Orinda Care Center, LLC
11 Altarinda Road, Orinda, CA 94563 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 47 certified beds · (925) 254-6500 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 11.2% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.8% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.7% | 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 | 3.9% | 1.6% | 3.3% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 25.3% | 9.8% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.7% | 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 | 2.5% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.4% | 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 | 21.7% | 12.0% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.4% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.7% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.1% | 23.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 21.5% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.29 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.86 | 1.57 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
53.4% 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 54 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 43.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 39 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 | 53.4%CMS range 40.2–66.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.5%CMS range 8.8–17.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 43.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 51.3% | 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 | 48.7% | 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 | 88.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 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 | 8.5%CMS range 5.0–13.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.30 | 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 47 beds and averages 44.6 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 2 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 4.18 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.51 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 3.73 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.36 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
32 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-29 · tag F0557 — patternHonor 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect personal belongings of four sampled residents (Resident 1, 2, 3, 4) and did not follow their policy to ensure the residents' personal property were properly logged upon admission and as necessary when:1. Resident 1's clothes and personal items were reported missing and not all were found.2. Residents 2, 3, and 4 had claimed they were missing clothes and personal items that were not reported.3. Residents losing their clothes was one of the concerns discussed in the Resident council meeting on 4/23/26 and there was no evidence that it was resolved.4. There was no evidence that the personal belongings for Resident 2 and 4 were inventoried upon admission and no evidence that they were updated subsequently for Residents 2 and 3.This failure had compromised the rights of residents to retain personal possessions.1. A review of the admission record for Resident 1 indicated Resident 1 was originally admitted on [DATE] and readmitted 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 · Dcited before2025-04-22 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not secure the belongings of one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1 ' s had some of her clothing items and money gone missing and facility staff did not create inventory, track, or replace the missing items. This failure resulted in Resident 1 expressing feeling, Frustrating which could affect Resident 1 ' s overall well-being. Findings: During a record review of Resident 1 ' s clinical document, admission Record, the document showed, the facility admitted Resident 1 in May 2025. Diagnoses included post-polio syndrome. (muscle weakness that can develop in someone who previously had polio). Record review of Resident 1 ' s clinical document, MDS 3.0 Nursing Home PPS (NP) Version 1.19.1 (resident assessment) showed, Resident 1 was oriented to the day, month, and year and could accurately recall words presented to her. During an interview on 4/22/2025 at 9:35 a.m. with Resident 1, Resident 1 stated she had underwear and other clothes Stolen and that she had reported this to Everyone including the social worker.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-22 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the skilled nursing licensed staff did not notify the physician for a change in condition for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). Resident 1 had a change in mentation and was hallucinating. This resulted in Resident 1 feeling it was a Horrible Experience with a possible unnecessary hospital stay. Findings: During a record review of Resident 1 ' s clinical document, admission Record, the document indicated the facility admitted Resident 1 in May 2023. Diagnoses included post-polio syndrome. (muscle weakness that can develop in someone who previously had polio). Record review of Resident 1 ' s clinical document, the document MDS 3.0 Nursing Home PPS (NP) Version 1.19.1 (resident assessment) showed Resident 1 was oriented to the day, month, and year and could accurately recall words presented to her. During an interview on 4/22/2025 at 9:35 a.m. with Resident 1, Resident 1 stated she had been Hallucinating and had asked the staff for a test and was Ignored. Resident 1 stated it had been a Horrible experience. Record review 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 · D2025-04-22 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the skilled nursing facility did not provide services to support dental health and the ability to live independently for one of three sampled Residents (Resident 1) when: 1.Dentist recommendation following a dental exam of Resident 1 to be scheduled as soon as possible for an abscess biopsy was never ordered and carried out. 2. Resident 1 was not provided the assistance she needed to live independently. This failure resulted in the potential for pain and infection, and contributed to Resident 1 feeling Frustrated, thereby negatively impacting their overall well-being, autonomy, and quality of life. Finding: 1.During a record review of Resident 1 ' s clinical document, admission Record, the document showed, the facility admitted Resident 1 in May 2023. Diagnoses included post-polio syndrome (muscle weakness that can develop in someone who previously had polio). Record review of Resident 1 ' s clinical document, MDS 3.0 Nursing Home PPS (NP) Version 1.19.1 (resident assessment), the document indicated, Resident 1 was oriented to the day, month, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 a clean, orderly homelike environment when: -Resident rooms had build-up of white crumbs on the floor and personal items like disposable briefs and pillows were piled on a chair at the bedside. -There was insufficient supply of bath towels, face towels, and bed linens available for residents to use. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a clean, orderly homelike environment when: -Resident rooms had build-up of white crumbs on the floor and personal items like disposable briefs and pillows were piled on a chair at the bedside. -There was insufficient supply of bath towels, face towels, and bed linens available for residents to use. This failure had resulted in unsanitary and uncomfortable environment for residents and negatively impact their dignity, comfort and safety. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 3/20/25 at 10:32 a.m. with Resident 3, Resident 3 stated there were not enough supplies at the facility. There were white crumbs on the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2), the facility failed to develop and implement an effective discharge planning process that focuses on resident's effective transition to post-discharge care when Resident 2 was discharged to a friend's home without the friend's consent. This failure had led to Resident 2 going to a homeless shelter after police were called to remove Resident 2 from the friend's home. Findings: During a review of Resident 2's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in June 2017. The admission Record indicated the name and contact number of Friend (FR) who was listed as other. There was no diagnosis information in the admission Record. During a review of Resident 2's discharge care plan initiated on 11/15/24, the care plan indicated Resident discharged is unknown or uncertain this time, and the following interventions included: Resident will continue in long term care .IDT (interdisciplinary team,…
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 · D2025-04-09 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
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 three sampled residents (Resident 2) the facility failed to complete a discharge summary that included the following information: A recapitulation (a concise summary of the resident's stay and course of treatment in the facility) of Resident 2's stay that includes diagnoses, course of illness/treatment or therapy, pertinent laboratory, radiology and consultation results. A final summary of Resident 2's status at the time of discharge and reconciliation of all pre-discharge medications with the resident's post-discharge medications. This failure had the potential to result in the lack of information affecting continuity of care. Findings: During a review of Resident 2's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in June 2017. There was no diagnosis information in the admission Record. During a review of Resident 2's discharge care plan initiated on 11/15/24, the care plan indicated Resident discharged is unknown or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-09 · 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 interview and record review, for one of three sampled residents (Resident 3), the facility failed to ensure Resident 2 received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice when: -A stage 2 pressure ulcer (also known as bedsores or pressure sores, are localized skin and soft tissue injuries caused by prolonged pressure, often over bony areas, resulting in reduced blood flow and potential tissue damage) on a bony prominence (a part of the skeleton where a bone is close to the surface of the skin) was assessed as a skin tear. This failure had the potential to result in delayed management of the wound. -Resident 2's foley catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted into the bladder through the urethra to drain urine) was changed from F16 to F18 (Foley catheters are sized using the French (Fr) system, F18 catheter is larger than a F16 catheter) without a physician's order. This failure had the potential to result in unnecessary tissue trauma. Findings: During a review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-01-24 · 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 follow food safety standards: 1. Cook1 did not wear beard net while preparing desert, when he had about an inch long beard. 2. Five bowls with dry cereal and one bowl with white granulated powder were left unlabeled and undated in the kitchen cabinet. These failures posed a potential risk for food safety and placed facility's residents at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview with [NAME] 1 and Dietary Services Supervisor (DSS) on 1/21/25 at 9:42 a.m., in the kitchen, [NAME] 1 was preparing desert that needed to be served during lunch on that day. [NAME] 1 had a surgical mask on his face, with about one-inch-long uncovered beard visible on both sides of the face, and did not have a beard net on. When asked if facility provided beard nets, Cook1 asked if he needed to wear beard net even with face mask on. During a review of facility's Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled Preventing Foodborne Illness - Employee Hygiene and Sanitary Practices dated 11/2022, the P&P…
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 · E2025-01-24 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 eight of 31 sampled residents (Residents 2, 11, 14, 18, 37, 38, 46 and 249), the facility failed to offer or ensure an advance directive (a written instruction for health care, recognized under State law, relating to the provision of health care when the individual is incapacitated) was on file, when the facility did not offer to locate or help the residents/representatives complete the document. This failure had the potential for Residents 2, 11, 14, 18, 37, 38, 46, and 249's wishes regarding provision of health care to not be honored. Findings: During a record review of the Resident 2's admission Record, printed 1/23/25, it indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions), paranoid schizophrenia (a mental health condition that affects how people think, feel and behave. It may result in a mix of hallucinations, delusions, and disorganized…
