Newport Nursing And Rehabilitation Center
1555 Superior Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 59 certified beds · (949) 646-7764 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 0.0% | 10.2% | 15.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.7% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 0.0% | 9.8% | 16.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.0% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 4.3% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 0.0% | 10.2% | 21.2% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
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.
68.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 700 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 40.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 96 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 43% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 68.8%CMS range 66.0–72.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.5%CMS range 8.3–12.8 | 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 | 40.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 35.4% | 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 | 47.9% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 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 | 3.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 5.1–9.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.04 | 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 59 beds and averages 60.4 residents a day — about 102% occupied, or roughly -1 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 3.69 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.53 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.13 is below 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 3.28 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.85 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 31 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · 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, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the sanitary requirements were met in the kitchen. * The facility failed to ensure the kitchen utensils had a smooth cleanable surface and were in good condition. * The facility failed to ensure the kitchenware and kitchen utensils were clean and free of food particles or residue. * The facility failed to ensure one heavy-duty blender and one plastic blender used for the puree preparation was air dried and free of water residue prior to storing and stacking. These failures had the potential for cross contamination and foodborne illnesses to the residents consuming the food prepared in the facility's kitchen.Findings: Review of the facility's Diet Type Report dated 12/4/25, showed 61 of 61 residents consumed the food prepared in the kitchen. 1. Review of the facility's P&P titled Sanitization revised date 11/2022 showed all the utensils, counters, shelves, and equipment are kept clean, maintained in good repair and are free from breaks, corrosions, open seams, cracks 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 before2025-12-10 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, facility record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to protect the resident's rights to be free from the physical abuse by a resident for one nonsampled resident (Resident 31) investigated for abuse. * Resident 31 was hit on the left eyebrow by another resident (Resident 32), resulting in a small laceration with bleeding. Resident 32 was identified with a history of attacking others out of anger due to delusions. However, there were no specific interventions in the care plan regarding the attacking behavior. This failure had the potential for not protecting the resident and negatively impact the resident's well-being.Findings: 1. Review of the facility's P&P titled Abuse Prohibition and Prevention dated 11/2017 showed the facility strives to provide an environment which prohibits and prevents abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property. The assessment, care planning, and monitoring of residents…
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 · D2025-12-10 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and facility P&P review, the facility failed to report an abuse allegation to the CDPH and law enforcement for an unidentified number of residents investigated for abuse. * The facility failed to report an allegation of excessively rough staff providing care to the residents. This failure of not reporting abuse allegation had the potential to put the residents at risk for further abuse. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Abuse Prohibition and Prevention dated 11/2017, showed the facility has policies and procedures for screening and training employees, protection of residents and for the prevention, identification, investigation, and reporting of abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property. The purpose is to assure the facility is doing all that is within its control to prevent occurrences. The P&P further showed the facility personnel will investigate different types of incidents including:a. Identification of staff member(s) responsible for the initial reporting;b.…
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 before2025-12-10 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the physician's orders matched the medication label provided by the pharmacy for one of four nonsampled residents (Residents 58) reviewed for the medication administration. * The facility failed to ensure Resident 58's physician's order for haloperidol decanoate (antipsychotic medication) matched the instructions shown on the medication label provided by the pharmacy. This failure posed the risk for negative health outcome to the resident.Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Administering Medications revised 4/2019 showed the medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. The medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame. Medical record review for Resident 58 was initiated on 12/4/25. Resident 58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 58's H&P examination dated 10/6/25, showed Resident 58…
