Sacramento Post-Acute
5255 Hemlock Street, Sacramento, CA 95841 · For profit - Corporation · 99 certified beds · (916) 331-4590 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- 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 facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its payroll-based staffing 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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 held steady at 4 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 | 4.4% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.3% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.5% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 22.6% | 7.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.4% | 0.4% | 0.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.1% | 9.8% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.8% | 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 | 6.0% | 4.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.0% | 10.2% | 21.2% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.7% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.2% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.3% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.1% | 23.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.9% | 11.2% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.99 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.11 | 1.57 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
59.8% 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 229 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 77.8% 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 135 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 0.51 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 27% 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 | 59.8%CMS range 52.8–65.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.5%CMS range 8.7–13.8 | 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 | 77.8% | 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 | 77.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 58.5% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 80.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 1.7% | 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 5.8–12.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.11 | 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 99 beds and averages 89.9 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 9 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 4.65 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.26 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.31 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.79 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% 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 · Fcited before2026-02-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when:Several kitchenware found not in sanitary manners and stored away in the clean and ready-to-use storage areas;The arrangement of the raw meat stored in the walk-in refrigerator were not in a food safety manner;The ice machine was not clean; andOne microwave designated for residents' food was not clean and not well maintained.These failures had the potential to result in food contamination which could cause illness for 71 medically [NAME] residents who received food prepared from the facility kitchen. The census was 89.Findings:1. During the kitchen observations on 2/17/26 at 9:03 a.m. and 9:06 a.m., the following items found issues and stored in the clean and ready-to-use storage areas:Two full sheet metal pans stacked wetTwo half sheet metal pans stacked wetFive quarter (1/4) sheet metal pans stacked wetOne muffin baking pan with…
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 before2026-02-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 and prevention practices for a census of 89. when:Two certified nursing assistants (CNAs) did not follow the Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP-infection control measures that require staff to wear gowns and gloves during high-contact care, such as dressing, transferring, or changing linen) required during resident's care;Five packs of adult briefs and three elongated packs of vinyl plank flooring covered with whitish-to-brownish substances were inside the dusty floor of the linen storage room [ROOM NUMBER]; A resident's indwelling urinary catheter (IUC, flexible tube inserted through the urethra into the bladder to continually drain urine into an external collection bag) urine drainage bag was sagging and touching the floor; and, Two residents' respiratory equipment were touching the floor. These failures had the potential to increase the risks of cross-contamination, airborne contaminants, and spread infectious…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-20 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was below 5% for two of 23 sampled residents (Resident 76 and Resident 11) when:1. Licensed Nurse (LN) 5 applied a medication patch not in accordance with the Physician's Orders (POs) for Resident 76;2. A medication was not available for timely administration for Resident 76 by LN 5; and3.LN 5 administered the wrong dose of a medication to Resident 11. These failures resulted to three errors identified out of 29 opportunities for error during the observation of medication administration with the facility's medication error rate of 10.34%.Findings:1. During a medication administration observation on 2/17/26 at 7:57 a.m., LN 5 applied a lidocaine transdermal patch (a patch that delivers pain relieving