Canterbury Woods

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

62.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 151 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 65.3% 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 95 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 0.97 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 97% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 24 beds and averages 15.9 residents a day — about 66% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 6.71 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.46 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.77 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 5.71 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 7.12 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.54 to 1.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 19% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and/or prepared under sanitary conditions when:A Kitchen Staff was not wearing hair restraint in the kitchen, andUnlabeled packs of bread were found in the food pantry.These failures had the potential to cause foodborne illnesses.Findings:1. During an initial kitchen tour observation and interview on 2/24/26 at 2:12 p.m. with the Executive Chef (EC), the EC verified a Dishwasher (DW) was walking around the kitchen without a hair restraint. The EC stated DW should have worn a hair net. Other staff present in the kitchen during the tour were all wearing a hairnet.A review of facility's policies and procedures (P&P) entitled Uniform Dress Code revised 1/2025, the P&P indicated. Personal cleanliness and a neat appearance are essential for the food service worker. Associates Working with food . wear the approved hair restraint when on duty regardless of length or presence of hair. The only exception is to remove hair restraints when delivering trays to patients/residents. Food service staff…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-27 · tag F0847 — isolated
  Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
  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 that three out of four sampled residents (Residents 9, 23, and 39), who signed the binding arbitration agreement (BAA, contract between the facility and resident requiring disputes to be resolved by a neutral arbitrator [third party decision-maker] instead of a judge or jury in court) understood the BAA prior to signing. This failure posed the risk for the residents to make uninformed decisions regarding the right to file an appeal, if there were any allegations of medical malpractice. During a concurrent interview and record review on 2/25/26 at 2:21 p.m. in the activity room with Resident 9, Resident 9 verified her signature on a BAA signed on 1/22/26. Resident 9 stated she did not know about the BAA and was not aware she signed the agreement. Resident 9 stated she just had a surgery prior to signing the BAA. Resident 9 also stated she did not want to give up her constitutional right to have any dispute decided in a court of law. A review of Resident 9's medical records indicated an admission date of 1/21/26. 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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Findings:Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure care and services were provided in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1 received oxygen therapy with no physician's order and there was no oxygen care plan.These failures had the potential to compromise the resident's health and well-being.Review of Resident 1's medical record indicated he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with (acute) exacerbation (COPD, a progressive, irreversible disease that restricts airflow causing breathing problem); acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (a critical condition where the lungs cannot adequately transfer oxygen to the blood.)Review of Resident 1's Weights and Vital Summary - Vital: O2 [Oxygen] sats [saturation] (a device used to measure how well blood is transporting oxygen throughout the body,) dated 1/12/26 to 1/14/26, the record indicated, Resident 1 was on oxygen via…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-13 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — pattern
  Ensure 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 eight sampled residents (Resident 66), was free of significant medication error, when the physician order for the Lasix (a diuretic, used to reduce fluid retention) medication, of Resident 66 was not followed. This failure had the potential to affect the health and general well-being of the resident. Findings: During an observation and interview with Resident 66 on 9/9/24 at 12:35 p.m., Resident 66 was in her bed with the head of her bed elevated at 90 degrees. Resident 66 was eating her lunch. She verbalized that her Lasix medication was wrongly given last week. The nurses gave it to her three times per day instead of three times per week. Review of the admission record (a document that contains important information about a resident's admission to a healthcare facility) of Resident 66 indicated, Resident 66 was re-admitted to the skilled nursing facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute pulmonary edema (a medical…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-13 · tag F0813 — pattern
  Have 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure foods were stored in safe and sanitary manner when: 1. Resident foods and food brought by family or visitor stored in the refrigerator at the facility dining area, were readily accessible to all the residents and; 2. Expired food was kept in the cabinet at the facility dining area. These failures had the potential to access the expired food and the food brought by family or visitor in the refrigerator. Findings: 1. During an observation of the skilled nursing facility dining area on 9/9/24 at 3:27 p.m., there was a refrigerator for storage of resident foods. The refrigerator had the following unexpired food items: a. 41 small cups of juices; b. 8 cups of snack packs; c. 2 small cups of diced peaches; d. 4 cups of yogurts (food produced by bacterial fermentation of milk); e. 8 small cups of cranberry juices; f. 9 cans of tomato juices; g. 12 small packs of milk; h. 3 packs of thickened dairy (milk-based) beverages; i. 6 cans 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · tag F0623 — isolated