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 before2025-12-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to store the drugs, biologicals, and medical supplies in a safe manner. * The facility failed to ensure LVN 2 did not leave two syringes filled with two ml Haldol decanoate (antipsychotic medication) unattended at Resident 58's bedside. * The facility failed to ensure the medications in the bin for the medication disposal in Medication Room A were properly stored and disposed of. These failures had the potential for the medications to be accidentally administered or used inappropriately.Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Administering Medications revised 4/2019 showed the medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. Medications should only be removed from the cart at the time of administration and must not be left unattended. Review of the facility's P&P tiled Discarding and Destroying Medications revised 6/2025 showed both controlled and non-controlled substances may be disposed of in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the P&P for the Outside Food met the current federal regulation. This failure had the potential to cause foodborne illnesses to the medically vulnerable residents population who received food items from outside sources.Findings: Review of the CMS S&C-09-39 dated 5/29/09, showed the residents have the right to choose to accept food from the visitors, family, friends, or other guests according to their rights to make choices. According to the Code of Federal Regulations, Section S483.60(i)(3) Food Safety Requirements, the facility must have a policy regarding use and storage of food brought to residents by family and other visitors to ensure safe and sanitary, handlings, and consumption. However, review of the facility's P&P titled Behavioral Health Outside Food revised 9/6/24, showed under Storage, the food brought into the facility cannot be stored or saved. The P&P further showed the food brought by the visitors must not be stored or kept in residents' personal areas. On 12/3/25 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the refuse was stored in a sanitary manner. * The facility failed to ensure the garbage was properly stored in one of three garbage dumpsters. This failure had the potential to attract pest/rodents that carried diseases.Findings: According to the 2022 FDA (Food and Drug Administration) Food Code, the outside garbage receptacles must be constructed with tight-fitting lids or covers to prevent the scattering of the garbage or refuse by birds, the breeding of flies, or the entry of rodents. Review of the facility's P&P titled Sanitization revised date 11/2022 showed kitchen wastes that are not disposed of by mechanical means are kept in clean, leakproof, nonabsorbent, tightly closed containers and disposed of daily. Garbage and refuse containers are in good condition, without leaks, and waste is properly contained in dumpsters/ compactors with lids (or otherwise covered). Areas used for garbage disposal are free from odors and waste fats and maintained to prevent pests. On 12/3/25 at 1501 hours, an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-10 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure essential equipment were maintained in proper working condition. * The facility failed to ensure the serial number on the glucometer and the serial number on the Daily Quality Control Record for Medication Cart A was accurate. * The facility failed to ensure the glucometer for Medication Cart B was calibrated and quality control was performed. These failures had the potential for the residents requiring blood glucose checks to have inaccurate readings.Findings: Review of the facility's document Fora GD50 Glucose Monitoring System Manual, undated, showed blood glucose monitoring plays an important role in diabetes control. Long-term study showed that maintaining blood glucose levels close to normal can reduce risk of diabetes complications by up to 60%. The results provided by this system can help the healthcare professional monitor and adjust treatment plan to gain better control of diabetes. The meter provides you with plasma equivalent results. The manual further showed the control…
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 before2025-07-09 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to protect the resident's rights to be free from the physical abuse when Resident 4 was punched in the face and all over the body at two separate incidents by Resident 3. This failure caused Resident 4 to sustain bleeding from his nose, redness above his right eyebrow and on the bridge of his nose, and a bluish/purplish discoloration on his left eye extending to his left cheekbone.Findings:Review of the facility's P&P titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program revised 4/2021 showed the residents have the rights to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes but is not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse.Review of the SOC 341 Report of Suspected Dependent Adult/Elder Abuse dated 7/7/25, showed Resident 3 physically assaulted Resident 4 by striking 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 · Dcited before2025-07-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to maintain a safe and secured environment for two of five sampled residents (Residents 1 and 2).* The facility failed to ensure there were systems in place to prevent Residents 1 and 2 from eloping. This failure placed the residents at risk for harm or injury. Findings:Review of the facility's P&P titled Behavioral Health Elopement revised on 5/1/24, showed the definition of elopement as a situation in which a resident leaves the premises or a safe area without the facility's knowledge and supervision. This situation represents a risk to the resident's health and safety and places the resident at risk of heat or cold exposure, dehydration and/or other medical complications, drowning or being struck by a motor vehicle.Review of the incident report of the DON dated 6/23/25, showed at approximately 1950 hours on 6/20/25, Residents 1 and 2 had left the premises through the west exit door.1. Closed medical record review 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.