medication through the skin) 5% to Resident 76's left knee.During a reconciliation of Resident 76's POs on 2/17/26 at 1 p.m., the PO indicated: Lidocaine External Patch 5% apply to the right knee once daily for knee pain and remove as scheduled.During a review of Resident 76'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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that prescription medications were labeled and that expired medications were not available for a census of 89, when:1. Multiple unlabeled prescription medications were found in the medication room and the treatment cart; and2. Expired wound dressings containing silver were found inside the treatment cart. These failures had the potential to compromise resident safety by increasing the risk of medication errors and the use of ineffective medications.Findings: 1. During an inspection on 2/17/26 at 8:55 a.m. in one out of two medication rooms with Licensed Nurse 7 (LN 7), the following meds were observed stored among other active medications without a resident specific pharmacy label:a. Lidocaine Injection (medication used to treat swelling, bruising, or pain at the injection site) 200mg/20 mL (milliliters, a unit of volume);b. Triamcinolone acetonide (medication used to reduce inflammation, swelling, itching, and redness) 200mg/5mL injectable suspension; andc. Folic acid (vitamin B9, primarily treats 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 · E2026-02-20 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — patternDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
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 a clean environment for the residents and visitors for a census of 89, when one of one garbage dumpster, located outside the facility, was not closed securely with the dumpster lid.This failure had the potential for an unsafe environment for the residents and visitors due to possible pest infestation and spread diseases in the facility.Findings:During an observation of the dumpster area outside the kitchen on 2/17/26 at 7:59 a.m., noted one of one garbage bin was not securely covered by the lid.During an interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 2/17/26 at 8:44 a.m., the DM confirmed and stated the garbage bin should be closed securely to prevent pest and rodent infestation. DM stated the maintenance department usually checked the garbage bin and surrounding area every morning and afternoon.During a second observation of the dumpster area outside the kitchen on 2/17/26 at 4:00 p.m., noted the same garbage bin was not securely covered by the lid and observed there were bags of trash inside the garbage…
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 before2026-02-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 38), when Resident 38's Bowel and Bladder Toileting Program (B&BTP) was not implemented with focused measurable objectives. This failure had the potential to negatively impact Resident 38's quality of life, and the care and services received.A review of Resident 38's admission Record indicated Resident 38 was admitted to the facility in early 2026, as his own responsible party, with a diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH, prostate enlargement which causes bladder dysfunction occurring in men), and a stool incontinence. A review of Resident 38's Order Summary Report, indicated physician orders on 1/27/26 for a urinary catheter (a hollow tube inserted into the bladder to drain or collect urine); and on 1/30/26 for a [B&BTP], with no end date. A review of Resident 38's Care Plan Report, initiated 1/27/26, indicated there was no care plan focus, goal, or intervention for the B&BTP. During an interview on 2/17/26…
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 before2026-02-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 ensure that one of the 23 sampled residents (Resident 76) received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, when Licensed Nurse 5 (LN 5) did not notify the physician about the unavailability of Resident 76's blood pressure medication.This failure prevented the physician from providing alternative orders and placed the resident at risk for uncontrolled blood pressure, which had the potential to cause stroke or other adverse effects such as headaches, dizziness, and fatigue.Findings:A review of Resident 76's admission record indicated that Resident 76 was admitted to the facility in 2/2025 with diagnoses which included stroke and high blood pressure.During a medication pass observation and interview on 2/17/26 at 7:57 a.m. with LN 5, LN 5 stated that Resident 76's losartan (a medication used to lower blood pressure) was not available to administer.A review on 2/17/26 at 1 p.m. of the reconciliation of the Physician's Orders for Resident 76's medications dated 3/24/25, 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 · D2026-02-20 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
