Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, LLC
2124 57th Avenue, Oakland, CA 94621 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 82 certified beds · (510) 261-2628 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 2 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 | 5.7% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.8% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.7% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.7% | 7.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 1.6% | 3.3% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.3% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.4% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.3% | 4.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.3% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.6% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 90.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.3% | 23.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 18.3% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.84 | 2.25 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.97 | 1.57 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
36.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 47 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 64.5% 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 31 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 24% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 36.4%CMS range 25.6–48.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.7%CMS range 6.0–15.1 | 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 | 64.5% | 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 | 54.8% | 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 | 58.1% | 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 | 86.7% | 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 | 1.7% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 7.6%CMS range 4.1–14.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.26 | 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 82 beds and averages 80.0 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.86 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.36 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.54 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.54 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.99 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.23 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2025-10-20 · 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 and record review, for four of four sampled residents (Resident 7, 90, 80, and 63) who were investigated for accidents, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and assistive device when: 1.Resident 7 fell out of bed when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 3 looked away while changing Resident 7's brief. Resident 7 sustained multiple injuries that included, a hematoma (when blood collects outside a blood vessel) on the right cheek and around the right eye, intraparenchymal hemorrhage (bleeding that occurs within the brain tissue), and fractures of the left 10th and 11th ribs (when one of the bones in the rib cage cracks, usually as a result of a fall or an accident). Resident 7 was transferred to the hospital for further treatment. 2. Resident 90 fell out of bed while CNA 4 assisted with toileting hygiene. Resident 90 was taken to the hospital via 911 with injuries that included frontal scalp hematoma, displaced fracture (when broken bone fragments move out of alignment, resulting 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 · Ecited before2026-02-10 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect 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 and record review, the facility failed to protect three of three sampled residents (Resident 1, Resident 2, Resident 3) from aggressive and inappropriate sexual behaviors exhibited by Resident 4. Resident 4 inappropriately touched Residents 1, 2, and 3 on their thighs, scrotum and buttocks areas without their consent. Resident 4 threw hot coffee at Resident 2.This failure resulted in feelings of emotional distress, embarrassment, anger and a loss of personal security on Resident 1, 2 and 3.Findings:During a record review of Resident 4's admission Record printed on 2/10/26, the record indicated, Resident 4 was admitted to the facility in 2020. The record indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female with history of mental and behavioral disorders.During a record review of Resident 4's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool used in identifying problems to be addressed in plan of care), dated 2/3/26, the MDS indicated, Resident 4's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-10 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 conduct a thorough investigation for an allegation of abuse involving two of four sampled residents (Resident 1, and Resident 4). Resident 1, a male resident alleged Resident 4 (female) touched him inappropriately and made sexual comments at him.This failure placed Resident 1 and other vulnerable residents at the facility to experience Resident 4's inappropriate sexual behaviors.Cross Reference F600.Findings:During a record review of Resident 1's admission Record printed on 2/10/26, the record showed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 2019. The record indicated Resident 1 was a [AGE] year-old male with diagnosis of limitations of activities due to disability.During a record review of Resident 1's MDS assessment dated [DATE], the assessment indicated Resident 1 was able to make himself understood and understood others.During an observation and interview on 2/10/26 at 10:00 a.m., in Resident 1's room, Resident 1 was sitting in a wheelchair.…