Show the remaining 31 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-05 · 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, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the sanitary requirements were met in the kitchen as evidenced by: * The facility failed to ensure the ice machine utilized for the residents and staff was maintained in a sanitary condition. * The facility failed to ensure the microwave utilized to warm up the food was in sanitary condition and free of food residue. * The facility failed to ensure the sanitary condition of the hood over the stove was maintained. * The facility failed to ensure the kitchen utensils had a smooth cleanable surface and in good condition. * The facility failed to ensure the kitchenware and kitchen utensils were clean and free of food particle or residue. * The facility failed to ensure the cutting board was kept in a sanitary condition and with cleanable surface. * The facility failed to ensure the countertop mounted can opener was in sanitary condition and free of residue. * The facility failed to ensure the heavy-duty blender used for puree preparation and the stainless-steel bucket 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 · Ecited before2024-12-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to maintain the infection control practices to prevent the development and transmission of diseases and infections. * The facility failed to show documentation of the Legionella facility risk assessment and testing protocols for Legionella and other opportunistic waterborne pathogen. * CNA 1 failed to remove the gown and gloves and perform hand hygiene after touching Resident 498 and before touching Resident A's environment. * The facility failed to ensure a N95 respirator was stored in a sanitary manner, at the entrance to a resident COVID-19 isolation room. * CNA 6 placed Resident 298's shower bin (which contained a clean towel and bathrobe belt) on top of a soiled linen cart during Resident 298's shower. * The residents' clean linen cart was observed with several bath robe belts lying on top of the clean linen cart. These failures had the potential to result in the transmission of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-05 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure LVN 1 informed the physician of a change in condition for one of three sampled residents (Resident 598) reviewed for falls. This failure had the potential for Resident 598 to have a delay in care and treatment. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Neurological Assessment (Routine) revised 10/2023 showed a routine neurological assessment is conducted to evaluate the resident for small changes over time that may be indicative of neurological injury. Routine neurological exams include assessing the mental status and level of consciousness, pupillary response, motor strength, sensation, and gait. Under the section Pupillary Response, showed to test both the pupils to ensure they are equally round and reactive to light and accommodation. Under the section Reporting, showed to notify the physician of any change in a resident's neurological status and report other information in accordance with facility policy 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 · D2024-12-05 · 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 medical record review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plans were implemented for one of thirteen final sampled residents (Resident 298) and one nonsampled resident (Resident 301). * The facility failed to implement the bilateral floor mats in accordance with the Risk for Falls care plan for Resident 298. * The facility failed to administer Resident 301's Lidocaine 4% external patch for pain management in accordance with Resident 301's At Risk for Pain care plan. These failures placed the residents at risk of not being provided appropriate, consistent, and individualized care. Findings: 1. Medical record review for Resident 298 was initiated on 12/2/24. Resident 298 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 298's care plan titled At Risk for Falls initiated 11/30/24, showed Resident 298 was at risk for falls related to generalized weakness, and a history of CVA and TIA. The care plan approaches included the placement of floor pads (mats)…
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 · D2024-12-05 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the necessary care and services were provided to prevent the development of a new pressure ulcers and promote the healing of the existing pressure ulcers for two of two final sampled residents (Residents 598 and 599) reviewed for pressure ulcers. * The facility failed to ensure the LAL mattress setting was consistent with Resident 599's weight and failed to ensure the wound treatment was administered as per the physician's order for Resident 599. * The facility failed to ensure the LAL mattress setting was consistent with Resident 598's weight. These failures had the potential for Residents 598 and 599 to not benefit from the therapy provided by the LAL mattress, and potential for delayed wound healing or worsening of existing pressure ulcers for Resident 599. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Pressure Ulcers/Skin Breakdown- Clinical Protocol revised 3/2014 showed…
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 before2024-12-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure two of three final sampled residents (Residents 298 and 600) reviewed for accident hazards remained free from the accident hazards. * The facility failed to ensure CNAs 2 and 3 used a gait belt as per the fall risk evaluation and care plan when transferring Resident 600 to the commode. * The facility failed to implement the bilateral floor mats for safety and fall prevention in accordance with the physician's order for Resident 298. These failures have the potential to place Residents 298 and 600 at risk for serious injury. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Falls and Fall Risk, Managing revised 3/2018 showed based on the previous evaluations and current data, the staff will identify interventions related to the resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falling. According to the MDS, a fall is defined as…
