No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Golden Hill Post Acute

1201 34th St., San Diego, CA 92102 · For profit - Corporation · 99 certified beds · (619) 232-2946 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (619) 232-2946 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
995 Gateway Center Way · (619) 263-9729 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
610 Gateway Center Way · (619) 238-9501 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
815 33rd St
Park
Cedar Ridge Park, 1700 Pentuckett Ave · (619) 525-8222 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased1.0%10.2%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.6%4.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.9%0.8%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.2%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.9%7.3%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.4%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.7%1.6%3.3%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened0.0%9.8%16.1%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication9.6%13.7%18.9%better
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.2%4.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.3%10.2%21.2%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.0%12.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.2%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.4%23.0%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.4%11.2%12.0%typical

* 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.

11.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.59U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.28hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.59 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.2%CMS range 7.9–16.710.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified95.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.071.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.62
RN hours/ resident / day
1.21
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.41
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.24
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.49
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 99 beds and averages 89.6 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 4.24 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.41 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 3.52 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.54 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

14
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-28)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2021-10-21)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

35 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2026-04-02 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 new, effective fall preventative measures after each fall incident for two of five residents reviewed for falls (Residents 1 and 2). These failures resulted in Resident 1 falling 13 times, sustaining two broken bones in her face and a broken rib.Findings:1. A review of Resident 1's undated Face Sheet indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia (a loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities severe enough to interfere with daily life) and Parkinson's Disease (a movement disorder of the nervous system that worsens over time). A review of Resident 1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool) dated 7/23/25, indicated a score of 0, or severely impaired cognition. A review of Resident 1's Nurse Practitioner/Physician's Assistant (NP/PA) progress note, dated 7/25/25, indicated Resident 1 had, evidence of severe cognitive…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-22 · tag F0557 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident rights were treated with respect and dignity for one of two resident 's (Resident 1) when the facility staff searched Resident 1's personal belongings without her permission.As a result, Resident 1 was observed anxious and stated she felt disrespected. On 4/20/26 at 9:15 A.M., an onsite investigation was conducted to investigate a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) reporting Resident 1 was involved in a MVA when her SO was driving the vehicle on 3/28/26.A review of Resident 1's admission Record indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with aphasia (difficulty with speaking caused by brain damage) and right-sided weakness caused by a stroke.A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, a comprehensive assessment tool) dated 3/19/26, indicated the resident's BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) was 13 out of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact (no memory, focus, or judgment issues).On…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a care plan for one of three residents (Resident 1) to ensure the safety of Resident 1 was maintained while Out On Pass (OOP) due to a previous motor vehicle accident (MVA) which occurred while OOP. The lack of care plan development posed a potential risk for Resident 1 and the resident's significant other (SO) to have a repeat MVA situation to occur.On [DATE] at 9:15 A.M., an onsite investigation was conducted to investigate a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) reporting Resident 1 was involved in a MVA when her SO was driving the vehicle on [DATE].A review of Resident 1's admission Record indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with aphasia (difficulty with speaking caused by brain damage) and right-sided weakness caused by a stroke.A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS, a comprehensive assessment tool) dated [DATE], indicated the resident's BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) was 13…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care plans for fall prevention were revised and updated with specific resident-centered interventions for two of five residents reviewed for falls (Residents 1 and 2). This failure had the potential