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide written notification to the Long-Term Care Ombudsman (person who routinely visits the facility and advocates for the residents) for one of two sample discharged residents (Resident 14) when Resident 14 was transferred to the acute care hospital. This failure had the potential to result in the resident not having an advocate who could inform them of their admission, transfer, and discharge rights and options. Findings: Review of Resident 14 clinical record indicated she was transferred to the acute hospital on 8/17/24. There was no documentation in the clinical record indicating the facility notified the Ombudsman regarding this transfer. During an interview with the social service designee (SSD) on 9/13/24 at 1:43 p.m., she confirmed written notification regarding the above transfer was not sent to the ombudsman. The SSD acknowledged the resident's transfer should have been notified to Ombudsman. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled Transfer, Evacuation, Relocation or Discharge…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive person-centered care plans for one of eight sampled residents (Resident 12) when the resident's communication care plan was not person-centered. This failure had the potential for inaccurate development and implementation of person-centered care plans that would address the residents' identified concerns and needs. Findings: Review of Resident 12's clinical records indicated he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including myringotomy tube status (a small tube placed in the ear to treat ear infections and other ear conditions) and bilateral presbycusis (age-related hearing loss). During an interview on 9/09/24 at 10:38 a.m. in his room, he stated he could not hear and needed to use his cellphone, which has a translator function as a communication tool. Review of Resident 12's minimum data set (MDS, an assessment tool) dated 7/15/24 indicated he had a brief interview of mental status (BIMS, a tool used to assess…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
  Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an activity program that met the resident's needs, interests, and preferences was provided to one of eight sampled residents (Resident 11). This failure had the potential to affect the residents' physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being and quality of life. Findings: Review of Resident 11's clinical record indicated she was admitted on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease (a progressive brain disorder that destroys memory, thinking skills, and the ability to perform simple tasks) and dementia (a decline in mental capacity affecting daily functioning). Review of Resident 11's minimum data set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 7/15/24, indicated she was not able to complete the brief interview for mental status. It also indicated Resident 11 felt it was very important to listen to music she liked. During a review of Resident 11's activities care plan, the care plan indicated she has little or no activity…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the interdisciplinary team (IDT, a group of health care professionals from diverse fields who work toward a common goal for residents) assessed and discussed the cause of unplanned weight loss, updated the care plan with a measurable goal and interventions, and provided necessary and timely interventions to maintain the acceptable weights of the residents when there was no follow-up by the IDT after the significant weight loss for one of eight sampled residents (Resident 8). This failure had the potential to result in being unable to evaluate the residents' complete nutritional status and provide necessary interventions timely. Findings: Review of Resident 8's medical record indicated she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including epilepsy (a disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed, causing seizures), hemiplegia (a condition that causes partial or complete immobility on one side of the body), and type 2 diabetes…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  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 their bed rails (adjustable rigid bars attached to the side of a bed: side rails, safety rails, and grab/assist bars) policy for one of one sampled resident (Resident 2) when there was no informed consent verification form obtained prior to installing bed rails. This failure had the potential to result in the resident and the resident's responsible parties (RP, individuals designated to make decisions on behalf of the residents) not being fully informed of the use of bed rails. Findings: During an observation on 9/09/24 at 10:13 a.m., the bed of Resident 2 was inspected. The bed had an upper partial bed rail on the left side. During an interview on 9/10/24 at 11:33 a.m., minimum data set coordinator (MDSC) A stated that the facility initiated bed rail for Resident 2 on 7/06/22, removed on 4/25/24, and reinstalled on 5/06/24. Review of Resident 2's physician's order, dated 5/06/24, indicated she use side rails assist bar on the left side of the bed to increase mobility (movement), support self 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to FRONT PORCH — 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 22 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $677K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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