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 · D2024-12-05 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services to maintain the IV access for one of 13 final sampled residents (Resident 398). * The facility failed to ensure the PICC line external catheter and arm circumference measurements were completed and documented in the medical record for Resident 398. This failure had the potential to delay the identification of catheter related complications for the resident. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Central Venous Catheter Care and Dressing Changes dated 2001 showed the purpose of this procedure is to prevent complications associated with intravenous therapy, including catheter-related infections that are associated with contaminated, loosened, soiled, or wet dressings. Measure the length of the external central vascular access device with each dressing change or if catheter dislodgement is suspected. Compare with the length documented at insertion. For PICCs, measure…
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 · D2024-12-05 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to provide the safe respiratory care for one of three final sampled residents (Resident 12) reviewed for respiratory care. * The facility failed to ensure Resident 12's CPAP machine was cleaned as per the manufacturer's user cleaning guidelines. This failure had the potential to adversely affect the health and well-being Resident 12 and posed the risk for equipment contamination and respiratory complications. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled CPAP/BiPAP Support revised 3/2015 showed the specific cleaning instruction guidelines are obtained from the manufacturer of the PAP device. For the machine cleaning, to wipe the machine with warm, soapy water and rinse at least once a weeks and as needed. For the humidifier (if used), to use clean, distilled water, to clean the humidifier weekly and air dry, to disinfect, place vinegar-water solution (1:3) in the clean humidifier, soak for 30 minutes and rinsed…
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 · D2024-12-05 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the appropriate pain management for two of two final sampled residents (Residents 12 and 599) reviewed for pain management. * The facility failed to administer pain medication according to the physician's order for Resident 12 and failed to ensure non-pharmacological interventions for pain (NPI) were provided/documented prior to the administration of pain medications. * The facility failed to ensure Resident 599 was consistently provided non-pharmacological interventions for pain prior to the administration of narcotic pain medication. These failures put Residents 12 and 599 at risk for ineffective pain management. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Administering Medications revised 9/2019 showed the medications are administered in accordance with the prescriber orders, including any required time frame. Review of the facility's P&P titled Pain Assessment and Management revised 10/2022 showed…
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 before2024-12-05 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. On 12/4/23 at 1007 hours, a concurrent observation and interview was conducted with LVN 4. LVN 4 was observed administering medications to the facility residents. LVN 4 stated she had seven residents (which included Residents 42, 302, and 305) remaining who had yet to receive their morning medications, which were scheduled to be administered at 0900 hours . LVN 4 stated in accordance with the facility's P&P, resident medications were to be administered within one hour of their prescribed time. LVN 4 stated she was unable to administer the morning medications scheduled for 0900 hours, to Residents 42, 302, and 305, due to having to provide nursing care to a resident (Resident 43) who had an episode of vomiting. a. Review of Resident 42's Order Summary Report dated 12/2024, showed the following medications were ordered to be administered on 12/4/24 at 0900 hours: - Lidoderm Patch 5% (analgesic), apply to right knee topically once a day for pain management, - Cardizem extended release (antihypertensive) 120 mg…
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 before2024-12-05 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was below 5%. The facility's medication error rate was 16.13%. * LVN 2 failed to administer three medications as ordered by the physician for Resident 602. * Resident 301 had a physician's order for Calcitriol 0.25 micrograms two capsules orally one time a day for supplement, however, LVN 4 administered two capsules of Calcitriol 0.5 micrograms orally (twice the ordered dose). * Resident 301 had a physician's order for Lidocaine 4% external patch to apply to the right hip and right foot topically for pain management, apply two patches one time a day at the same time, however, LVN 4 applied one lidocaine 4% external patch to Resident 301's hip. These failures had the potential to negatively affect the residents' health. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Administering Medications revised 4/2019 showed the medications are administered in accordance with the prescriber…