to result in additional falls, and an increased risk for injuriesFindings: 1. A review of Resident 1's undated Face Sheet indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia (a loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities severe enough to interfere with daily life) and Parkinson's Disease (a movement disorder of the nervous system that worsens over time). A review of Resident 1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool) dated 7/23/25, indicated a score of 0, or severely impaired cognition. A review of Resident 1's Nurse Practitioner/Physician's Assistant (NP/PA) progress note, dated 7/25/25, indicated Resident 1 had, evidence of severe cognitive…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were answered in a timely manner for three of three residents (Residents 2, 3 and 4) who filed complaints with the California Department of Public Health (CDPH, an agency responsible for regulatory compliance of healthcare facilities).This failure had the potential to negatively affect the overall health and mental wellbeing of the residents.Findings:Three consumer complaints were filed with CDPH regarding the facility's failure to answer call lights in a timely manner. An onsite investigation was conducted. An interview was conducted on 2/12/26 at 5:15 P.M. with Resident 2. Resident 2 stated she had been in two skilled nursing facilities over the last seven years, and she had never filed a complaint with CDPH prior to this incident. Resident 2 stated she often waited an hour or more for someone to respond to her call light. Per Resident 2, on 2/4/26 she waited 90 minutes for a medication. Resident 2 stated due to her…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to administer medications as ordered by the physician for one of three residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident 4) when:Resident 4 did not receive nine of the 14 medications within 24 hours of her admission; and,Resident 4 received a medication two times when it was scheduled five times over her admission to the facility. This failure had the potential to affect the health and well-being of Resident 4.Findings:Resident 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include diabetes (a long-lasting health condition that affects how the body turns food into energy), high blood pressure and heart failure, per the Face Sheet.A record review was conducted on 2/23/26.Resident 4's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment tool) score was 13, indicating intact cognition.According to the physician's orders, dated 11/5/26, Resident 4 had 14 scheduled medications to be administered at specific times of day.According 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-28 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmacy services in accordance with accepted standards of practice when:1. A medication was not in stock for one of five sampled residents (Resident 5) when it was due. This failure had the potential for Resident 5 not to benefit from the full therapeutic effect of her medication. 2. Random controlled medication (medications with a high abuse potential) use audit for four out of eight sampled residents (Residents 6, 9, 37, 73) did not reconcile. The residents' medications were signed out of the controlled drug record (CDR, count sheet), but not documented on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) to indicate they were administered to the residents. This failure resulted in inaccurate accountability and had the potential for abuse and diversion (unlawful distribution or use) of controlled medications. 3. Controlled medications for pain were not administered as ordered for two of five sampled residents (Residents 72 and 73).…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure dignity and respect was provided for one of three sampled residents (73) during lunchtime, when a staff was standing over, while assisting and feeding the resident. This failure had the potential to affect the resident's self-esteem and resident's safety.Findings: Resident 73 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included paraplegia (loss of movement and/or sensation, to some degree, of the legs), and blindness per the facility's admission Record. On 8/25/25 at 12:27 P.M., a lunch observation was conducted in Resident 73's room. Resident 73 was in bed with the lunch tray at the bedside table. A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1 was assisting and feeding Resident 73 while standing. There was a folded metal chair by the wall. CNA 1 was noted not to be in level with Resident 73. On 8/25/25 at 12:33 P.M., an interview was conducted with CNA 1. CNA 1 stated Resident 73 was confused and blind. CNA 1 stated…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    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 baseline care plan (detailed plan with information about a patient's treatment, goal, and interventions) within 48 hours for three of 16 residents reviewed for baseline care plan related to:1. Resident 10's urinary catheter use.2. Resident 72's pain management.3. Resident 81's oxygen use. This deficient practice placed newly admitted residents with urinary catheters at risk for developing an infection, residents with pain to have unmanaged pain and residents with oxygen to be at risk for low or high oxygen level. Cross Reference to F 697 and F 695.Findings: 1.Resident 10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], per the facility's admission Record. On 8/25/25, a review of Resident 10's history and physical (H&P) was conducted. Resident 10's H&P dated 7/5/25, indicated Resident 10 was alert and oriented. On 8/25/25, a review of Resident 10's minimum data set (MDS – a federally mandated resident assessment tool) dated 7/24/25,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive resident-centered care plans were revised and implemented for two of 16 sampled residents (Resident 20 and 40) when: 1. Resident 20 had an altercation with his roommate and the care plan was not revised.2. Resident 40's activities care plan was not implemented. These failures had the potential to affect resident's care needs. Cross Reference F 679.Findings: 1. Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], per the facility's admission Record. On 8/27/25, a review of Resident 20's clinical record was conducted. Resident 20's progress notes dated 8/21/25 indicated Resident 20 had physical contact with his roommate. The care plan noted in Resident 20's clinical record related to resident's physical contact with his roommate was not revised. On 8/27/25 at 8:40 A.M., an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2. CNA 2 stated Resident 20 was alert and oriented. CNA 2 stated the report 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide medication therapy in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of five sampled residents (Resident 58) when Licensed Nurse (LN) 11 did not flush (push water through) Resident 58's gastrostomy tube (G-tube, a device used to administer food and medications to individuals with difficulty swallowing) before and in between medication administration.This failure had the potential for Resident 58 not to get the full therapeutic benefit of her medications or to experience complications from her medications clogging in her G-tube.A review of Resident 58's clinical records indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included, encounter for attention to gastrostomy.During the medication administration observation on 8/25/25 at 8:45 a.m., LN 11 was observed preparing and administering a total of 10 medications for Resident 58. LN 11 stated Resident 58 received two medications through her G-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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 24 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide routine nail care to one of three residents (Resident 48), reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL, activities related to personal care) for dependent residents. As a result, Resident 48 was at risk for skin injury and infection.Findings: 1.Resident 48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included stroke, per the facility's admission Record. Resident 48's history and physical (H&P), dated 7/17/25, indicated Resident 48 had altered mental status. On 8/25/25, a review of Resident 48's minimum data set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) dated 7/22/25, indicated Resident 48's brief interview for mental status (BIMS, ability to recall) score was 12/15, which meant Resident 48's cognition was moderately impaired. The MDS also indicated Resident 48's functional abilities indicated he had upper extremity impairment and that he required assistance from the staff on his activities of daily…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide individualized therapeutic and/or social activities according to their plan of care for one of one reviewed resident (Resident 40) that promotes their highest physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. This deficient practice placed Resident 40 at risk for decreased emotional well-being, social isolation, and reduced quality of life due to the lack of meaningful engagement. Cross Reference F 656.Findings: Resident 40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included hemiplegia (total paralysis of the arm, leg, and trunk on the same side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness or the inability to move on one side of the body, making it hard to perform everyday activities like transferring), per the facility's admission Record. On 8/25/25, a review of Resident 40's history and physical (H&P), dated 7/4/25, indicated Resident 40 had the capacity to make decisions. On 8/25/25, a review of Resident 40's minimum…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 a tube feeding formula was labeled for one of one resident (58) reviewed for Parenteral Nutrition. This failure had the potential to affect Resident 58's health conditions and decline.Findings: A review of Resident 58's admission Record indicated that Resident 58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm (cancerous tumors) of the tongue. Resident 58's history and physical (H&P), dated 7/17/25, indicated Resident 58 was alert and oriented to person, place and time. On 8/25/25, a review of Resident 58's minimum data set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) dated 7/21/25, indicated Resident 58's brief interview for mental status (BIMS, ability to recall) score was 8/15, which meant Resident 58's cognition was moderately impaired. The MDS also indicated Resident 58's nutritional status indicated she was on feeding tube (a tube inserted through the stomach) upon admission. On…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0694 — isolated
    Provide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide care and treatment consistently for a Midline catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted into a vein in the upper arm) for one of one resident (Resident 23) reviewed for Intravenous therapy. This failure had the potential to cause infection and affect Resident 23's health. Findings:Per the facility's admission Record , Resident 23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic kidney disease. (kidneys can no longer fully clean toxins from the blood) . On 8/25/25 at 9:17 A.M., a joint observation and interview with Resident 23 was conducted. Resident 23 had a midline catheter on her right arm with an unclear dated transparent dressing. Resident 23 stated she stated the midline catheter has not been flushed for a few days and that no one has changed the dressing since it was last done. Resident 23 stated she had been asking the licensed nurses if she still needed the midline catheter since Resident 23 knew…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review , the facility failed to ensure an oxygen tubing was dated on 2 out of 2 residents (Resident 81,Resident 25) reviewed for Oxygen needs.This failure had the potential to affect Resident 81's and Resident 25's respiratory health.Findings:1) Per the facility's undated admission Record ,Resident 81 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Acute Respiratory failure with Hypoxia (absence of enough oxygen) . On 8/25/25 at 10:15 A.M., an observation during the initial tour was conducted. Resident 81 had the oxygen nasal cannula (NC-a two-pronged plastic tubing used to deliver oxygen through the nose) regulated at 3 liters per minute via oxygen concentrator. Resident 81's oxygen tubing was not dated. On 8/25/25 at 10:20 A.M., an interview with Resident 81 was conducted. Resident 81 stated she used the oxygen almost twenty-four hours due to Resident 81 could not breathe without the oxygen. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess and manage pain for one of two residents investigated for pain management (Resident 72). As a result, the deficient practice had the potential for unmanaged pain. Cross Reference F 655.Findings: Resident 72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included pressure ulcer of right buttock (localized, pressure-related damage to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence), per the facility 's admission Record. Resident 72's H&P, dated 6/26/25, indicated Resident 72 had the capacity to make decisions. On 8/25/25, a review of Resident 72's minimum data set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) dated 7/2/25, indicated Resident 72's brief interview for mental status (BIMS, ability to recall) score was 15/15, which meant Resident 72's cognition was intact. On 8/25/25 at 10:04 A.M., an observation and an interview of Resident 72 was conducted in her room. Resident 72 sat up in 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure 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 one out of five residents (Resident 72) was free from unnecessary medications when blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) hold parameters were not followed with the administration of medications.This failure had the potential for Resident 72 to experience low BP and low HR.A review of Resident 72's clinical record indicated she had an active order for atenolol 50 milligram (mg, unit of measure) tablet, give one and half tablet by mouth two times a day (at 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.) for hypertension (HTN, high blood pressure). Hold if HR less than 60, originally dated 6/28/25. Resident 72 received doses, as documented on her July 2025 and August 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR), despite a HR less than 60 on the following dates:7/6/25 HR 53 the 9 a.m. dose was administered7/13/25 HR 57 the 9 a.m. dose was administered7/18/25 HR 57 the 9 a.m. dose was administered8/2/25 HR 57 the 5 p.m. dose was administered8/12/25 HR 55 the 5 p.m. dose was administered8/13/25 HR 56 the 5 p.m. dose was administeredA 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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 had a medication error rate of 10% when three medication errors occurred out of 30 opportunities during the medication administration observation for two out of five residents (Residents 5 and 58). This failure resulted in Residents 5 and 58 not receiving medications as ordered and had the potential for both residents not to get the full therapeutic benefit of their medications. This failure also had the potential for Resident 58 to experience complications from her medications clogging in her gastrostomy tube (G-tube, a device used to administer food and medications to individuals with difficulty swallowing). 1. During the medication administration observation on 8/25/25 at 8:45 a.m., Licensed Nurse (LN) 11 was observed preparing and administering a total of 10 medications for Resident 58. LN 11 stated Resident 58 received two medications through her G-tube and the rest were administered by mouth. LN 11 prepared the following two medications 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary measures were met in the kitchen during dietary operations according to standards of practice when food items were free from contaminants. This finding had the potential to expose the facility's residents to unsafe and unsanitary food practices that could lead to widespread foodborne illnesses.Findings: On 8/25/25 at 8:08 A.M., an observation of the produce walk-in refrigerator and an interview was conducted with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM). There were two packs of strawberries with white porous materials and a jar of Caesar salad dressings with sticky material around the edges of the jar. On 8/25/25 at 9:01 A.M., an interview was conducted with the CDM with the presence of the Registered Dietitian (RD). The CDM stated the strawberries will be discarded. The CDM stated the staff will not serve strawberries. The CDM stated the dietary staff should have rotated the produce. The CDM asked a dietary aide to clean the edges of the jar of the Caesar salad dressing. The CDM stated,…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-10-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare and distribute food in a sanitary manner when: 1. Foods were not labeled and dated in the walk-in cooler, 2. A juice dispenser was not sanitized, 3. A damaged spatula was used during food preparation, 4. Racks with compromised surfaces were used for holding sanitized dishes, and, 5. Coffee mugs and bowls appeared to have a white residue on the inside surface. These failures may result in risk for foodborne illness, as well as bacterial, chemical and foreign object contamination to the residents. Findings: 1. On 10/18/21 at 7:53 A.M., a kitchen tour was conducted with the Dietary Services Supervisor (DSS). The walk-in cooler contained the following items with no label or date identified: One package of 12 flour tortillas, expiration date 9/20/21 peanut butter and jelly sandwich five portions fruit in bowls five portions thickened juice three fortified shakes one dinner plate, with entree and starch On 10/18/21 at 8:10 A.M., an interview was conducted with the DSS. The DSS stated all foods