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 treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her ability to carry out the activities of daily living for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 61), when the eye patch (specialized, often concave, devices used to cover, protect, or treat an eye abnormality) was not worn during lunch time as ordered by the physician. This failure had the potential to result in the decline of Resident 61's functional independence during meals. Findings:During a review of Resident 61's admission Record (AR) dated 6/9/14, the AR indicated, he had diagnoses which included ptosis (droopy eye caused by weak eye muscles which may block vision) of left eyelid, glaucoma (a common eye disease that causes slow and silent vision loss), and left facial droop.During a review of Resident 61's Physicians Order (PO) dated 11/24/25, the PO indicated, Restorative Nursing Assistant [RNA, specialized training in restorative care] for dining program: Patient to wear eye patch on his left eye during lunch time or as tolerated.During a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-20 · 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 quality care and dignity to maintain good grooming for one of 23 sampled Residents (Resident 65), when Resident 65 had sweaty smell and scattered white flakes on his scalp, strands of his hair, ears, face and neck. This failure resulted to Resident 65's with unkempt appearance and not attaining his highest practicable physical, mental and psychological well-being.Findings:During a review of Resident 65's admission Record (AR) dated 3/5/21, the AR indicated, Resident 65 was admitted with diagnoses which included traumatic brain injury (TBI, a disruption in the normal function of the brain that can be caused by a bump, blow, or jolt to the head) and abnormal posture.During a review of Resident 65's Physician's Order (PO) dated 10/8/24, the PO indicated, Resident 65 cannot understand rights and responsibilities and/or able to participate in treatment plan.During a review of Resident 65's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated resident assessment tool), dated 12/6/25, the MDS indicated, Resident 65…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-20 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 quality care services were provided for two of twenty-three sampled residents (Resident 67 and Resident 1) when:Resident 67 indwelling urinary catheter (IUC, a flexible tube inserted into the bladder to continuously drain urine, typically used when a patient cannot urinate on their own) smelled foul odor of urine and the tubing had creamy-white-brownish encrustation (forms when minerals and other debris accumulate inside the catheter or drainage bag) The physician was not notified of creamy-white encrustation in Resident 1's IUC. These failures had the potential for Resident 67 and Resident 1 to develop complications including blockage of urine flow, urine leakage, bladder pain, and recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs). Findings: During a review of Resident 67's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 67 was admitted with diagnoses which included urine retention, neuropathic bladder (nerve damage causing loss of bladder control) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH, enlargement…
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 · D2026-02-20 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Mince and Moist level 5 (MM5) texture (the food texture is designed for residents who experience biting, chewing, or swallowing limitations. All food must be soft, moist and minced to size [no larger than 4 millimeters (mm) x 15 mm]. The food item size and texture must pass testing requirements, fork test and spoon tilt test) food items prepared properly for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 9). This deficient practice had the potential to increase risk for Resident 9 with swallowing and chewing difficulties to choke and/or aspirate (a condition in which food, liquids, saliva, or vomit is breathed into the airway).Findings:According to Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND, the organization of food and nutrition professionals, and is a leading source for credible, science-based information on nutrition and health), IDDSI (International Dysphagia Diet Standardization Initiative) diets was recognized to be the only texture-modified diet beginning in October 2021.According to IDDSI, MM5 texture…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide appropriate, sufficient supervision to each resident to prevent an avoidable accident for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1) and failed to investigate an accident thoroughly when:Resident 1 fell to the floor while being transferred from her bed to a shower chair, and the facility failed to provide documentation of a fall investigation for Resident 1.These failures had the potential for Resident 1 to sustain a major injury, be exposed to physical pain, increased anxiety from her history of falls, and placed Resident 1 at risk for an unidentified injury from the failure to investigate.During a review of Resident 1's Hospital Discharge Summary dated 1/5/26, summary indicated, Resident 1 had hospital problems including but not limited to Closed pelvic ring fracture (serious injury, often from high-energy trauma like car accidents, causing severe pelvic/groin pain, bruising, and inability to bear weight) and a pubic ramus…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-18 · 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 food was prepared and stored in a safe and sanitary manner for a census of 62 residents who received food prepared from the kitchen, when: 1. Expired food items were found on the kitchen shelf; 2. An unclean appliance attachment cap was on the steam table and an unclean oven top and mesh rack for storage of water pitchers were found in the kitchen; 3. Pans with hard black residue were available for use in the kitchen; 4. The dry storage room had no documented evidence of temperature monitoring; 5. The freezer section of the refrigerator used for storage of resident foods had no thermometer and no documented temperature monitoring evidence; and, 6. the ice dispensing mechanism of the ice maker had dark residue. These failures decreased the facility's potential to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 10/15/24 commencing at 8:31 a.m. with the Registered Dietitian (RD) 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 · E2024-10-18 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain the reach-in meat freezer in safe operating condition when door seals were observed with tears/cracks, and the top of the freezer had ice buildup on the inside. This failure decreased the facility's potential to ensure food safety and quality for 62 residents who ate facility prepared meals. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 10/18/24 at 10:37 a.m. with the Registered Dietitian (RD) in the kitchen, the reach-in meat freezer was observed with two cracks on door seals (under 1/2 inch in length) and ice build-up hung near the fan at the top of the freezer. The RD confirmed observations. A review of the facility provided freezer installation and operations manual, undated, indicated, The door gaskets should be cleaned in place with a mild soap solution to extend their life. A review of the United States Food and Drug (FDA) Food Code 2022 indicated, EQUIPMENT shall be maintained in a state of repair and condition that meets the requirements specified under Parts 4-1 and 4-2 EQUIPMENT components…
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 before2024-10-18 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 ensure nursing care provided met professional standards for three residents (Resident 63, Resident 36, and Resident 53) of 23 sampled residents when licensed nursing staff did not: 1. Perform Resident 63's suprapubic catheter (a tube that drains urine from the bladder through a small incision in the lower abdomen, just above the pubic bone) care and coccyx (also known as the tailbone which is the triangular bony structure found at the bottom of the spine) skin care as ordered; 2. Ensure Resident 36's medical record indicated the physician was notified as ordered; and, 3. Ensure Restorative Nurse Assistant (RNA, a program which provides exercise and a range of motion activities to the residents) services were provided to Resident 53 without active prescriber orders. These failures decreased the facility's potential to provide adequate and accurate care to residents. Findings:1. A review of an admission record indicated Resident 63 was admitted to the facility in Winter of 2023 with diagnoses which included…
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 before2024-10-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain infection prevention and control practices to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections when: 1. Resident 37's nephrostomy bag (a bag that collects urine from a nephrostomy tube, which is a thin, flexible tube placed into the kidney) was observed touching the floor and the antimicrobial bag used as a privacy bag was not labeled with a placement date; and, 2. The Continuous Air Mist (CAM) respiratory equipment was not labeled with placement dates for Resident 14 and Resident 59. These failures had the potential to result in infection among a facility census of 85 residents. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 37's admission record indicated admission to the facility in August 2024 with diagnoses which included pyelonephritis (a bacterial or viral infection that causes inflammation of the kidneys) and urinary tract infection (UTI- an infection in the bladder/urinary tract). A 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 · Dcited before2024-07-09 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to report an incident of alleged abuse for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), when Resident 1 verbalized he was treated roughly and handled like a rag doll. This failure had the potential to place the resident at risk for further harm. Findings: Review of an anonymous staff report received by the department on [DATE] indicated, During Afternoon shift, Resident [Resident 1] acquired an avulsion (degloving) [avulsion-a traumatic injury that occurs when the layers of skin and tissue are torn away from the underlying muscle, connective tissue, or bone] injury to RUE [right upper extremity] while brief change. Per resident CNA [certified nursing assistant] grabbed him by his arm and stated, she pulled me, and was so strong .she tore the last piece of skin I had. DON [director of nursing]/ administrator do not want to report and is insisting to Nursing staff to reword documentation, due to I can misinterpret to physical abuse. CNA was not written up.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-09 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow their policy and procedure (P&P) to investigate an allegation of abuse for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1), when on [DATE] Resident 1 was noted to have a degloving (avulsion-a traumatic injury that occurs when the top layers of skin and tissue are torn away from the underlying muscle, connective tissue, or bone) injury to right forearm and finger point areas to posterior right forearm and right wrist', and claimed it was from rough treatment from the Certified Nursing Assistant. This failure had the potential to place the resident at risk for further harm. Findings: Review of an anonymous staff report received by the department on [DATE] indicated, During Afternoon shift, Resident acquired an avulsion (degloving) [avulsion-a traumatic injury that occurs when the layers of skin and tissue are