Shandin Hills Behavior Therapy Center
4164 N 4th Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92407 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 78 certified beds · (909) 886-6786 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2025
- a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 5 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 | 0.3% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.7% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 0.5% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 43.1% | 13.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 4.3% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 0.8% | 10.2% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.00 | 2.25 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.19 | 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.
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.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 78 beds and averages 78.6 residents a day — about 101% occupied, or roughly -1 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 2.55 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.25 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.62 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 2.38 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.62 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.26 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary kitchen in accordance with professional standards for food safety when: 1. A turkey meat product wrapped in foil was in the freezer, uncovered in a tray.2. One open box of fish filet was in the freezer with the inner plastic bag not properly sealed.3. One open box of frozen chocolate chip cookie dough had the inner plastic bag left open.4. Heavy grease, carbonized food residue (burnt food that has hardened and turned black due to heat and was not cleaned from surfaces) and burnt buildup were observed on cooking surfaces, ovens, and drip trays.5. Visible grease accumulation was observed on interior and exterior oven surfaces.6. Dark buildup and debris were observed on the oven door pane and bottom tray.7. The emergency food storage room was observed unclean with dust accumulation on the floor shelving, water bottles, and dry leaves on the floor.These failures had the potential for microorganism growth that could be inadvertently transferred to food of 78 medically compromised residents who…
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 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a secure environment for 78 of 78 residents when multiples keys that open the main locked gate and doors to the facility were left hanging on the outside gate.This failure had the potential to place 78 residents at risk from unauthorized individual entering the building and or the residents leaving the facility through the unlocked door. During an observation on February 18, 2026, at 7:27 AM, surveyor found multiple keys that opened locked behavior doors and units hanging on the outside of the main entrance gate. There were no staff at the gate. Once the surveyors entered the building through the main entrance door, they proceeded through a second door, which leads directly to the resident's dining room.During a concurrent observation and interview on February 18, 2026, at 7:29 AM, with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1 inside the building, LVN 1 stated, the main entrance door should be locked at all the time. LVN 1 stated, her keys were in her pocket, however as she Searched her pocket for the keys,…
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 F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose 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 did not ensure proper disposal of garbage when the recycling dumpster located in the front area of the building was observed overflowing with cardboard and debris, preventing the lid from closing, with visible staining and debris on surrounding surfaces.This failure had the potential to attract vermin (pests or animals that spread diseases) in the facility that cares for 78 medically compromised residents.During a concurrent observation and interview on February 17, 2026, at 8:46 AM, with the Account Manager (AM 1), the recycling dumpster located in the front area of the building was inspected. The dumpster was overflowing with cardboard and debris, preventing the lid from fully closing. There was staining and buildup on the exterior surfaces, and debris was present on the surrounding ground area. The AM 1 confirmed the condition and stated the lid should remain close to prevent pest attraction.During an interview on February 19, 2026, at 1:54 PM, with the Administrator (Admin), the Admin, stated the lid should remain…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-25 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent one of four sample residents (Resident 1) from being abuse by another Resident (Resident 2), when Resident 2 struck Resident 1 while he was in line with many other residents for medication. This failure resulted in Resident 1 suffered a scratch below the left eyebrow, a bruise on the left forehead, and a scratch on the left arm. Findings: On February 25, 2025, at 9:15 AM, the facility was entered to investigate a facility-reported