McClure Post Acute

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

53.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 221 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 82.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 78 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 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 56.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.51 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.88 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.23 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.62 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

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

• Potential for harm · E2026-04-09 · tag F0640 — pattern
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on an interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS, standardized assessment used in nursing homes to evaluate a resident's physical, psychological, and functional status) assessments were transmitted (electronically submitted to the national database) within the required 14 day timeframe for four of 19 sampled residents (Resident 12, 29, 46, and 64). This failure resulted in the delayed reporting of the residents' condition, which may negatively impact care planning, oversight, and delivery of appropriate services to meet the residents' needs. Findings:During a review of Resident 12's MDS, dated [DATE], the MDS indicated a completion date of 3/13/26.During a review of Resident 29's MDS, dated [DATE], the MDS indicated a completion date of 3/13/26.During a review of Resident 46's MDS, dated [DATE], the MDS indicated a completion date of 3/12/26.During a review of Resident 64's MDS, dated [DATE], the MDS indicated a completion date of 3/13/26.During a concurrent…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-09 · tag F0638 — isolated
  Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS, standardized assessment used in nursing homes to evaluate a resident's physical, psychological, and functional status) assessments were completed in a timely manner for two of 19 sampled residents (Resident 40 and 46) when: 1.Resident 40's Quarterly MDS was not completed within the required timeframe of 14 days from the Assessment Reference Date (ARD, specific date selected for an MDS assessment that determines the end of the observation) 2. Resident 46's Quarterly MDS was not within the required timeframe of 92 days from the prior MDS assessment. These failures resulted in the facility's inability to ensure timely and accurate assessments of Resident 40 and 46's condition and had the potential to negatively impact the residents' care planning and delivery of services to meet the residents' needs.Findings:1.During a review of Resident 40's Face Sheet (demographics), dated 4/9/26, the Face Sheet indicated…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure supervision was provided during dining per physician's orders for one of 19 sampled residents (Resident 23). This failure resulted in an increased risk of choking, aspiration (entry of food or liquid into the airway or lungs), and potential respiratory complications such as death for Resident 23. During a review of Resident 23's Face Sheet (FS, demographics), dated 4/9/26, the FS indicated Resident 23 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and then was readmitted after a change of condition on 2/16/26. The FS further indicated Resident 23's diagnosis was a stroke (blood flow blocked to the brain) with difficulty swallowing and speaking.During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/9/26 at 8:16 a.m. with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1 in Resident 23's room, Resident 23 was in bed, sitting up, head tilted to left, chin resting on her neck sleeping. Resident 23's right hand was on the bedside table with her…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-09 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolated
  Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff were adequately trained and competent regarding medication management of self-administered medications that were stored at bedside for one of 19 sampled residents (Resident 76). This failure resulted in Resident 76's medications being administered without appropriate oversight or documentation, placing the resident at risk for medication errors. Findings:During a review of Resident 76's Face Sheet (demographics), dated 4/9/26, the Face Sheet indicated Resident 76's diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (a short-term and ongoing breathing problem where the body is not getting enough oxygen).During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/9/26 at 11:30 a.m. with Resident 76 in his room, Resident 76 stated he kept his albuterol sulfate inhaler (medication inhaled into the lungs that helps make breathing easier) in a locked box in his room and self-administered the medication as needed. Resident 76 stated he last self-administered the albuterol on 4/7/26 at 7pm 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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in a safe and secure manner for one of 19 sampled residents (Resident 76) when his albuterol sulfate inhaler (medication inhaled into the lungs that helps make breathing easier) was found lying on his tray table. This failure had the potential to result in unsafe or unauthorized medication use, drug diversion, and accidental ingestion by Resident 76 or other medically vulnerable residents.Findings:During a review of Resident 76's Face Sheet (demographics), dated 4/9/26, the Face Sheet indicated Resident 76's diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (a short-term and ongoing breathing problem where the body is not getting enough oxygen).During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/6/26 at 4:33 p.m. with Resident 76 in his room, the albuterol inhaler was lying on Resident 76's tray table. Resident 76 stated, It was getting annoying asking the nurse when I need my puffer, so the medication was kept at his bedside. During a concurrent observation…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited beforedisputed · IDR2026-03-18 · tag F0628 — isolated