should…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-10-21 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Physicians Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST, a form which outlines a person's choices for end of life care, or Advanced Directive) form was accurate and matched the facility's code status (the level of medical interventions a person wishes to have if their heart or breathing stops), for one of one residents (27) reviewed for Advance Directives. This failure had the potential for Resident 27 to receive the incorrect care in the event of an emergency. Findings: Resident 27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis to include chronic respiratory failure (a long-term condition where lungs do not work well), per the facility's admission Record. On 10/18/21 at 4:11 P.M., an observation and interview was conducted with Resident 27. Resident 27 was in bed, with markers and a white board (a board used for communicating through writing) at his bedside. When asked questions, Resident 27 was able to nod yes or no in response.…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-10-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a care plan was developed related to catheter (tubing connected to the bladder) care for two of five residents (76, 12) reviewed for catheter care, and, 2. Ensure a care plan for fall precautions was implemented for one of three residents (49) reviewed for falls. As a result, the residents (76, 12) were at risk of developing urinary infections, and Resident 49 was at risk for injury from falls. Findings: 1a. Resident 76 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included obstructive and reflux uropathy (urine backs up to the kidneys), per the facility's admission Record. An observations of Resident 76 was conducted: On 10/18/21 at 10:54 A.M. Resident 76 was lying in bed with a catheter attached to a covered urine bag at the side of the bed. On 10/20/21 at 3:47 P.M. Resident 76 was sitting in a wheelchair in the activity room. His catheter appeared to contain bloody urine output. An interview was conducted 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-10-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to consistently provide hygiene for three of five residents (29, 76, and 12) reviewed for catheter (tube inserted into the bladder) care. This failure had the potential to increase the risk of infection for residents. Findings: 1. Resident 29 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (lack of bladder control), per the facility's admission Record. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS, assessment tool), dated 10/5/21, Resident 29 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS, an assessment of the resident's ability to remember and reason) score of 14 (13-15 meant cognitively intact) which indicated, the resident was cognitively intact. On 10/20/21 at 3:59 P.M., an observation and interview with Resident 29 was conducted. Resident 29 was sitting in bed, with a catheter attached to the bed. Resident 29 stated the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2 assigned to her did a poor job…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-10-21 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure 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 ensure a recipe was followed for a pureed food. This failure had the potential to affect the nutritional value of the food prepared, and further compromise the health of residents receiving the pureed food. Findings: On 10/20/21 at 10:45 A.M., a concurrent interview and observation of Dietary Aide (DA) 11 was conducted in the kitchen. DA 11 prepared pureed chicken to serve at the next meal. DA 11 pulled the recipe for pureed meat from a binder and began preparing four portions of the recipe. DA 11 added a liquid to the pureed meat, and stated it was chicken broth. DA 11 stated the broth was added to make the pureed meat smoother and less thick. A record review was conducted. The recipe, dated 4/2017, titled Recipe: Pureed Meats, indicated to add, .warm fluid such as gravy, or low sodium broth .Directions: .3. Gradually add warm liquid (low sodium broth or gravy) . On 10/20/21 at 11 A.M., a concurrent interview and observation was conducted with the Dietary Services Supervisor (DSS). The DSS pulled 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-10-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide nursing interventions to monitor one of 20 (30) sampled residents. This failure had the potential to place Resident 30 at risk for dehydration. Findings: Resident 30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and gastrostomy (creation of an artificial external opening into the stomach for nutritional support) per the facility's admission Record. On 10/10/19, a review of Resident 30's MDS (health status screening and assessment tool) Section C, dated 9/6/19, indicated Resident 30's BIMS Summary Score (test for cognitive function) was 3 out of 15 (severe cognitive impairment). On 10/7/19 at 8:10 A.M., an observation of Resident 30 was conducted. Resident 30 was lying in bed. Resident 30's lips were dry and cracked, with peeling skin. Resident 30's lips stuck together when he was speaking. On 10/8/19 at 1:11 P.M., an observation and interview with Resident 30 was conducted.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 ensure a care plan was revised/updated to reflect the current status of two of 20 residents (70, 7) reviewed for care plans when: 1. Resident 70's care plan was not updated to reflect his current wound dressing change procedure which resulted in miscommunication amongst care givers and delay in treatment and, 2. Resident 7's care plan was not revised to reflect discharge plans or goals which had the potential to result in a delayed discharge. Findings: 1. Resident 70 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included paraplegia (the loss of the ability to move and feel anything in the legs and lower body), pressure ulcers (injuries to skin and underlying tissue resulting from prolonged pressure on the skin) of sacral region stage 4 (the pressure injury is very deep, reaching into muscle and bone and causing extensive damage), pressure ulcer of right hip stage 2 ( the skin breaks open, wears away, or forms an ulcer, which is usually…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0660 — isolated