incident related to an injury to Resident 1 caused by Resident 2 struck Resident 1 without provocation. During an interview on February 25, 2025, at 9:41 AM with Resident 1, Resident 1 stated that as he was standing in line to receive his medication, Resident 2 approached him and punched him. He stated there were a lot of them waiting in line when it occurred. He further stated that he had a bruise on his left forehead, a scratch below his left eyebrow, his jaw felt tense, and a scratch on the left arm…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-15 · 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 implement adequate monitoring and supervision for one of one resident (Resident 1) who had a history of elopement (leaving a designated area without permission), when the facility ' s back door was unlocked and Resident 1 left the facility without staff awareness on January 6, 2025, for 15 hours, before police brought Resident 1 back to the facility at midnight, on January 7, 2025. This failure placed Resident 1 at high risk for accidents and had the potential to place Resident 1's health and safety at risk and for him to experience some serious adverse outcome, due to exposure of the (outdoor) elements, as well as effects of his admitted use of marijuana ( a drug than can be smoke, vaporized or consume in milk) and alcohol while he was gone interacting with his prescribed medications. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (a document that gives a summary of resident's information), the admission Record 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 · F2024-11-15 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the 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 follow their daily approved menu for lunch when, on November 12, 2024, Dietary [NAME] served a mixture of lettuce, tomato, and cheese together to serve with tacos and used a #24 scoop (1.33 ounces or 2-2/3 tablespoons), instead of ¼ cup (4 tablespoons) shredded lettuce and diced tomato topping and 1 tablespoon of shredded cheddar cheese. This failure had the potential for residents to compromise their nutritional status when menus are not followed for 78 of 78 medically compromised residents who received food from the kitchen. FINDINGS: During tray line (when cook serves food on plates for each resident according to the menu) observation on November 12, 2024, at 12:11 PM, In Unit 1 Dietary [NAME] served lettuce, tomato, and cheese mixture using a #24 handle scoop (1.33 ounces or 2-2/3 Tablespoon). During a tray line observation on November 12, 2024, at 12:37 PM. In Unit 2 Dietary Aide served lettuce, tomato, and cheese mixture using a #24 handle scoop (1.33 ounces or 2-2/3 tablespoon). During a review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-15 · tag F0576 — isolatedEnsure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
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 ensure the residents rights to forms of communication were respected for three of six residents (Residents 24, 31 and 66) when Residents 24, 31 and 66 did not receive mail on Saturdays. This failure resulted in Residents 24, 31 and 66's not having means of communication with individuals inside or outside the facility, which could cause psychosocial harm and lead to low self-esteem, feeling irritated, sad, and anxious. Findings: During a review of Resident 24's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnoses of schizophrenia (a chronic mental disorder that affects a person's ability to think, perceive, and interact with others), nicotine dependence (a condition where a person has a compulsive need for nicotine, the addictive chemical found in tobacco products) and hyperlipidemia (high levels of fat in the blood). During a review of Resident 31's admission Record, the admission…
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 · D2024-11-15 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the menu for dysphagia mechanical soft diet (texture-modified diet that restricts foods that are difficult to chew or swallow) when one of twenty two sampled resident (Resident 16) did not receive her physician ordered therapeutic diet (a meal plan that's prescribed by a doctor and created by a dietician to treat a medical condition) on the following days: Received regular tortilla and regular green chili rice instead of pureed tortilla and pureed green chili rice for lunch on November 12, 2024. Received a whole piece of bread and chopped roast pork instead of pureed bread and ground roast pork for lunch on November 13, 2024. This failure had the potential for Resident 16 that received this diet to be at risk for choking and impact the resident's nutritional needs and health outcomes. FINDINGS: A review of Resident 16's admission Record, (contains demographic and medical information), indicated Resident 16 was admitted to 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 · D2024-11-15 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure when one of one sampled residents (Resident 278) food preferences were not honored when Resident 278 asked for ketchup for his lunch on November 12, 2024 and staff said no. This failure had the potential to result in unmet care of needs for Resident 278 which could potentially affect the residents nutrition status. FINDINGS: A review of Resident 278's admission Record,(contains demographic and medical information), indicated Resident 278 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included schizoaffective disorder (s a mental health condition marked by hallucinations or delusions, and symptoms of a mood disorder, such as mania and depression), enlarged lymph nodes (swollen lymph nodes are your body's natural reaction to illness or infection. These small lumps are soft, tender, and often painful), and nicotine dependence (a chronic disease that makes it difficult to stop using tobacco, even when a person wants to…