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 · D2025-10-20 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect belongings for one sampled resident (Resident 63), when his clothes and personal items were missing and were not accounted for. This failure had compromised the right of Resident 63 to retain personal possessions. Findings:A review of the admission record for Resident 63 indicated, Resident 63 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic kidney disease (progressive loss of kidney function). Resident 63 was discharged on 9/18/25.During a telephone interview on 10/2/25 at 9:45 a.m., with Resident 63's Responsible Party (RP), RP stated Resident 63 was missing clothes and personal items while he was in the facility and that the facility were not returning his clothes. RP stated she had noted other residents were wearing Resident 63's clothes during Resident 63's stay in the facility and had notified staff. RP stated she was not given Resident 63's inventory of personal items upon the resident's discharge and that no one went over 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 · Dcited before2025-10-20 · 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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical abuse when two of five sampled residents (Resident 3 and Resident 26) were involved in a physical altercation. This failure resulted in Resident 3 sustaining a skin tear on the left arm. Findings:During a record review of Resident 3's admission Record (AR), printed on 9/19/25, the AR indicated that Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record of Resident 26's AR, printed 9/18/25, the AR indicated that Resident 26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record of review of Resident 3's Minimum Data Set (MDS, resident assessment instrument used to identify resident problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan), dated 8/8/25, the MDS indicated, Resident 26 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status in regard to attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall information) score 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 · D2025-10-20 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based interview and record review, for one of five sampled residents (Resident 2) reviewed for unnecessary medication use, the facility failed to ensure Resident 2 did not receive unnecessary psychotropic (also referred to as psychoactive medications, including antianxiety medications) medications when:-Lorazepam (antianxiety) was given for PRN (as needed) beyond 14 days.-Monitoring for behavioral manifestation for lorazepam use did not coincide with physician-ordered lorazepam PRN use. This failure had the potential to result in increased risk of adverse drug effects, such as dependence, sedation, confusion, and falls. Findings: During a review of Resident 2's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses that included anxiety disorder (repeated episodes of sudden feelings of intense fear or worry) depression (persistent feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and loss of interest or pleasure in activities) and insomnia (difficulty falling or staying asleep). During a concurrent joint interview and record review 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 · D2025-10-20 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 one of two sampled residents (Resident 6) who were reviewed for PASRR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review, required to determine if the resident needs specialized services for serious mental illness or mental retardation before admission to a Medicaid certified nursing facility) evaluation, the facility failed to coordinate PASRR Level II (a more in-depth evaluation for individuals identified by the Level I screen) determination after a positive PASRR I evaluation.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 6 receiving care that is not appropriate for their needs.Findings:During a review of Resident 6's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 6 was admitted to the facility in July 2025 with diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type (a mental health condition that combines symptoms of schizophrenia such as disorganized thinking, false beliefs, hallucinations, and bouts of mania and depression).During an initial 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-10-20 · 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 record review, the facility failed to treat skin rash for one of five sampled residents (Resident 42) when nursing staff was not aware of Resident 42's skin rash. This failure resulted in Resident 42 having an untreated skin rash for unknown of length of time. Findings: During a review of Resident 42's admission Record AR, printed on 10/1/25, the AR indicated that Resident 42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a review of Resident 42's Minimum Data Set (MDS, resident assessment instrument used to identify resident problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) dated 9/26/25, the MDS indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, a scoring system used to determine the resident's cognitive status in regard to attention, orientation, and ability to register and recall information) score of 12 . A BIMS score of 8 to 12 is an indication of moderately impaired cognitive status. During an interview on 9/29/25, at 12:30 p.m., with Resident 42, Resident 42…