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 before2024-12-05 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to store the drugs, biologicals, and medical supplies in a safe manner as evidenced by the following: * The facility failed to ensure the opened medical supplies in Medication Carts B and C were properly disposed. * The facility failed to ensure the discontinued medications were properly disposed. These failures had the potential for the drug diversion and to result in an unsafe handling and storage of the residents' medications. Findings: 1a. Review of the facility's P&P titled Discarding and Destroying Medications dated 2001 showed for unused, non-hazardous controlled substances that are not disposed of by an authorized collector, the EPA recommends destruction and disposal of the substance with other solid waste following the steps below: a. Take the medication out of the original containers. b. Mix medication, either liquid or solid, with an undesirable substance. Undesirable substances include sand, coffee grounds, kitty litter,…
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 · E2023-04-07 · 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, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the menus were followed. * The soup was served to the residents without following recipe and nutritional analysis. * The wrong scoop size was used to serve green beans for the residents on the soft-and-bite size diet. * The regular bread was used instead of garlic bread during the pureed bread preparation for the residents on the soft-and-bite size diet. * The pureed bread was not served to Resident 11 during lunch as per the menu. These failures had the potential for residents not receiving adequate nutrition, and appropriate servings. Findings: Review of the Form CMS-672 titled Resident Census and Conditions of Residents completed by the facility dated 4/4/23, showed 54 of 54 residents residing in the facility received food prepared in the kitchen. Review of the facility's P&P titled Menu dated 11/17 showed the residents receive food in the amount, type, consistency, and frequency to maintain normal body weight and acceptable nutritional values. Menus meet basic…
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 before2023-04-07 · 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 facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the sanitary requirements were met in the kitchen. * The facility failed to ensure the ice machine was clean. * The facility failed to ensure the food items in the freezer were properly labeled. * The facility failed to ensure the cooking utensils were in good repair. * The facility failed to ensure the cutting boards were in sanitary condition. These failures had the potential to expose the residents who consumed food prepared in the kitchen to foodborne illnesses. Findings: Review of the CMS 672 Resident Census and Conditions of Residents completed by the facility dated 4/4/23, showed 54 of 54 residents in the facility received food prepared in the kitchen. 1. According to the USDA Food Code 2022 Section 4-601.11, Equipment, Food-Contact Surfaces, Nonfood-Contact Surfaces, and Utensils, (A) Equipment, Food-Contact and utensils shall be clean to sight and touch. On 4/5/23 at 0815 hours, an observation of the ice machine and concurrent interview was conducted with the Maintenance Director. 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 · D2023-04-07 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to determine if it was safe for two of 17 final sampled residents (Residents 27 and 497) to self-administer the medications. * Resident 497 was observed with a bottle of Carboxymethylcellulose Ophthalmic Solution 0.5% (a medication used to relieve dry and irritated eyes) at the bedside table. Resident 497 did not have a physician's order to keep the medication at his bedside. Resident 497 did not have an assessment, or a care plan problem addressing the self-administration of medication. * Resident 27 was observed with ACT dry mouth lozenges (formulated with xylitol to help soothe dry mouth and moisturize mouth tissue) at the bedside. Resident 27 did not have an assessment, physician's order, or a care plan problem addressing the self-administration of medication. In addition, there was no physician's order to administer the lozenges. These failures had the potential for Residents 27 and 497 to administer 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 · D2023-04-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure the quality of care was provided to two of 17 final sampled residents (Residents 41 and 296) as evidenced by: * No information related to Resident 296's pacemaker was documented. The apical pulse for Resident 296's pacemaker was not monitored and recorded. * Resident 41's anti-embolism stockings were not consistently placed on the resident. These failures had the potential for the residents to not receive quality of care. Findings: 1. On 4/4/23, medical record review for Resident 296 was initiated. Resident 296 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. Review of Resident 296's H&P examination dated 3/30/31, showed Resident 296 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including high blood pressure, coronary artery disease, and permanent atrial fibrillation. Review of Resident 296's March 2023 Order Summary Report showed an order dated 3/27/23, for Resident 296's left upper chest pacemaker. Review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the necessary treatment and services were provided to help improve or correct performance or prevent further deformity for one of 17 final sampled residents (Resident 10). * Resident 10 was observed wearing cervical collar (commonly used by those who have had a surgical intervention of the cervical spine, to immobilize the neck) while in bed. The facility failed to ensure Resident 10 followed the physician's order to apply TLSO (thoracic lumbar sacral orthosis, brace used to limit motion in the thoracic, lumbar and sacral regions of the spine) brace when the resident was out of bed. In addition, the facility failed to monitor Resident 10's application of the cervical collar while in bed. This failure had the potential for Resident 10 to develop complications from the orthotic device application. Findings: On 4/5/23 at 0933 hours, and 4/7/23 at 0808 hours, Resident 10 was observed in bed wearing a cervical collar.…