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 22 citations
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-24 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess two of three sampled residents (Resident 13 and Resident 23) for tobacco use status on comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment used to guide care). Facility inaccurately coded NO to Current Tobacco Use for Resident 13 and Resident 23 who were smoking daily. The failure resulted in inaccurate reflection of Resident 13 and Resident 23's clinical status and placed them at risk for not receiving person-centered care. Findings: During a record review of Resident 13's admission Record, printed on 1/24/25, the record indicated Resident 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a record review of Resident 23's admission Record, printed on 1/24/25, the record indicated Resident 23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During an observation on 1/22/25, 1/23/25, 1/24/25 at 10:10 a.m., 1:19 a.m., and 10:16 a.m. respectively, Resident 13 and Resident 23 were observed smoking at facility's patio. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-24 · 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 have Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for at least eight (8) consecutive hours a day for a total of 11 days. This deficient practice had the potential to cause delayed delivery of necessary assessment and treatment services for resident's day-to-day care. Findings: During a record review of the facilities Payroll Based Journal (1/2024 - 12/2024) was reviewed, which indicated the facility did not use the services of an RN for at least eight consecutive hours a day on the following dates: 1/13/24, 1/27/24, 2/11/24, 2/17/24, 2/25/24, 3/2/24, 3/3/24, 3/30/24, 7/21/24, 7/28/24, and 8/31/24. During a concurrent interview and record review on 1/23/25 at 1:53 p.m. with the Administrator (ADM), the facility payroll document titled NHPPD SNF CNA/RNA HOURS, dated 1/13/24 - 8/31/24 was reviewed. The ADM acknowledged there was not an RN in the facility for eight consecutive hours a day on the following days: 1/13/24, 1/27/24, 2/11/24, 2/17/24, 2/25/24, 3/2/24, 3/3/24, 3/30/24, 7/21/24, 7/28/24, and 8/31/24. The ADM stated this practice…
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 before2025-01-24 · 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, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy services policies and procedures were followed when: 1. Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1 left the medication cart unlocked and unattended in the hallway. 2. The refrigerator for medication was not maintained within the required temperature range of 36°F to 46°F as outlined in the facility policy and procedure. These failures had the potential for loss or misuse of medications and the potential to jeopardize the residents' health and safety due to improper storage conditions. Findings: 1. During an observation on 1/21/25, at 2:55 p.m., medication cart II was unlocked, unsupervised and unattended with drawers facing the hallway directly outside the dining and activity room. During a concurrent observation and interview with LVN 1 on 1/21/25 at 2:57 p.m., LVN 1 returned to the medication cart II then proceeded to lock the cart. LVN 1 stated, she did not ensure it fully locked prior to leaving medication cart II unattended. LVN 1 further added, it was important to keep medication cart locked…
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 · E2025-01-24 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to protect Resident-identifiable information, including but not limited to full name, date of birth (DOB), and clinical status. Clinical staff including attending physician, nurses, nursing managers; and non-clinical staff including Administration, medical records personnel used their personal cell phones to exchange residents' Protected Health Information (PHI) and confidential biographical details and received text messages for above details even when they were off duty. This failure posed a potential significant risk to protect the privacy and security of facility's residents' information. Findings: During an interview and record review with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1 on 1/24/25 at 12:17 p.m., Resident 249's clinical chart for pain management was reviewed. LVN 1 stated she was aware of Resident 249's complaints of pain as she had notified the doctor about it. When asked to show the communication between LVN 1 and Resident 249's doctor, LVN 1…
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 before2025-01-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control prevention practices when: 1. Resident 11's nasal cannula (nc, a small plastic tube, which fits into the person's nostrils for providing supplemental oxygen) tubing was undated and unlabeled. 2. LVN (Licensed Vocational Nurse) 3 did not properly disinfect stethoscope (a device used to amplify internal body sounds) between residents. 3. Housekeeping Manager (HKM) held Resident 14's clean blankets against her clothing during transport to Resident 14's room. These failures had the potential for cross contamination and spread of infections among residents at the facility. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 11's admission record, dated 1/23/25, indicated Resident 11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a review of Resident 11's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment tool) dated, 12/27/24, indicated Resident had multiple diagnoses that included, Asthma (lung condition that causes…