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 · D2025-10-20 · 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 and record review, facility failed to provide the prescribed Bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP is a non-invasive ventilation machine that automatically adjusts the air pressure according to patient's requirement at a particular time) therapy as ordered for one of five sampled residents (Resident 8). This failure placed Resident 8 at risk for poor sleep quality, respiratory compromise and worsening chronic conditions. Findings:During a review of Resident 8's admission Record (AR), printed on 10/2/25, the AR indicated, Resident 8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of acute and chronic respiratory failure (lungs are not working well to get enough oxygen into blood or to remove enough carbon dioxide from the body) with hypoxia (low oxygen in the blood), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD, a long-term lung condition that makes it hard to breath because the airway become narrowed or blocked), and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA, breathing stops for short…
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 before2025-10-20 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — isolatedHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to schedule a registered nurse (RN) for eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for three days in January 2025.This failure had the potential to put residents at risk and not receive sufficient care.During a concurrent interview and record review on 10/3/25 at 9:20 a.m., with the Payroll Account Payable Coordinator (PAPC), PBJ (Payroll - Based Journal) Staffing Data Report [NAME] Report 171705D FY (Fiscal Year) Quarter 2 2025 (a method of staffing data from nursing facilities) January 1- March 31, dated 9/22/25 was reviewed. PAPC stated she was not aware that there were days in January with no RN on duty for 8 hours a dayDuring a concurrent interview and record review on 10/3/25 at around 12:18 p.m., with the PAPC, the Payroll document titled, DHPPH (Direct Care Service Hours Per patient Day - form to accurately capture the direct care service hours provided to patients in skilled nursing facilities) Worksheet - Totals was reviewed. PAPC confirmed that there were three days in January 2025 namely 1/19/25, 1/25/25,…
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 · D2025-10-20 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were available and provided to residents when: 1. Resident 78 did not receive Xarelto (a blood thinner) medication as ordered by the physician. 2. Two medication E-kits (Emergency kits) were opened and not replaced within 72 hours. These failures had the potential to put patients at risk for harm due to missed doses of medications including delayed treatment during emergency situations when medications are not available for use. Findings:1.During a medication pass observation on 9/30/25 at 8:04 a.m., Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 9 prepared five oral medications for Resident 78. LVN 9 stated Xarelto medication was supposed to be given at this time but was not available. LVN 9 stated it was requested from pharmacy. During record review of Resident 78's admission Record (AR), undated, the AR indicated Resident 78 was admitted in October 2025, with diagnoses that included pain in the lower leg, and current use of anticoagulants (blood thinners). During a review of Resident 78's Minimum Data…
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 23 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-10-20 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based interview and record review, for one of five (Resident 2) sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use, the facility failed to act on the Consultant Pharmacist's (CP) recommendations for monthly Medication Regimen Review (MRR, in-depth evaluation of a patient's complete list of medications by a pharmacist to ensure safety and effectiveness) for three consecutive months.This failure had the potential to result in unnecessary medication use.Findings: During a review of Resident 2's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in December 2023 with diagnoses that included anxiety disorder (repeated episodes of sudden feelings of intense fear or worry) depression (persistent feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and loss of interest or pleasure in activities) and insomnia (difficulty falling or staying asleep). During a concurrent joint interview and record review on 10/2/25 at 1:48 p.m., with Registered Nurse (RN) 1 and Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 7, Resident 2's Order Summary Report (OSR) and Medication Administration Record (MAR)…
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 before2025-10-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the safe storage and labeling of medications when:1. Three medications - Adult Gummies C, Extra strength D 3, and Magnesium Extra strength were observed at Resident 71's bedside.2. One over the counter (OTC) eye drop in the medication (med) cart 1 was not labeled with name.These failures had the potential for medication errors and unsafe use of medications and biologicals.Findings:1.During a concurrent observation and interview during an initial tour on 9/29/25 at 10:45 a.m., in Resident 71's room, there were three medication bottles containing vitamin supplements - Kirkland Adult Gummies C 250 mg, Kirkland extra strength D3 50 mcg, and Nature made magnesium extra strength 400mg inside a basin that contained other stuff on top of Resident 71's bedside table. Resident 71 stated they were his vitamins but did not elaborate.During an observation on 10/1/25 at 12:24 p.m. in Resident 71's room, the three medication bottles containing vitamin supplements - Kirkland Adult Gummies C 250 mg, Kirkland extra…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store food in a safe and sanitary manner when: 1. Fresh lettuce stored inside the reach-in refrigerator was exposed and had no cover 2. A plastic container bin with single packs of graham crackers had no use by date or open dates Failure to store food in accordance with facility policy and/or professional standards had the potential to not meet food service safety standards and prevent food borne illnesses for 76 residents who received food from the kitchen out of a facility census of 76. Findings: 1.During an initial kitchen tour observation and concurrent interview on 6/10/24 at 10:13 a.m., with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), the contents of Refrigerator 1, were inspected. The bottom rack had a clear storage bin with fresh lettuce inside. The lettuce was exposed and had no cover. DS stated the lettuce should be covered with a plastic wrap to keep it fresh and to make sure spills do not get in contact the lettuce. During an interview on 6/13/23 at 1:10 p.m., with the Regional Registered Dietitian (RRD), when…