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 before2023-04-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to provide the necessary pharmacy services for one of 17 final sampled residents (Resident 37). * The facility failed to ensure Resident 37's oxycodone hydrochloride (a narcotic pain medication) Drug Control Receipt/Record/Disposition Form did not match Resident 37's MAR. This failure posed the risk for diversion of controlled medications. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Controlled Substances revised April 2019, under the section for Administration, showed the nurse administering the medication is responsible for recording the time of administration. On 4/5/23 at 1110 hours, review of Resident 37's Drug Control Receipt/Record/Disposition Form and MAR was conducted with the IP. Review of Resident 37's oxycodone Drug Control Receipt/Record/Disposition Form showed Resident 37 was administered oxycodone 5 mg two tablets on 3/19/23 at 2044 hours. Medical record review for Resident 37 was initiated on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-07 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure one of five unnecessary medication sampled residents (Resident 41) was free from unnecessary psychotropic medication (any drug that affects brain activity). * The facility failed to monitor the side effects for Resident 41's use of Trazadone (anti-depressant medication). This had the potential for inaccurate side effect monitoring for Resident 41's physician not having the necessary information if Resident 41 had side effects from medication. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Psychotropic Medication Use revised July 2022 showed the residents, families, and/or the representative are involved in the medication process. Psychotropic medication management includes indication for use, dose, duration, adequate monitoring for efficacy and adverse consequences, and preventing, identifying and responding to adverse consequences. Medical record review for Resident 41 was initiated on 4/7/23. 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 · Dcited before2023-04-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was below 5%. The facility's medication error rate was 15.38%. Two licensed nurses (LVNs 4 and 5) who were observed during the medication administration were found to have made errors. * LVN 4 failed to administer the correct dose of Clearlax oral powder (medication to treat occasional constipation) to Resident 294. * LVN 5 failed to administer Resident 24's medications as ordered by the physician. In addition, LVN 5 failed to administer Resident 344's medications with food or meals as ordered by the physician. These failures had the potential to negatively affect the residents' health. Findings: According to the facility's P&P titled Administering Medications dated June 2016 showed it is the facility's policy that medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. Further review of the policy showed that medications must be administered 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 · Dcited before2023-04-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and the facility P&P review, the facility failed to store the drugs and biologicals in a safe manner. * The facility failed to store Resident 24's difluprednate emulsion (an eye drop medication to treat eye swelling and pain) 0.05% in a locked compartment at bedside. This failure had the potential for the residents, staff, and visitors to have an easy access to the medication. * Multiple outdated Indicaid Covid-19 (a respiratory disease caused by SARS-CoV-2) Rapid Antigen Test buffer solution bottles were observed in Medication Cart A. This had the potential for use of expired medications or biologicals. * Multiple outdated intravenous (into or within a vein) insertion needles were observed in Medication Cart B. This had the potential for use of expired medical supplies. * Medication Cart C had Resident 24's bottle of rhopressa (eyedrops medication) was stored at room temperature. This had the potential for administration of deteriorated medication. Findings:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-07 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure the food served to one of 17 final sampled residents (Resident 296) was attractive to the resident. This failure had the potential for the resident not enjoying his meals. Findings: Medical record review for Resident 296 was initiated on 4/4/23. Resident 296 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 296's H&P examination dated 3/30/31, showed Resident 296 had the capacity to understand and make decisions. Review of Resident 296's April 2023 Order Summary Report showed an order dated 4/1/23, for Resident 296's diet as soft and bite size texture, solid bread okay. On 4/4/23 at 0825 hours, Resident 296 was served pureed bread. Resident 296 stated he did not know what to do with the pureed bread. On 4/4/23 at 1302 hours, Resident 296 was served minced main entrée and pureed bread. Per the facility's menu, the main entrée was supposed to be chicken salad. Resident 296 stated the salad served was too dry and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-07 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, medical record review, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the dietary texture guidelines were followed for the residents on the soft-and-bit-sized diet. * The facility failed to ensure the chopped pot roast and chopped green beans were served to the residents on the soft-and-bite sized diet. This failure had the potential for the residents not liking the food based on the dietary modification and could affect the residents' quality of life. