Pine Creek Care Center

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.

63.7% 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 494 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 78.7% 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 150 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 0.80 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 94% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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 99 beds and averages 96.6 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.44 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.49 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 3.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.65 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-02-09 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — pattern
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  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 reasonable accommodation of resident needs for three out of eight sampled residents (Resident 5, Resident 6, and Resident 7) when:1. Resident 5 and Resident 6's call light buttons were not within their reach; and,2. Resident 7's call light system was broken and was not provided with an alternative call system.This failure placed Resident 5, Resident 6, and Resident 7's safety at risk and had the potential for the residents' needs not to be met.Findings:1a. A review of Resident 5's clinical record indicated Resident 5 was admitted February of 2026 and had diagnoses that included fracture (a break in the continuity of a bone) of the neck bone and dementia (memory loss that interferes with daily functions).A review of Resident 5's physician's order, dated 2/9/26, indicated Resident 5 had no capacity to make decisions.A review of Resident 5's care plan, dated 2/9/26, indicated, [Resident 5] is at risk for falls with or without injury related to .fracture .altered mental status .Keep call light within…

  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 · D2025-07-23 · tag F0628 — isolated
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow the discharge process for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), when Resident 1 was transferred to an acute hospital and Resident 1's Responsibility Party (RP) was not informed of intent to discharge the resident or provided with notice of bed-hold.This failure resulted in Resident 1 being denied return to the facility causing disruption of care. A review of Resident 1's admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in June 2025 with multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy (a change in brain function due to a systemic illness affecting the body's metabolism), dementia with behavioral disturbance (loss of memory and brain function with symptoms including agitation, aggression, psychotic symptoms, and mood changes), and enterocolitis due to clostridium difficile (bacterial infection of the bowel that can cause inflammation and diarrhea). A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS- federally mandated assessment tool), Cognitive Patterns, dated 7/4/25, indicated Resident 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-11 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  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

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services for three (3) of 27 sampled residents (Resident 82, Resident 25 and Resident 67) according to accepted standards of clinical practice when: 1. Resident 82's order for Thrombo-Embolic Deterrent, (TED stockings, also known as anti-embolism stockings, to prevent blood clots and swelling in the legs, particularly after surgery) and lymphatic compression device (devices that work by inflating sleeves around the legs to mimic muscle contractions, helping blood flow back to the heart) were not applied as ordered; and, 2. Resident 25 and Resident 67's TED hose were not applied as ordered. This failure decreased the facility's ability to provide a clear and consistent picture of the residents's conditions, treatment responses, outcomes, and risk factors to improve residents' health and safety. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 82's admission Record (AR) indicated he was admitted in February 2025 with diagnoses which included endocarditis (serious infection and inflammation of the inner lining…

  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 · E2025-04-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide 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 two (2) of 27 sampled residents (Resident 30 and Resident 38) proper hygiene when: 1. Resident 30 and Residents 38's fingernails were untrimmed, jagged and had black substances underneath the nailbeds; 2. Resident 30's skin on right foot was dry and scaly; 3. Resident 38's skin on right and left feet were dry and scaly; and, 4. Resident 30 and Resident 38's traced of colored-liquid, old and dry food residue stacked in between their beards. This failure decreased the facility's ability to maintain Resident 30 and Resident 38's overall health, comfort, and a sense of dignity. Findings: A review of Resident 30's admission Record (AR) indicated he was admitted in June 2024 with diagnoses which included osteoarthritis (a degenerative joint disease where cartilage breaks down, causing pain, stiffness, and reduced movement) generalized muscle weakness and left below the knee amputation (LBKA). A review of Resident 30's revised Care Plan (CP) dated 2/7/25, titled ADL(activities of daily living- routine…