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 before2024-06-13 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was Registered Nurse (RN) coverage eight hours a day, seven days a week. This failure had the potential to endanger the health and safety of residents. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on 6/13/24 at 9:54 a.m. with Payroll (PAYROLL), payroll data was reviewed from Q3/2023 (April 1 - June 30) until Q4/2023 (July 1 - September 30). Payroll confirmed there were no RN working for the following dates: 1. For the month of April 2023: 4/23/23 2. For the month of May 2023: 5/28/23 3. For the month of June 2023: 6/25/23 4. For the month of July 2023: 7/9/23 5. For the month of August 2023: 8/27/23 6. For the month of September 2023: 9/2/23 During a concurrent interview and record review on 6/13/24 at 10:17 a.m. with Central Supply/Scheduler (CS/S), staffing schedule was reviewed. CS/S confirmed a RN was not scheduled to work on 4/23/23, 5/28/23, 6/25/23, 7/9/23, 8/27/23, 9/2/23. During an interview on 6/12/24 at 3:56 p.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON), DON stated, it was important to have…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · 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, and record review, the facility failed to provide the Restorative Nursing Assistant (RNA) services as ordered by the physician for two of 20 sampled residents reviewed for Range Of Motion (ROM) functions (Resident 2 and 69). This failure had the potential for decline in the resident's range of motion and mobility. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 2's face sheet dated, 6/12/24, showed Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 10/2020 with multiple diagnoses that included Brain Stem Stroke Syndrome (when a blood supply to the base of the brain is stopped which can potentially affect many functions in the body). During a review of Resident 2's Physical Therapy (PT) Discharge summary, dated [DATE], revealed under Assessment and Summary of Skilled Services: Prognosis to maintain Current Level of Functioning (CLOF) = Excellent with consistent staff support, excellent with participation in Restorative Nursing Program (RNP). Under Discharge Recommendations: Functional Maintenance…
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 · D2024-04-11 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 three of 78 sampled residents' (Resident 2, Resident 6, and Resident 8), call lights were within reach and easily accessible. This failure placed the Resident 2, Resident 6 and Resident 8 at risk of not being able to ask for assistance. Findings: Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in late 2020, with diagnoses which included cerebral infarction (disrupted blood flow does to the brain), stenosis (narrowing of the spinal cord) and convulsions (irregular movement of arms and legs). Resident 6 was admitted to the facility in late 2020 with diagnoses which included heart disease, bradycardia (slow heartbeat) and blindness of the right eye (vision loss). Resident 8 was admitted to the facility in mid-2022, with diagnoses which included seizure (irregular body movement), Parkinson (tremors, stiffness, and loss of balance) and repeated falls. During an observation on 4/11/24 at 1:15 p.m. in Resident 2's, Resident 6's and Resident 8's rooms, the call lights were on the floor behind or under the beds. During…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one out of three residents (Resident 1) had written Informed Consent (a process in which a health care provider educates a patient about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of a given procedure or intervention to help them decide if they want to authorize the given procedure or intervention) before they were administered a psychoactive medication (a drug or other substance that affects how the brain works and causes changes in mood, awareness, thoughts, feelings, or behavior). This failure had the potential to cause Resident 1 to take a psychoactive medication without knowledge of the medication ' s risks, benefits, and alternatives. A review of Resident 1's admission Record printed 3/21/24, indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with a diagnosis of Spastic Hemiplegia (a nerve and muscle condition that results in the muscles on one side of the body being in a constant state of contraction). The record indicated Resident 1 was their own Responsible Party (health care decision maker). During a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) received necessary care to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene when Resident 1 had long, sharp fingernails with brownish yellow matter underneath on both hands. This failure resulted in Resident 1 feeling helpless and placed her at risk for infections and hurting themselves with long fingernails. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record , printed on 9/26/23, the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was originally admitted to the facility on admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The admission records also indicated that Resident 1 had a medical diagnosis including spastic hemiplegia (a condition that that results in the muscles on one side of the body being in a constant state of contraction and weakness of one side of the body). During a record review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool used to guide care), dated 8/27/23, the MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-01 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a summary of the baseline care plan for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure resulted in the lack of information regarding care. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, the document indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included severe protein calorie malnutrition, gastroenteritis (lining of the stomach and intestines are inflamed) and colitis (inflammation of the inner lining of the large bowels), cachexia (marked weight and muscle loss), esophagitis (inflammation of the esophagus/swallowing tube), diarrhea, and gastric ulcer (open sores develop on the stomach lining). During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) dated 7/6/23 indicated Resident 1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool for resident's orientation to time and capacity to remember) score of 11 out of 15, indicating…
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 · D2023-08-01 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two sampled residents (Resident 1), maintained acceptable desirable body weight range when: 1. G-tube (gastrostomy tube, a tune inserted through the stomach that brings nutrition directly to the stomach) feeding was discontinued despite Resident 1's inability to maintain adequate oral intake. 2. G-tube feeding was not provided as ordered by the physician. These failures potentially resulted in Resident 1's significant weight loss of 5.8 pounds from 58 pounds (lbs.) on 7/7/23 to 52.2 lbs. on 7/23/23 (10 %) over two weeks. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, the document indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included severe protein calorie malnutrition, gastroenteritis (lining of the stomach and intestines are inflamed) and colitis (inflammation of the inner lining of the large bowels), cachexia (marked weight and muscle loss), esophagitis (inflammation of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2022-05-20 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to provide adequate oversight of the kitchen when multiple issues were identified with kitchen safety and sanitation; equipment was not maintained; food was not served so it was palatable and cooked to maintain nutritive value; and staff were not trained and competent for calibrating thermometers and cooking food to a safe temperature. These failures had the potential to result in food being served to residents in a safe and sanitary manner resulting in food borne illness; attract pests to the kitchen resulting in contamination of food, utensils, and equipment; and decrease the amount of food intake for residents resulting in nutritional related medical issues, for 71 residents who received food from the kitchen out of a facility census of 71. Findings: Review of the undated job description provided for the Dietary Supervisor (DS), titled, Director of Nutritional Services, indicated this position ensured the preparation of nutritious meals to all residents, maintained a safe and sanitary work…
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 · F2022-05-20 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure vegetables were palatable and cooked in a manner to conserve nutritive value for 71 residents who received food from the kitchen out of a facility census of 71. This failure had the potential for residents to not consume the amount of nutrients planned for the menu. Findings: An observation and concurrent interview with [NAME] 1, on 5/16/22, at 10:30 a.m., [NAME] 1 was observed pureeing food in a food processor. [NAME] 1 stated she was pureeing the turkey for lunch. [NAME] 1 said she just put the pureed green beans and pureed bread on the oven. [NAME] 1 stated the regular green beans were in the oven too. Inside the oven, was one large pan covered with foil and two smaller pans covered with foil. [NAME] 1 lifted the foil off the large pan to show it held green beans. [NAME] 1 stated she had to heat them up and planned to take them out at 11:45 a.m. to place on tray-line which started at 12 p.m. [NAME] 1 confirmed the oven was set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-05-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to ensure a safe and sanitary environment in the kitchen when: 1. Food was not frozen when stored in a reach-in freezer; 2. Two door screens were not intact and sealed properly to help prevent insects and rodents from entering the kitchen; 3. Cooking pans were in poor condition; 4. The ice machine was not stored in an area to help prevent contamination of the ice; 5. There were no air-gaps for the food preparation sink and the 2-compartment warewashing sink; 6. Staff did not practice appropriate hand hygiene; and 7. Soiled oven mitts came into contact with food. This failure had the potential to cause contamination of food resulting in food borne illness for 71 residents who received food from the kitchen out of a facility census of 71. Findings: 1. An observation and concurrent interview with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), on 5/16/22 at 10 a.m., showed food stored in the 2-door, reach-in freezer number 2 was not frozen solid when the food was pressed, and it was soft. Foods that were not frozen solid…