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 before2024-11-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe, sanitary food preparation, and storage practices in the kitchen when: 1. There was two plastic drawers with food crumbs and spill stains inside the drawers. The plastic drawer base and the shelf that the drawers were sitting also had a build-up of food crumbs. 2. There was a black build-up on floor under the three compartment sinks. Looks like black sludge with food. The had the potential for microorganism growth and to attract pests. 3. The meat slicer had old meat crusted on the blade. This had potential to contaminate meat sliced on the slicer. 4. The steam table in unit one dining room was dirty, had grease and grime on the front of the unit and the shelf under the steam table had a buildup and food crumbs.The steam table in unit two dining room had a build-up of a brown substance and food crumbs. And the stainless-steel shelf had a rust like substance on the shelves. This had a potential to contaminate food and attract pests. 5. A dresser was being used in unit two next to the steam table to…
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 8 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-11-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe, sanitary food preparation, and storage practices in the kitchen when: 1. There were eight outdated cups of prune juice found in the kitchen refrigerator, and one box of outdated saltine crackers was found in the dry food storage and were available for use. 2. There were food crumbs and trash under the stove. These failures had the potential to expose 77 highly susceptible residents who received food from the kitchen to foodborne illness (illness caused by ingestion of contaminated food or beverages) due to cross- contamination (the transfer of harmful substances or disease- causing microorganisms to food). Findings: 1. During an observation and interview with [NAME] 1, on October 30, 2023, at 8:20 AM, in the kitchen, one of the refrigerators were inspected. Inside the refrigerator, there was a food storage container holding eight cups of outdated prune juice. It had a label, Prune juice .UB 10-18-23 [October 18, 2023]. During further observation and interview with [NAME] 1, on October 30, 2023,…
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 · F2023-11-03 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement the water management plan in accordance with their own policy and procedure. This failure had the potential to result in causing water borne illness(illness caused by ingestion of contaminated water) to 77 residents in the facility. Findings: During an interview, on November 2, 2023, at 1:00 PM, with the Maintenance Supervisor 1 (MS 1), the MS 1 stated he was not following the water management plan as per facility policy and procedure except for checking the water temperature. During a concurrent interview and record review, on November 2, 2023, at 3:00 PM, with the Administrator in Trainee (AIT), the AIT reviewed the facility's undated policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Legionella Water Management Plan, and stated,We [the facility] are not following the steps that was documented in the policy and procedure for the Legionella water management plan except the temperature checking daily. During a review of the facility's undated policy and procedure titled, Legionella Water Management Plan, it…
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 · D2023-11-03 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure informed consents (process in which a health care provider educates a patient about the risk and benefits and alternatives) were obtained for a resident (Resident 54) reviewed for use of psychotropic medication (a drug which affects behavior, mood thoughts, or perception). This failure had the potential for Resident 54 and his representative to not be informed of Resident 54's current health condition and treatment options, which could negatively impact Resident 54's health and safety. Finding: During a review of Resident 54's admission Record (contains demographic and medical information), it indicated Resident 54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included paranoid schizophrenia [a pattern of behavior where a person feels distrustful and suspicious of other people and acts accordingly], insomnia [inability to sleep] and hypothyroidism [low activity of the thyroid gland]. During a record review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-30 · tag F0940 — failed to train staff — patternDevelop, implement, and/or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members.