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 · D2025-01-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care with dignity for one of three sampled residents (Resident 18) when two facility staff did not provide privacy for Resident 18 during nursing care. This deficient practice resulted in not ensuring resident 18's right to be treated with dignity and respect. Findings: During a review of Resident 18's admission record, dated, 1/23/25, the admission record indicated Resident 18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was re-admitted on [DATE]. During a review of Resident 18's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated assessment tool), dated 11/17/24, indicated Resident 18 had multiple diagnoses which included progressive neurological conditions (type of illness that affects the nervous system like brain, spinal cord, or nerves and gets worse over time) that included cerebral palsy (condition that affects posture and movement), quadriplegia [(condition characterized by the loss of impairment of movement and sensation in all…
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 · D2025-01-24 · 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 to ensure an assessment and/or an evaluation for self-administration of medications was completed for one of 46 sampled residents (Resident 11) when the following were observed on Resident 11's bedside table: a. a bottle of Nystatin (antifungal antibiotic topical treatment) powder b. one cup filled with Pepto Bismol (oral medication used for heartburn, indigestion, diarrhea, and nausea) c. Sudafed (allergy) Nasal Spray This facility failure increased the potential for the unsafe self-administration of medications. It also had the potential to result in the use of the medications by other residents, who could come into the room and obtain the treatment from the bedside table where it was stored. Findings: During a review of Resident 11's admission record, dated 6/23/25, the admission record indicated, Resident 11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses that included, mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown…
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 · D2025-01-24 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure 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 complete quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment used to guide resident's care, Quarterly MDS assessment is used to track a resident's status between comprehensive assessment to ensure resident's gradual change in status are monitored) assessment in a timely manner for one of two sampled residents (Resident 28) for over four months. This deficient practice resulted in Resident 28 not receiving the assessment and placed her at risk for not receiving appropriate care and services based on her health status. Findings: During a review of Resident 28's admission Record printed on 6/22/25 indicated Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During an interview and record review on 1/23/25 at 10:50 a.m., with the Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDSC), Resident 28's MDS assessment history was reviewed. MDSC stated he missed to complete Resident 28's Quarterly assessment in 10/2024.The MDSC stated he did not assess Resident 28 after…
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 · D2025-01-24 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident's (Resident 14) Pre-admission Screening Resident Review (PASARR-Preadmission Screening and Resident Review is a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals who have a mental disorder or intellectual disabilities are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) for serious mental illness was accurately completed and sent to the appropriate state mental authority for Level II evaluation and determination. This failure had the potential to prevent Resident 14 from receiving appropriate required mental health services. Findings: During a record review of Resident 14's admission Record, printed 1/23/25, it indicated Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including epilepsy (a brain disorder in which a person has repeated seizures over time. Seizures are episodes of uncontrolled and abnormal firing of brain cells that may cause changes in attention or behavior such as bodily…
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 · D2025-01-24 · 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, the facility failed to ensure/perform a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR-a screening tool to determine if individuals with serious mental illness or intellectual/developmental disability or related condition require nursing facility services or specialized services) for one (Resident 2) of four sampled residents. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 2 not being provided specialized care and services to address a mental illness. Findings: During a record review of the Resident 2's admission Record, printed 1/23/25, it indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions), paranoid schizophrenia (a mental health condition that affects how people think, feel and behave. It may result in a mix of hallucinations, delusions, and disorganized thinking and behavior), epilepsy (a brain disorder in which a person has repeated…
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 before2025-01-24 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an alternative for use of splint (a medical device used to support and immobilize a part of the body, to promote healing and reduce pain) for over a month, for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 38) to manage left hand deformity, when Resident 38 refused to wear a splint. Resident 38 stated he had a history of plate implant surgery on his left hand. This failure resulted in Resident 38 to experience pain when he used his left hand to wheel the wheelchair and potential risk for skin breakdown of his left hand while pushing the wheelchair. Findings: During a record review of Resident 38's admission Record (admission Record is a document used to communicate basic information about a resident) printed on 1/21/25, the record indicated Resident 38 was admitted to the facility 10/11/24. During a review of Resident 38's Minimum Data Set (MDS is a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) dated 10/17/24, the assessment indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-24 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure range of motion (ROM) exercises were provided for two of five sampled residents (Resident 6 and 18) reviewed for limited ROM. This failure had the potential to result in decline in the Resident 6 and Resident 18's ROM. Findings: a. During a review of Resident 6's admission record, dated 1/23/25, the admission record indicated Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During a review of Resident 6's MDS, dated , 1/7/25, the MDS revealed, Resident 6 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool used by the facilities to screen and identify memory, orientation, and judgment status of the resident) Score of 5/15, meaning, Resident 6's cognition was severely impaired. The MDS indicated, Resident 6 had multiple diagnoses that included progressive neurological conditions Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA, stroke) and muscle weakness. The MDS also indicated, Resident 6 had functional limited range of motion on both…