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 · F2022-05-20 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep 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 a drainpipe from the 2-compartment kitchen sink was in good repair. This had the potential to attract pests resulting in contamination of food and utensils for 71 residents who received food from the kitchen out of a facility census of 71. Findings: An observation and concurrent interview with Dietary Aide 1 (DA 1) and [NAME] 2, on 5/17/22, at 8:32 a.m., showed a drainpipe under the 2-compartment sink, used for manual warewashing, was plumbed into the floor. When the sink was drained, water leaked from the pipe, which was caught in a plastic dome plate cover on the floor under the sink and drainpipe. DA 1 and [NAME] 2 stated, there was a terrible odor that came from the drainpipe area under the sink, especially when the 2-compartment sink drained. [NAME] 2 said the drain was like that since she started working at the facility six months ago. In an interview on 5/17/22, at 10:25 a.m., Environmental Manager (EM) stated there was a maintenance logbook in station 1. EM said kitchen staff 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 · E2022-05-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the comprehensive care plan for falls were updated and implemented for one of one sampled resident (Resident 67), when Resident 67 was identified as a high risk for falls and experienced multiple falls. This failure resulted in Resident 67 experiencing a fractured left femoral neck (hip bone), requiring a left hemiarthroplasty (hip replacement surgery) from the fall, and was transferred to the acute care hospital for treatment. Findings: A review of Resident 67's admission Record, dated 5/19/22, indicated Resident 67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included paralysis (the loss of the ability to move (and sometimes to feel anything) in part or most of the body and weakness of the left side of the body. A review of Resident 67's Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool to guide care), dated 7/21/21, indicated Resident 67's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, a screening tool to assess cognitive function)…
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 · E2022-05-20 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rate was not five percent or greater. During the medication pass (med pass) observation, there were six medication errors observed out of 36 opportunities which resulted to a med pass error rate of 16.6 percent. This failure had the potential for Resident 54 not getting the full therapeutic benefit of the medications. Findings: During a medication pass observation on 5/17/22 at 8:40 a.m., Registered Nurse 1 (RN1) crushed six medications of Resident 54: Metoprolol 25mg (used to treat high blood pressure), Lovastatin 20mg (used to lower cholesterol), Tamsulosin 0.4mg (for the treatment of enlarged prostate), Metformin 500mg (used to treat high blood sugar levels), Memantine 10mg (for dementia), Lisinopril 40mg (used to treat high blood pressure and heart failure). A review of Resident 54's admission Record, dated 5/19/22, indicated Resident 54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which…
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 · E2022-05-20 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of one sampled resident (Resident 54) was free of significant medication error, when Resident 54's oral medications were all crushed and administered together without a physician's order. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 54 not receiving the full benefits of the medications. Findings: During a medication pass observation on 5/17/22, at 8:40 a.m., Registered Nurse 1 (RN1) crushed all of Resident 54's prescribed medication in a plastic pouch: Metoprolol 25mg (used to treat high blood pressure), Lovastatin 20mg (used to lower cholesterol), Tamsulosin 0.4mg (for the treatment of enlarged prostate), Metformin 500mg (used to treat high blood sugar levels), Memantine 10mg (for dementia), Lisinopril 40mg (used to treat high blood pressure and heart failure) poured them in a medicine cup, mixed it with apple sauce, then served it to Resident 54, followed by a teaspoonful of Medpass Plus 2.0 (a medication pass drink…
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 before2022-05-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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, facility failed to follow its policy and procedure on Oxygen Therapy when there was no date on the oxygen tubings of Resident 62. This deficient practice had the potential of delivering oxygen in an unsafe and unsanitary condition to resident. Findings: During the initial tour of the facility on 5/16/22 at 11:55 a.m., Resident 62 had two (2) oxygen concentrators ( a device that concentrates oxygen by removing nitrogen to supply oxygen-enriched gas), and two(2) small oxygen tanks in her room. The two(2) concentrators each had 25 feet tubings connected by a Y tube to deliver a high dose of oxygen to Resident 62. The two(2) oxygen tanks were set up with tubings and were a back up source of oxygen, in case of a power outage. The oxygen tubings connected to the two(2) concentrators and two(2) oxygen tanks were not dated. In an interview with Registered Nurse (RN)1 on 5/16/22 at 12:10 p.m., she stated she was not sure when the tubings were changed. She stated there were no labels indicating the date the tubings were changed. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-05-20 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 five (Resident 26 and 34) sampled resident vaccination record, the facility failed to follow their immunization policy and procedure when the pneumococcal vaccine was not offered or documented for Resident 26 and 24 as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunizations Practices (ACIP, group of medical public health experts). This deficient practice had the potential to increase the risk for Resident 26 and 34 to acquire, transmit or experience complications from pneumococcal disease. Findings: During a concurrent interview and vaccine record review, on 5/18/22, at 10:55 a.m., Resident 26 and 34's pneumococcal vaccination records were reviewed with the Infection Preventionist (IP). The vaccination record indicated Resident 26 received the pneumococcal vaccine on 6/10/16. The vaccination record did not indicate which pneumonia vaccine was administered to Resident 34. The newly appointed IP stated she would search through records for Resident 26 and 34. 