrent interview on 4/27/21 at 11:23 a.m.,with licensed vocational nurse (LVN 4) inside the medication storage room at nurse station 1, an unsealed, open bottle of Rolaids, (an over-the-counter medication used to treat symptoms of too much stomach acid), was noted stored on one of the shelves for stored medication . The bottle had a name written on it but there was no label indicating the expiration date, date/time the bottle was unsealed and opened . LVN 4 was asked about the medication and stated the medication is for a resident. LVN 4 acknowledged that there was no open date/time and expiration date on the bottle. LVN 4 proceeded on discarding the bottle of medication. During a review of the facility policy and procedure, titled Labeling of Medication Containers,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-04-29 · 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 the refrigerator designated for food had documented temperatures with in the acceptable range per policy and procedures. This failure had the potential to lead to growth of micro-organisms, which could lead to foodborne illnesses in the vulnerable population residing in this facility. Findings: The facility policy and procedure, titled Refrigerators and Freezers, dated December 2014, indicates Acceptable temperature ranges are 35 to 40 degrees Fahrenheit for refrigerators . During an observation and record review on 4/26/21, at 11:48 a.m., the food refrigerator located on Nursing Station One contained juices. The refrigerator temperature log (RTL) had several recorded temperatures above 35 to 40 degrees Fahrenheit range noted in the facility policy and procedure. The following temperatures were logged: 4/18/21 PM Shift: 42 4/19/21 NOC Shift: 42 4/20/21 NOC Shift: 42 4/22/21 NOC Shift: 44 4/23/21 NOC Shift: 46 The RTL header indicated documented reference range for food refrigerators as 36-46, which was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-04-29 · tag F0920 — isolatedProvide at least one room set aside to use as a resident dining room and for activities, that is a good size, with good lighting, air flow and furniture.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the dining area used during meal times for one sampled residents (Resident 21) and one un-sampled residents (Resident 36) was well lit. This failure had the potential for Residents 21 and 36 to have decreased enjoyment of dining experience with risk to affect the residents' nutritional intake and well-being. Findings: During an observation and concurrent interviews on 4/26/2021, at 12:32 p.m., in the dining room no lights were on and Resident 36 stated it was better to eat with the lights on. Certified nursing assistant (CNA3) stated it depends on resident but that it is dark in the room . CNA3 confirmed Resident 36 liked the lights on. Resident 21 stated they would like the light on when they eat. CNA4 confirmed Resident 21 would like lights on while eating. During an interview on 4/29/2021, at 11:22 a.m., with the director of nursing (DON), the DON confirmed the expectation is for the dining room to be well lit for resident comfort and well-being. During a review of the facility policy titled…
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 · C2024-08-23 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain copies of the posted direct care daily staffing numbers. This had the potential to affect all residents that resided in the facility. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Posting Direct Care Daily Staffing Numbers, revised in August 2022, revealed, Our facility will post on a daily basis for each shift nursing staff data, including the number of nursing personnel responsible for providing direct care to residents. The section titled Policy Interpretation and Implementation included 5. The previous shift's forms are maintained with the current shift form for a total of 24 hours of staffing information in a single location. Once a form is removed, it is forwarded to the office of the director of nursing services (DNS) and filed as a permanent record. 6. Records of staffing information for each shift are kept for a minimum of eighteen (18) months or as required by state law (whichever is greater). During an interview on 08/22/2024 at 2:46 PM, the Staffing Coordinator stated she was responsible for…
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 CAMBRIDGE HEALTHCARE SERVICES — 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 | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 4.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
The other 31 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRESCENT FACILITIES OPERATIONS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 02/07/2007 |
| BERING PROPERTIES LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2007 |
| IRA & RACHEL SMEDRA FAMILY IRREVOCABLE GIFT TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2007 |
| JENMAX ENTERPRISES LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2007 |
| JENNIFER NURIT SMEDRA TRUST 1997 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2007 |
| JK-CSH JV LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 11/01/2006 |
| MANHATTAN FIVE PARTNERS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 11/01/2006 |
| THE HYMAN & BETTY INGBER FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 10/10/2013 |
| WIN WIN ENTERPRISES, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2007 |
| BH ALLIANCE | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 11/01/2006 |
| THE JACOB WINTNER TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 11/01/2006 |
| THE WINTNER LIVING TRUST DATED 7/08/1992 | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 02/01/2007 |
| WINTNER, JACOB | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/01/2007 |
| BRETSCH, GREGORY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/25/2019 |
| DAROUZE, MICHAEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/22/2024 |
| SMEDRA, IRA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2014 |
| CAMBRIDGE HEALTHCARE SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2014 |
| BUTENKO, JULIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/24/2023 |
| CAPELA, HEIDI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/03/2023 |
| HASSELL, LANCE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/25/2022 |
| LUTZ, LINDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2012 |
| MANOHARAN, ARUN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/24/2024 |
| SALAZAR, PAULINA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2020 |
| SILVEIRA, SKYLER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/01/2021 |
| 2424 M STREET LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/15/2006 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 43 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
14 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 $884K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 055271. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-23, 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.