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 · D2025-01-24 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow up on one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 249)'s request to change routine pain medication (Oxycodone) from every six hours to every four hours. This failure resulted in Resident 249 to experience unrelieved pain and made him feel frustrated and unhappy. Findings: During a record review of Resident 249's admission Record (admission Record is a document used to communicate basic information about a resident) printed on 1/21/25, the record indicated Resident 249 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and Resident 249 had a Diagnosis of Acquired absence of left leg above knee. During a review of Resident 249's Minimum Data Set (MDS is a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) dated 1/15/25, the assessment indicated Resident 249 was able to speak clearly, understand others and make himself understood. The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-24 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to plan and implement parameters for Glargine insulin (a type of insulin helps maintain blood glucose levels throughout the day and night) administration for one of six sampled residents (Resident 7) for over five months period. Resident 7 received insulin for certain blood glucose levels on some days and did not on other days. The failure placed Resident 7 at risk for not receiving insulin as needed and posed risk for hyperglycemia (high blood glucose) or hypoglycemia (a condition which blood glucose is too low). Findings: During a review of admission Record printed on 1/24/25, Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]with diagnosis of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (a form of diabetes) with hyperglycemia. During a record review, Resident 7's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) assessment was reviewed. MDS assessment indicated that Resident 7 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-24 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure 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 two sampled residents was free from significant medication errors when the facility incorrectly reconciled and transcribed the dosage of a prescribed anti-seizure (seizures are episodes of uncontrolled and abnormal firing of brain cells that may cause changes in attention or behavior such as bodily movements) medication to Resident 99. Licensed nursing staff then administered the incorrect dosage of the medication to Resident 99 for a period of 22 days. This failure resulted in Resident 99 experiencing multiple seizures, hospitalization, and death. Findings: During a record review of Resident 99's Administration Record, printed on August 21, 2024, it indicated Resident 99 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including non-traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (a life-threatening condition that occurs when there's bleeding in or around the brain), malignant neoplasm of the brain (a cancerous brain tumor),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for safety when a resident food refrigerator contained items that were not labeled and/or dated. This failure put 41 of 45 residents who can access the resident refrigerator at increased risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. Findings: During an interview on 10/17/23 at 2:31 p.m. with Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) 3, CNA 3 stated outside food must be labeled with resident's room number and last name. During an interview on 10/17/23 at 3:00 p.m. with Director of Nursing (DON), DON stated the expectation is for staff to store resident food appropriately by labeling it with resident name and date before placing it in the refrigerator. During a concurrent observation and interview on 10/17/23 at 3:09 p.m. with DON, in the medication room, a resident refrigerator/freezer contained a straw-textured bag with drinks and a clear plastic bowl covered with tin foil that contained a partially eaten salad. DON stated the items belonged to a resident and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented when staff did not wear a gown while handling residents' dirty laundry and soiled linens for 45 of 45 residents. This failure placed the facility's residents at risk for healthcare-associated infections. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 10/18/23 at 10:59 a.m. with Housekeeping Manager (HSKM), in the laundry room, gowns were not available for use in the work area. HSKM stated staff needed to wear a gown to prevent contact with soiled linens, which contaminated clean linens. During an interview on 10/18/23 at 10:59 a.m. with Housekeeper (HSKP), HSKP stated there were no gowns available and she did not wear a gown when she started the two loads of laundry in the dryer. During an interview on 10/18/23 at 2:22 p.m. with Infection Preventionist (IP), IP stated the expectation for staff in laundry was to wear personal protective equipment (PPE - equipment worn to minimize exposure or spread of infection or illness) when handling dirty…