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Therapeutic Diets revised 10/2017 showed the therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician to support the resident's treatment and plan of care and in accordance with his or her goals and treatments. A therapeutic diet is considered a diet ordered by a physician, practitioner or dietitian as part of treatment for a disease or clinical condition, to modify specific nutrients in the diet, or to alter the texture of a diet, for example: altered consistency diet. Review of the facility's document titled Soft 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 before2023-04-07 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record, facility P&P, and facility document review, the facility failed to follow the residents' preferences when the facility ran out of a food items to be served for breakfast. The facility failed to served fruit cups for one of 17 final sampled residents (Resident 344) and two nonsampled residents (Residents 345 and 346). This failure posed the risk of the residents' nutritional needs not being met and the residents' preferences not being honored. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Menus dated 11/17 showed resident preferences and needs are incorporated into the development of the individual food plan. 1. On 4/4/23 at 0853 hours, during the initial tour of the facility, Resident 344 was observed with her breakfast tray. Resident 344's meal ticket card showed fruit cup, oatmeal. Fruit cup was not observed in Resident 344's breakfast tray. Resident 344 stated she wanted her fruit cup. When asked if the dietary staff offered something else other than a fruit…
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 before2023-04-07 · 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, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to establish and maintain the infection control program and practices designed to help prevent the development and transmission of diseases and infections. * The facility failed to ensure the licensed nurse performed hand hygiene between changing of gloves during the medication administration observation. * The facility failed to ensure CNA 3 used the proper PPE in an enhanced standard/barrier precaution room when assisting Resident 295. * The facility failed to ensure CNA 5 performed hand hygiene when assisting the residents with meals. * The facility failed to ensure the staff performed proper hand hygiene when providing care. These failures posed the risk for transmission of disease-causing microorganisms and infections to the residents. Findings: 1. Review of the facility's P&P titled Glove Use with effective date 8/2017, under the general information section, showed the employees shall perform hand hygiene…
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 before2023-04-07 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the freezer compartment inside the residents' refrigerator was free of ice buildup. This had the potential for the refrigerators not being maintained in safe operating condition. Findings: On 4/4/23 at 0753 hours, an inspection of the residents' refrigerator was conducted with the DSS. The surrounding of the freezer compartment of the residents' refrigerator was observed with a build-up of ice. The DSS verified the above findings. The DSS stated the dietary staff was responsible to check the temperature of the refrigerator and make sure the food items inside the refrigerator were not expired. The DSS stated the maintenance department was responsible to check the build-up of ice inside the resident's refrigerator. On 4/6/23 at 0735 hours, an interview was conducted with the Maintenance Director. The Maintenance Director stated the dietary staff was responsible to check the resident's refrigerator daily and to inform the maintenance department if the refrigerator needed to be fixed such as if there was a build-up of ice.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-07 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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, medical record review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the regular inspection of all the bed frames, mattresses, and side rails were performed as part of the regular maintenance program to identify areas of possible entrapment. This had the potential to negatively impact the residents resulting to entrapment, serious injuries, and death. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Bed Safety revised March 2017 showed the facility strives to reduce hazards such as resident entrapment associated with side rails, mattresses and/ or bedrails. In an effort to reduce injuries associated with bedside rails, the DON Services/Environmental Supervisor/ designee and the community IDT shall: - Inspect all bed frames, bedside rails and mattresses according to the regular preventive safety schedule to identify potential areas of possible entrapment; - Ensure that no gap between the mattress, bedframe or side rails exceeds FDA regulations; and - Ensure that replacement…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-12-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to implement their infection control program in accordance with the facility's P&P. * The facility failed to ensure LVN 3 performed appropriate hand hygiene during a medication administration observation. This failure put the residents at risk for increased risk of infection and transmissions of diseases.Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Administering Medications revised 4/2019 showed medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. The P&P further showed the staff follows established facility infection control procedures including handwashing and antiseptic techniques for the administration of medications. On 12/5/25 at 1600 hours, a medication administration observation and concurrent interview was conducted with LVN 3 at Medication Cart B. During the medication administration, LVN 3 did not perform hand hygiene before and after administering oral medications to Resident 25. LVN 3 verified he did not perform hand hygiene before and after administrating 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.