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, for two of three sampled residents (Resident 1 and 2), the facility failed to provide required discharge notice in a timely manner when notice of proposed discharge were provided on the day of discharge. This failure had the potential to prevent residents from understanding their rights or available appeal options.During a review of Resident 1's admission Record(AR) dated 3/17/26, the AR indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility 11/12/25 with diagnoses that included peripheral vertigo (severe sensation of spinning), chronic kidney disease (long-term, progressive loss of kidney function), muscle weakness, difficulty walking and other symptoms and signs involving cognitive functions and awareness. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) dated 1/26/26, the MDS indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status as regards to attention,…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited beforedisputed · IDR2026-03-18 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, for two of three sampled residents (Resident 1 and 3), the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records in accordance with professional standards when:1.a.Resident 3 left the faciity on 3/9/26 without staff knowledge or permission (elopement, when a resident leaves the facility without staff knowledge or permission), and this was documented in the medical record as leaving Against Medical Advice (AMA, a situation in which a resident chooses to leave a healthcare facility or discontinue recommended care despite the facility's clinical advice to remain).1.b. Resident 3's request for room changes, as well as the facility's corresponding response, were not documented in the clinical record. 2. For Resident 1, the clinical record lacked documentation of communication between the Social Services Director (SSD) and Case Manager (CM) 2 regarding discharge plans. This failure had the potential to result in a lack of continuity of care and the inability to provide…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ddisputed · IDR2026-03-17 · tag F0576 — isolated
  Ensure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not provide privacy to one (1) out of four (4) sampled residents during phone conversations. This failure resulted in facility staff overhearing Resident 1's phone conversations, violation of rights to privacy and placed her at risk of being upset. During a record review of Resident 1's admission record, indicated that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool used in identifying problems to be addressed in plan of care), dated 1/20/26, the record indicated that Resident 1 had clear speech, was able to make herself understood, and was able to understand others. MDS also indicated that it was very important for Resident 1 to be able to use a phone in private. During a phone interview on 3/16/26 at 9:10 a.m. Resident 2's Family Representative (FR 1) stated, it was important for them to communicate with Resident 2 over the phone on an ongoing basis to…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-21 · tag F0628 — isolated
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, for two of two residents (Resident 2 and Resident 3) who were discharged , the facility failed to develop and implement an effective discharge planning process for their transition to post-discharge care when:1.For Resident 2, the facility failed to assist in obtaining a government ID and bank card before discharge. The facility did not arrange primary care or pharmacy services for medication follow-up. This had the potential to result in Resident 2 lacking funds for his ILF (Independent Living Facility) stay and potentially facing homelessness.2.For Resident 3, the facility failed to establish a primary care provider and pharmacy for medication refills after discharge. This failure had the potential to result in unnecessary re-admissions.1.During a review of Resident 2's admission Record (AR) printed 1/15/26, the AR indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 with multiple diagnoses that included cognitive communication deficit (impairment in communication such as speaking, listening, reading, or writing caused by…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for safety when: 1. Unlabeled, undated food items were stored in the kitchen refrigerator. 2. [NAME] (CK) 1 did not wear a beard restraint while preparing resident food. 3. Expired and moldy food items were stored in the resident refrigerator. These failures had the potential for contamination of food resulting in food borne illness for the 55 residents who received food from the kitchen and used the resident refrigerator. Findings: During an observation on 3/10/25, at 9:47 a.m. the kitchen refrigerator was observed with one covered container of unlabeled and undated onions, one covered container of unlabeled and undated peas, and one pack of undated turkey burgers. During an observation on 3/10/25, at 10:49 a.m. the resident refrigerator was observed with one opened bottle of milk with an expiration date of 3/9/25, one pack of garlic with an expiration date of 3/5/25 and one container of blueberries and strawberries dated 2/28/25 that had…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

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 $926K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in CA