torn away from the underlying muscle, connective tissue, or bone] injury to RUE [right upper extremity] while brief change. Per resident CNA…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-12 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician promptly or implement monitoring timely for one of four sampled residents (Resident 2) when Resident 2 was administered Norco (a narcotic mediation that contained hydrocodone and acetaminophen) when hydrocodone was listed as an allergy. This failure resulted in Resident 2 not being monitored for an allergic reaction for approximately 20 hours, which increased the risk for unmet health care needs. Findings: Resident 2 admitted early 2023 with diagnoses which included Multiple Sclerosis (a disease of the brain and spinal cord), stage four pressure ulcer (wound caused by pressure that extends to the muscle and bone), and paraplegia (paralysis that affect the legs). Resident 2 was listed as his own responsible party (RP). During a review of Resident 2's face sheet (a document that gives patient information at a quick glance), admission date 4/2023, the face sheet indicated, .Allergies: HYDROcodone (sic) . During a review of Resident 2's Order Summary Report (OSR), Active Orders As Of 6/12/24, the OSR…
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 before2024-06-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure person centered care plans were developed which included specific goals and interventions for one of four sampled residents (Resident 2) when Resident 2 was administered Norco (a narcotic mediation that contained hydrocodone and acetaminophen) when hydrocodone was listed as an allergy. This failure had the potential for Resident 2 to experience unmet care needs. Findings: Resident 2 admitted early 2023 with diagnoses which included Multiple Sclerosis (a disease of the brain and spinal cord), stage four pressure ulcer (wound caused by pressure that extends to the muscle and bone), and paraplegia (paralysis that affect the legs). Resident 2 is listed as his own responsible party (RP). During a review of Resident 2's face sheet (a document that gives patient information at a quick glance), admission date 4/2023, the face sheet indicated, .Allergies: HYDROcodone (sic) . During a review of Resident 2's Order Summary Report (OSR), Active Orders As Of 6/12/24, the OSR indicated, Allergies: HYDROcodone (sic) . Resident 2'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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-12 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
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 residents were free from unnecessary medications for one of four sampled residents (Resident 2) when Resident 2 was administered Norco (a narcotic mediation that contained hydrocodone and acetaminophen) when hydrocodone was listed as an allergy. This failure had the potential for adverse systemic effects and jeopardized Resident 2's health. Findings: Resident 2 admitted early 2023 with diagnoses which included Multiple Sclerosis (a disease of the brain and spinal cord), stage four pressure ulcer (wound caused by pressure that extends to the muscle and bone), and paraplegia (paralysis that affect the legs). Resident 2 is listed as his own responsible party (RP). During a review of Resident 2's face sheet (a document that gives patient information at a quick glance), admission date 4/2023, the face sheet indicated, .Allergies: HYDROcodone (sic) . During a review of Resident 2's Order Summary Report (OSR), Active Orders As Of 6/12/24, the OSR indicated, Allergies: HYDROcodone (sic) . Resident 2's OSR further 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 · D2024-04-18 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain the resident's communication within the facility for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1's call light was not within reach. This failure had the potential to increase the residents' fear of not being able to get assistance from staff when needed. Findings: According to an admission Record, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including paralysis of the legs and lower body and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD; anxiety disorder from a traumatic event). A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 5/7/24, indicated Resident 1 had no memory impairment. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/18/24 at 10:06 a.m., inside Resident 1's room, Resident 1 stated he was not able to reach for the call light. The call light was observed hanging off the left side of the bed. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/18/24 at 11:17 a.m. with Certified Nursing Assistant 1 (CNA 1), CNA 1 confirmed the call light 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 · D2024-01-16 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