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 staff were properly trained on emergency procedures when the cook did not call a Code Red or use the fire extinguisher to put out a fire in the kitchen. This failure had the potential to flare up and consume the kitchen which could have negatively impacted the physical and emotional well-being of the residents in the facility. Findings: On August 1, 2023, an unannounced visit was made to the facility to investigate a complaint regarding Physical Environment. During an interview with the Dietary Aide (DA 1) on August 1, 2023, at 3:19 PM, DA 1 stated, The cook was cooking fried steak. The Assistant Manager (AM) noticed a flame. The oil in the pan under the top of the stove caught on fire. The flame was getting bigger. The cook said, I know the flame is getting bigger, but I'll turn it off after I finish cooking. The AM noticed the flame was getting higherr. I went outside because of the smoke in the kitchen. The AM called the maintenance assistant (MA 1) first. MA 1 got the extinguisher and put the fire…
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 · E2023-08-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain comfortable temperature levels for three of three sampled residents (Resident1, Resident 2 and Resident 3.) The failure resulted in three Residents not being provided a comfortable environment that led to a feeling of frustration and discomfort. Findings: An abbreviated survey was conducted on July 27, 2023, at 12:50 PM to investigate a complaint related to physical environment. During a review of Resident 1 's clinical record, the face sheet indicated an admission date of June 8, 2023, with diagnoses which included schizoaffective disorder (mental illness that can affect your thoughts, mood, and behavior.) During an observation on July 27, 2023, at 1:15 PM, in the hallway on Unit 1, Resident 1 was perspiring. Resident 1 then stated, The last three days it's been hot. I'm sweating in here. During a review of Resident 2's clinical record, the face sheet indicated an admission date of September 7, 2022, 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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2026-02-20 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
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 measurement, the facility failed to ensure resident bedrooms provide a minimum of 80 square feet (the amount of space in the room) per resident in multiple resident rooms for 13 of 13 resident rooms reviewed (Rooms 30 through 42) located in Unit 2, affecting 29 of 29 residents residing in these rooms.This failure had the potential to limit residents' freedom of movement, increase the risk of accidents, interfere with safe mobility within the environment, and negatively impact on residents' health, safety, and quality of life.During an observation and measurement conducted on February 18, 2026, at 9:34 AM, in the presence of Maintenance Director (MDIR), resident rooms located in Unit 2 were measured using a tape measure to determine total livable floor space. Measurements were taken in inches and converted to square feet. The following measurements were obtained: room [ROOM NUMBER] (two Bed) measured 142 sq ft (71 sq feet per resident) room [ROOM NUMBER] (Two beds) measured…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-11-15 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
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 and interview, the facility failed to provide a minimum of 80 square feet (sq. ft.- unit of measurement) of livable space per resident for 13 rooms (Rooms 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, and 42). This failure had the potential to limit freedom of movement and affect the health and safety of 29 residents who reside in these rooms. Findings: During an observation and interview with the Facility Maintenance Director (FMD) on November 14, 2024, at 1:53 PM, 13 rooms were measured and found to be less than the required 80 sq. ft. per resident. The residents' rooms and their measurements of livable space were noted as follows: i. room [ROOM NUMBER] (two beds) measured 142 sq./ft. (71 sq. ft. per resident) ii. room [ROOM NUMBER] (two beds) measured 144 sq./ft. (72 sq. ft. per resident) iii. room [ROOM NUMBER] (four beds) measured 234 sq./ft. (58.5 sq. ft. per resident) iv room [ROOM NUMBER](three beds) Measured 178 sq./ft. (59.3 sq. ft. per resident) v. room [ROOM NUMBER] (two beds)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-11-03 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
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 and interview, the facility failed to provide a minimum of 80 square feet (sq. ft.- unit of measurement) of livable space per resident for 13 rooms (Rooms 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, and 42). This failure had the potential to limit freedom of movement and affect the health and safety of 29 residents who reside in these rooms. Findings: During an observation and interview, with the Maintenance Supervisor 1 (MS 1), on November 3,2023, at 9:00 AM, 13 rooms were measured and found to be less than the required 80 sq. ft. per resident. The resident's rooms and their measurements of livable space were noted as follows: i. room [ROOM NUMBER] (two beds) measured 141.6 sq./ft. (70.8 sq. ft. per resident) ii. room [ROOM NUMBER] (two beds) measured 144 sq./ft. (72 sq. ft. per resident) iii. room [ROOM NUMBER] (four beds) measured 234 sq./ft. (58.5 sq. ft. per resident) iv. room [ROOM NUMBER] (three beds) measured 178.43sq/ft (14.66x12.16sq/ft per patient) v. room [ROOM NUMBER] (two…
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in CA
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. 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 05A208. 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.