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 · D2022-05-20 · 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, and record review, the facility failed obtain a doctor's order and assess one of one resident (Resident 67) ability to self-administer medications when Resident 67 had a bottle of Sore Throat Oral Anesthetic Spray (medication to temporarily relieve sore throat pain) bottle at the bedside. This deficient practice had the potential to result in Resident 67 using the Sore Throat Oral Anesthetic Spray against safe dosing recommendations. It also had the potential to result in the use of the medication by other residents, who could potentially obtain Resident 67's medication from the bedside table where it was stored. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/16/22, at 11:35 a.m., with Resident 67, at Resident 67's bedside, a bottle of Sore Throat Oral Anesthetic Spray was observed on Resident 67's overbed table. Resident 67 stated she used the Sore Throat Oral Anesthetic Spray whenever she felt throat pain. Resident 67 further stated she did not remember how often…
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 · D2022-05-20 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 one of one sampled resident's (Resident 27) preferences for showers were followed, when Resident 27's scheduled shower days were missed from April through May 2022. This failure resulted in Resident 27's request and preference for showers not being honored. Findings: During an interview on 5/16/22, at 12:30 p.m., with Resident 27, Resident 27 stated he does not receive showers as scheduled. Resident 27 stated he told the Administrator (ADM) and the Interim Director of Nursing (IDON) about missed showers. Resident 27 stated he was scheduled to have showers twice a week on Tuesdays and Fridays and prefers to take them on his scheduled days. Resident 27 stated his scheduled shower last Friday was missed because of short staff and had to wait until Monday for a shower. Resident 27 further stated it makes him feel annoyed and agitated when his showers are missed because he wants to be clean. During a review of Resident 27's admission Record, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-05-20 · 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
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to follow infection control policies and procedures when the Infection Preventionist (IP) did not properly disinfect and store reusable ice bags. This deficient practive had the potential to place residents at risk for spread of infection and cross contamination. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/17/22, at 11:20 a.m., at the medication room in Nurses Station 1, with Licensed Vocational Nurse 1 (LVN 1), the Nurses Station 1 resident food refrigerator was observed. The refrigerator did not have food inside. There were four re-useable ice packs in the refrigerator compartment and five re-useable ice packs in the freezer compartment. LVN 1 stated the ice packs were for residents, for issues such as pain, and residents needed a doctors order for them. During an interview on 5/18/22, at 9:45 a.m., with LVN 1, LVN 1 stated the ice packs in the Nurses Station 1 fridge were from physical therapy. During an interview on 5/18/22, at 9:52 a.m. with Physical Therapist (PT), PT stated the ice packs were reusable,…
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 · D2022-05-20 · tag F0888 — isolatedEnsure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure one of four staff (Dietary Aide 1 [DA 1]) followed the COVID-19 (an infectious respiratory disease) vaccination policies and procedures when DA 1 did not complete COVID-19 vaccine series with a booster dose. This failure had the potential to result in the spread of COVID-19 infections to residents, staff, and visitors in the facility. Findings: During a concurrent interview and document review on 5/18/22, at 10:55 a.m., the Employee COVID-19 Vaccination Log, was reviewed with Infection Preventionist (IP). The vaccination log indicated DA 1 received the Pfizer vaccine (a COVID-19 vaccine) on 8/13/21 and 10/20/21. A COVID-19 vaccine booster result was not recorded for DA 1. IP confirmed DA 1's booster was due and not logged. IP stated, DA 1 received the COVID-19 booster vaccine, however, DA 1 has not brought in the vaccine record for verification. IP stated DA 1 still worked in the facility and last worked sometime last week. During a follow-up interview and concurrent document review on 5/19/22, 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.
“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. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-11-12 for 13 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CORPORATE INTERFACE SERVICES — 40 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
The other 39 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SILVER, DAVID | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 99% | since 06/09/2016 |
| SILVER, MICHELLE | Individual | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/09/2016 |
| ROCKPORT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/04/2025 |
| ALDRIDGE, THEARTIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/16/2025 |
| MANOHARAN, ARUN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2023 |
| ERETZ LION CREEK PROPERTIES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 89% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 055876. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-10-20, 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.