  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 · E2025-04-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure controlled medications (medications that the use and possession of are controlled by the federal government) for three residents (Resident 30, Resident 38, and Resident 51) of a census of 95 were accurately accounted for on the Medication Administration Record (MAR - a daily documentation record used by a licensed nurse to document medications given to a resident) and Controlled Drug Record (CDR - a log for tracking dispensing of controlled substances to ensure compliance with relevant regulations). This failure decreased the facility's potential to ensure accurate accountability for residents' controlled medications and prevent their misuse. Findings: A review of Resident 30's admission record indicated he was readmitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of orthopedic (medical care pertaining to bone injuries or deformities) aftercare following surgical amputation (surgical removal of a body part, usually a limb) and osteoarthritis (degeneration 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that: 1. Discontinued medications were not available for resident use; 2. Medications were stored locked in medication cart; and, 3. Medications were stored in original packaging with pharmacy approved labels. These deficient practices had the potential for unsafe medication storage and administration for a census of 95. Findings: A review of Resident 29's Face Sheet indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (not enough oxygen in the blood), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a condition of lung damage which makes it hard to breathe). A review of Resident 29's Order Summary Report indicated she was prescribed Arformoterol Tartrate Inhalation Nebulization Solution 15 micrograms/2 milliliter (mcg/ml - units of measure) (a medication used for maintenance of air flow blockage in the lungs) on [DATE]. A review of Resident 29's Discharge summary,…

  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 · E2025-04-11 · tag F0807 — failed to offer suitable drinks — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides drinks consistent with resident needs and preferences and sufficient to maintain resident hydration.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient hydration for four residents (Resident 13, Resident 298, Resident 299, Resident 300) of a census of 95, when staff did not deliver bedside water pitchers for two days. This failure had the potential to cause dehydration (a harmful reduction in the amount of water in the body) to the residents. Findings: A review of all four residents' care plans (Resident 13, Resident 298, Resident 299, Resident 300) indicated they were at risk for dehydration due to their medical conditions. A review of Resident 13's face sheet indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including urinary tract infection (an illness in the urinary system-kidneys, bladder, or urethra-typically caused by bacteria), type 2 diabetes mellitus (a disease in which the body's inability to produce or respond to the hormone insulin is impaired - symptoms include thirst and frequent urination) and high blood pressure. 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-04-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately document and secure the care and treatment provided for five of 27 sampled residents (Resident 82, Resident 25, Resident 67, Resident 249, and Resident 48) when: 1. Licensed Nurse 4 (LN4) documented she had applied Resident 82's Thrombo-Embolic Deterrent, (TED stockings, also known as anti-embolism stockings, designed to prevent blood clots and swelling in the legs, particularly after surgery) and lymphatic compression device (helps the trapped lymph fluid to move and flow through the lymph vessels) when she had not; 2. Resident 25 and Resident 67's administration records indicated TED hose had been applied daily by the LNs, when LN's had not; 3. Resident 249's intravenous antibiotics (IV, a type of antibiotic administered directly into a vein to treat infections) was documented as administered by a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN), which was not within the scope of practice; 4. Residents' meal tickets were disposed of in the regular garbage bin; and 5. Resident 48's Informed Consent (IC, voluntary…

  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 before2025-04-11 · 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

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a Care Plan (CP, a detailed document outlining a person's healthcare needs, goals, and the specific care and support they will receive) for one out of 27 sampled residents (Resident 79). This failure had the potential for Resident 79 to not receive the highest practible level of care for her health and wellness. Findings: A review of Resident 79's admission Record indicated Resident 79 was admitted to the facility in December 2024 with diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and partial paralysis to the left side. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/8/25 at 10:11 a.m. with Resident 79, in the resident's room, Resident 79 stated, It'd be great if I could get this G-tube [a surgically placed feeding tube inserted through the abdomen directly into the stomach] out. Resident 79 lifted her shirt to where the G-tube was observed. A review of Resident 79's Order Summary Report (OSR, physician orders) did not indicate Resident 79 had an order for a G-tube. 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-11 · tag F0811 — isolated
  Ensure that residents are assessed for appropriateness for a feeding assistant program, receive services as per their plan of care, and feeding assistants are trained and supervised.
  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 one resident out of 27 sampled residents (Resident 79) with appropriate supervision and assistance during meals. This failure had the potential for Resident 79 to experience malnutrition and an increased risk of choking during meals. Findings: A review of Resident 79's admission Record indicated Resident 79 was admitted to the facility in December 2024 with diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and partial paralysis to the left side. A review of Resident 79's Order Summary Report (physician orders) indicated an order with a start date of 3/1/25 for 1:1 supervision for meals, cue resident to slow rate, pre-cut food into bite sized pieces with meals. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/8/25 at 12:37 p.m. with Resident 79, in her room, Resident 79 was sitting up in bed, leaned over to the right side, unattended. Resident 79 acknowledged staff bring the meal trays, sit her up to eat and then leave. During a follow-up observation on 4/09/25 at 7:33 a.m. in Resident 79's…

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

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

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

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in CA