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 · D2023-10-19 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide grooming to one of 12 sampled residents (Resident 37), when they did not shave their facial hair. This failure had the potential to cause Resident 37 to feel undignified and upset. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool used to guide care), dated 9/5/23, the MDS indicated Resident 37 was admitted 8//23 and was a female. The MDS also indicated Resident 37 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS - a tool used to assess mental function) score of 12, meaning moderately impaired. Additionally, the MDS indicated Resident 37 needed extensive assistance (resident involved in activity, staff provide weight-bearing support), from one person to shave and complete personal hygiene. During a concurrent observation and interview on 10/16/23, at 10:27 a.m., Resident 37 was observed with hair on their chin, cheeks, and upper lip. Resident 37 stated their facial hair was too long and they told staff last week that they wanted to shave, but they wouldn't do it. Resident 37…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-04-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary food preparation when: 1. Dietary [NAME] (DC)1 did not perform hand hygiene while handling and preparing chicken puree. 2. Food preparation sink and ice machine did not have an air gap (a gap created to prevent back flow of contaminated water). These failures had the potential to cause food contamination and food born illnesses in residents. Findings: 1. During a observation and concurrent interview on 04/05/21, at 11:46 a.m., with DC 1, in the kitchen, a blender (mixer) filled with chicken was running on the kitchen countertop on the left side of the tray line. DC 1 was observed with blue colored gloves on both hands. DC1 touched the stove regulator (dials to control the stove heat temperature) with gloved hands, then picked up a glass measuring cup, proceeded to the dirty dish washing sink, turned on the faucet, half-filled the measuring cup with water from the sink faucet designated for washing dirty dishes, and then turned the faucet off. DC 1 proceeding to the tray line , turned…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-04-08 · tag F0813 — patternHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' food brought from outside was labeled and stored appropriately in one of one residents' food refrigerator and freezer. This failure had the potential to cause food contamination and food borne illnesses in residents. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview, on 4/6/21, at 11:37 a.m., with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA 1) and the Director of Staff Development/Infection Control Preventionist (DIC), in facility's copy room, the facility's refrigerator and freezer designated for residents' food brought from outside stored the following items: a. An unlabeled, undated 12 (ounces) oz jar of organic apricot fruit spread, 16 oz of chunky blue cheese dressing, 6 oz of hot sauce. CNA 1 stated she did not know who these food items belonged to. b. A 20 oz coffee drink, CNA 1 stated the coffee drink belonged to her. CNA 1 stated she was not sure if staff could keep their food in resident's food refrigerator. c. An unlabeled, undated, partially eaten meat pizza slice, on a disposable…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-04-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow its policy in verifying the effectiveness of Spirit II disinfectant against the bacterial organism found in one (Resident 18) of 39 sampled residents . This failure had the potential to result in the spread of Enterobacter Cloacae(member of the normal gut flora) which could result in the infection of additional residents, possible facility outbreak, and the possibility of resident death. Findings: Review of Resident's 18's face sheet dated 1/16/20, indicated Resident 18 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of chronic hepatitis C (infection caused by a virus that attacks the liver that can lead to an infection), cancer of the skin and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (a condition in which acidic gastric fluid flows backward into the esophagus (connects the throat to the stomach) causing heart burn without esophagitis. During an interview on 04/06/2021, at 9:30 a.m., with the Director of Staff Development/Infection Preventionist Consultant (DIC), the DIC stated that Resident 18 had bacteria…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2021-04-08 · 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, the facility failed to ensure medications and biologicals were stored properly, when the medication cart was found unattended in the main hallway with the drawers unlocked. This failure had the potential for unauthorized staff and residents to access medications and biologicals, which could lead to potential harm. Findings: During an observation and concurrent interview on 4/8/21, at 10:21 a.m., in the main hallway, the station two medication cart was unattended against the wall. The utilization review nurse consultant (URNC) was asked to open the drawers, and she found the drawers to be unlocked. URNC stated the drawers on the medication cart were not locked and should always be kept locked. During an interview on 4/8/21, at 10:22 a.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON), the DON stated the medication cart drawers should be locked at all times, and only authorized personnel should have access to the medication cart. The DON stated there could potentially be harm to the residents, since they could access medications stored in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CRYSTAL SOLORZANO — 9 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OCCST LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 25% | since 07/24/2024 |
| RENEW HEALTH GROUP LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 75% | since 04/11/2015 |
| COHEN, RACHEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 74% | since 07/24/2024 |
| DIONISIO, PAOLA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 25% | since 07/24/2024 |
| CHAVARRIA, EVA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| RENEW HEALTH CONSULTING SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/17/2023 |
| FETIC, MIRJANA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/05/2025 |
| RASHEED, MOYRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/06/2026 |
| SHARMA, VATSALA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/17/2023 |
| ELEOS HEALTH CARE, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/29/2025 |
| GATEWAYS REHABILITATION CENTER II LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/17/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 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 78% 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 $374K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
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 055775. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-01-24, 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.