- No harm found · B2024-12-05 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — patternKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 facility P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's PHI was utilized in a confidential manner during the medication administration for one nonsampled resident (Resident 301). * Resident 301's PHI was displayed on a computer screen located in the hallway and left unattended by the staff member. This failure had the potential to violate the resident's right to personal health information privacy. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Confidentiality of Information and Personal Privacy revised 10/2017 showed the facility will protect and safeguard resident confidentiality and personal privacy. The facility will safeguard the personal privacy and confidentiality of all the residents' personal and medical records. Access to the residents personal and medical records will be limited to authorized staff. Medical record review for Resident 301 was initiated on 12/2/24. Resident 301 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 12/4/24 at 0821 hours, a medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2024-12-05 · tag F0807 — failed to offer suitable drinks — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides drinks consistent with resident needs and preferences and sufficient to maintain resident hydration.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, facility document review, and facility P&P review, the facility failed to accommodate the drink preferences for one of 13 sampled residents (Resident 12). * Resident 12 was not served milk for his lunch meal. This failure had the potential to affect the resident's overall meal intake and nutritional status. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Systems for Recording Food Preferences dated 2023 showed the food and beverage preference notes must be kept on file, recorded on the meal identification card/ticket or kept in an electronic format. For meal identification cards, to note the food and beverage preferences on the individuals' meal identification card/ticket. Review of the facility's document titled Generations Health Care Menu Week 1, showed the following entrees to be served for lunch on Monday 12/2/24: Roast Pork Loin, Poultry Gravy, Roasted Potatoes, Capri Mixed Vegetables, Applesauce Bar, Milk, and choice of beverage. On 12/2/24 at 1234 hours, a concurrent lunch observation and interview was conducted with Resident 12 in his room.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-07-05 · 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 interview, medical record review, and P&P review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's food preferences and allergies were followed for one of five sampled residents (Resident 1). * Resident 1 had an allergy to dairy products but was served milk. This failure had the potential to negatively impact the resident's well-being. Findings: Review of the facility's P&P titled Food Allergies and Intolerances revised 8/2017 showed the residents with food allergies and intolerances are identified upon admission and offered food substitutions of similar appeal and nutritional values. Resident are assessed for a history of food allergies and intolerances upon admission and as part of the comprehensive assessment, and the residents with food intolerances and allergies are offered appropriate substitutions for foods that they cannot eat. Closed medical record review was initiated for Resident 1 on 7/3/24. Resident 1 was admitted to facility on 6/14/24. Review of Resident 1's acute care hospital H&P examination dated 6/8/24, showed Resident 1's allergies included the dairy…
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 GENERATIONS HEALTHCARE — 27 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 | 4.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 26 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.1★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BMO BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 10/06/2021 |
| MASTROCOLA, LOIS | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 02/01/1998 |
| OLDS, THOMAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 02/01/1998 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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 055518. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-10, 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.