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 interviews, clinical record review, and facility documents review, the facility failed to readmit one of one resident (Resident 1) to return to the facility after hospitalization when Resident 1 was ready to be readmitted to the facility. This failure resulted in the denial of Resident 1's right to return to the facility and had the potential to negatively affect Resident 1's wellbeing. Findings: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (low level of oxygen) and atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rate). During a review of Resident 1's Progress Note, dated 12/22/23 at 2:25 a.m., indicated RP (responsible party) was notified about Resident 1's critical lab result. RP requested that Resident 1 be sent out to the hospital. PA (Physician Assistant) was notified and a new order was received to send Resident 1 to the ED (Emergency Department), for further eval (evaluation)/ blood transfusion. During a 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 · Dcited before2023-08-02 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of a reasonable suspicion of a crime for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1), when Resident 1's allegation of mishandled care by Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) 3 was not reported to the State Survey Agency/California Department of Public Health (CDPH) within 24 hours. This failure had placed Resident 1 and other residents in the facility at risk for further mishandled care, and possible serious physical and/or psychosocial harm. Findings: A review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated Resident 1 was admitted May of 2023 and had diagnoses that included encounter for other orthopedic aftercare (care provided after a surgery that involves bones, muscles, and joints) and muscle weakness. A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool used to guide care) Cognitive Patterns, dated 6/2/23, indicated, Resident 1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (a tool to assess cognition) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated Resident 1 had intact…
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 before2023-08-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1) when a report of suspected dependent adult/elder abuse was filed for Resident 1 who alleged Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) 3 of not cleaning her well before putting on her new briefs (adult diaper). This failure had placed Resident 1 at risk of not receiving appropriate care and interventions and placed all residents in the facility at risk for mishandled care, and possible serious physical and/or psychosocial harm. Findings: A review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated Resident 1 was admitted May of 2023 and had diagnoses that included encounter for other orthopedic aftercare (a care provided after a surgery that involves bones, muscles, and joints) and muscle weakness. A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool used to guide care) Cognitive Patterns, dated 6/2/23, indicated, Resident 1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (a tool to assess cognition) score of 15 out of 15 which…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-19 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication administration error rate was less than 5 percent (%), when two medication errors occurred out of 25 opportunities during medication administration for two residents (Resident 46 and Resident 7) of 21 sampled residents. As a result of these failures, the facility's medication administration error rate was 8%. Findings: A review of an admission record indicated Resident 46 was admitted to the facility early 2018 with multiple diagnoses, which included anoxic brain damage (brain injury caused by a complete lack of oxygen to the brain). A review of Resident 46's physician's order, dated 5/10/23, indicated, [scopolamine (medication that prevents nausea and vomiting due to motion sickness, anesthesia, and surgery)] Patch .Apply 1 patch transdermally [on the skin] one time a day every 3 day(s) . A review of Resident 46's Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 5/1/23 to 5/31/23, indicated the scopolamine patch was administered on 5/13/23 and 5/16/23. During a concurrent medication…
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 · E2023-05-19 · tag F0801 — patternEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Dietary Supervisor (DS) completed one of the seven pathways required to manage a skilled nursing facility in California. This failure had the potential for unsafe food handling and food borne illness in a highly susceptible population of 88 residents. Findings: During an interview on 5/16/23 at 8:01 a.m., the DS stated she had been employed at the facility for 10 years and had been in the position of Dietary Supervisor for approximately one year. The DS stated she had a ServeSafe Certificate (nationally accredited certificate in food safety that is required by law in many states) and did not have a Certified Dietary Manager certification nor was she currently participating in a Dietary Manager training program. During an interview on 5/16/23 at 1:37 p.m., the DS stated she conducted the training and monthly in-services for dietary staff and did the ordering of food and kitchen supplies. During an interview on 5/17/23 at 2:35 p.m., the Registered Dietician (RD) stated she was unaware of the pathway 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 · Ecited before2023-05-19 · 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 proper infection control practices were performed for four residents (Resident 46, Resident 102, Resident 7, and Resident 86) of 21 sampled residents when: 1. The Licensed Nurse 1 (LN 1) and LN 3 did not perform hand hygiene between glove changes; 2. The LN 1 did not disinfect a stethoscope (an equipment used in listening to sounds produced within the body) prior to its use; 3. The LN 2 brought a container of glucometer strips (test strips used in a glucometer machine to check blood sugar level) and a glucometer to Resident 102's bedside without disinfecting them prior to use; 4. The LN 3 dropped a packet of powdered medication on the floor and continued to use the dropped medication to administer to Resident 7; and, 5. A Continuous Aerosol Misting (CAM, special tubing set-up used to provide moist air to the breathing tube) mask and tubing used for tracheostomy (surgically placed breathing tube in the front of the neck directly connected to the trachea) care did not indicate a date when the equipment…
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 before2023-05-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one resident (Resident 51) of 21 sampled residents upon re-admission to the facility. This failure reduced the facility's potential to meet Resident 51's care needs for a urinary catheter (a tube used to drain urine from the bladder to a collection bag). Findings: A review of an admission record indicated Resident 51 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses which included stroke, hemiplegia, or hemiparesis (paralysis of one side of the body), aphasia (loss of ability to express speech caused by brain damage), and neurogenic bladder (lack of bladder control due to injury or disease of the nervous system). A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 4/13/23, indicated a permanently present indwelling urinary catheter. During an observation on 5/16/23 at 9:30 a.m., Resident 51 was lying in bed, looked alert, well-groomed, with no…
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 · D2023-05-19 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 update care plans for two residents (Resident 24 and Resident 65) of 21 sampled residents when: 1. A care plan was not created on the precautions and safe usage for Resident 24's new medication enoxaparin (an injected medication that prevents blood clots); and, 2. A care plan was not created for the Resident 65's new diagnosis of septicemia (sepsis, an infection in the blood). These failures decreased the facility's potential to meet residents' needs upon a change in their care. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 24's admission record indicated admission to the facility on 1/4/22, with diagnoses of dissection of precerebral arteries (a tear in the carotid or vertebral arteries of the head and neck which transmit blood to the brain), traumatic subdural hemorrhage (a head injury causing bleeding into the brain), and respirator dependence. A review of Resident 24's clinical record indicated a physician's order, dated 5/6/23, for enoxaparin 40…
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 before2023-05-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure services provided met professional standards for one resident (Resident 65) of 21 sampled residents when: 1. Staff did not immediately notify the physician of Resident 65's change in condition; and, 2. Staff carried out an intervention for Resident 65 but did not evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention per protocol. These failures reduced the facility's potential to provide safe and effective care to Resident 65. Findings: A review of Resident 65's admission record indicated re-admission on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes (the body's inability to efficiently process sugar). A review of Resident 65's medical record on 5/18/23, indicated the following: A physician's order, dated 4/20/23, indicated, .if Blood Sugar [BS] less than 70, Initiate Hypoglycemic [low blood sugar] protocol .Notify MD [physician] . A weights and vitals summary, dated 5/1/23 at 9:34 p.m. and 5/1/23 at 10:31 p.m., indicated Resident 65…
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 · D2023-05-19 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an acceptable parameter of nutritional status when one resident (Resident 62) of four sampled residents lost 9.9% of his body weight over a 12-day period. This failure placed Resident 62 at risk for potential muscle loss increasing his susceptibility to infection and delayed wound healing for a census of 88. Findings: A review of Resident 62's admission record indicated admission to the facility in April 2023 with multiple diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and stage four pressure ulcer (a deep wound that extends to the muscle, tendons, ligaments, or bone). A review of Resident 62's Weights and Vitals Summary, between 4/14/23 and 5/19/2023, indicated, Resident 62 weighed 242 pounds (a measure of weight) on 4/15/23 and 218 pounds on 4/27/23. This loss of 24 pounds was 9.9% of his body weight was classified as severe weight loss over a 12-day timespan. A review of Resident 62's undated Order Listing Report indicated, Resident 62 required enteral feeding (liquid formula given through a tube…
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 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 273; lowest-rated first.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HUDSON RIVER OPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 11/05/2021 |
| BAY BRIDGE CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 11/05/2021 |
| SANDHU, HARKESH | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/29/2020 |
| BARBIERI, JEFFERY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 05/01/2022 |
| APT, FREDERICK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| JERGENSEN, JOSHUA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| MITCHELL, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
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 $1.1M 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
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 056073. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-20, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.