    Plan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document discharge planning for one of two residents reviewed for discharge (7). This failure had the potential for Resident 7 to not receive the appropriate discharge plan. Findings: Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included traumatic brain injury (brain dysfunction caused by an outside force) per the facility's admission Record. On 10/10/19, a record review of Resident 7's MDS (health status screening and assessment tool) Section C, dated 7/17/19, indicated Resident 7's BIMS Summary Score (test for cognitive function) was 10 out of 15 (moderate cognitive impairment). On 10/7/19 at 9 A.M., an interview with Resident 7 was conducted. Resident 7 stated he would like to go home, and had not spoken with social services regarding this issue. Resident 7 stated he wanted to be closer to home and his family. Resident 7 proceeded to ask a staff member to speak to social services. On 10/8/19 at 9:57 A.M., an interview 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
    Ensure 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide out of bed assistance for one of three residents reviewed for ADLs (30). This failure had the potential to result in Resident 30 to experience a further decline in ADLs. Findings: Resident 30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include traumatic subdural hemorrhage (a condition due to bleeding under the membrane covering the brain), need for assistance with personal care, and muscle weakness, per the facility's admission Record. On 10/10/19, a review of Resident 30's MDS (health status screening and assessment tool) Section C, dated 9/6/19, indicated Resident 30's BIMS Summary Score (test for cognitive function) was 3 out of 15 (severe cognitive impairment). On 10/7/19 at 8:10 A.M., an observation and interview was conducted in Resident 30's room. Resident 30 was lying in bed staring at the ceiling. Resident 30 stated he would like to get out of bed and walk. Resident 30 further stated staff does not get him…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two of 20 residents (30, 66) reviewed for quality of care when: 1a. A physician's order was not followed for Resident 30's enteral feeds (also known as tube feeding, a device used to provide nutrition to those who are unable to swallow safely), 1b. An order was not obtained for Resident 30 before a dressing change and, 2. A physician's order was not followed for Resident 66 who required assistance with meals. These failures had the potential to result in Resident 66 and Resident 30's physical needs not being met. Findings: 1a. Resident 30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and gastrostomy (creation of an artificial external opening into the stomach for nutritional support) per the facility's admission Record. On 10/10/19, a record review of Resident 30's MDS (health status screening 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that range of motion treatments provided by Restorative Nursing Assistants (RNA) was provided for two of four residents (55,16) reviewed for contractures (hardening of muscle and tissues leading to rigidity of joints). This failure had the potential for residents to experience further decrease in range of motion. Findings: 1. Resident 55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included contracture, unspecified joint, and contracture of muscle, multiple sites, per the facility's admission Record. An observation of Resident 55 was made on 10/7/19 at 2:46 P.M., Resident 55 was reclining in bed; his left leg was contracted at the knee. An observation of Resident 55 was made on 10/9/19 at 8:30 A.M., Resident 55 was reclining in bed; his left leg was contracted at the knee. A review of Resident 55's medical record on 10/9/19 at 8:58 A.M., indicated no orders, care plans, or other documentation for RNA. A concurrent…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-10-10 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure effective pain management for one of one residents reviewed for pain (70). This failure had the potential for Resident 70 to have unrelieved pain. Findings: Resident 70 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included paraplegia (the loss of the ability to move and feel anything in the legs and lower body), pressure ulcer (injuries to skin and underlying tissue resulting from prolonged pressure on the skin) of sacral region stage 4 (the pressure injury is very deep, reaching into muscle and bone and causing extensive damage), pressure ulcer of right hip stage 2 ( the skin breaks open, wears away, or forms an ulcer, which is usually tender and painful), pressure ulcer of left heel, un-stage able (a bedsore whose severity cannot be determined with a visual exam) and pressure ulcer of other site, unspecified state per Resident's admission Record. On 10/7/19 at 4:20 P.M., An interview was conducted with Resident 70. Resident 70…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0800 — isolated
    Provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary 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 appropriate food portions were served to residents. This failure had the potential for residents to not have their nutritional and special dietary needs met. Findings: An observation of the kitchen during tray line was conducted on 10/8/19 at 12 P.M. The facility's menu indicated meat sauce and pasta with Scandinavian mixed vegetables were the lunch items for that day. [NAME] 1 used the same ladle (1/2 cup=regular portions) for all portion sizes of the meat sauce. Per the daily diet spread sheet a small portion was 1/4 cup and a large portion was 3/4 cup. The residents' meal ticket indicated the portion size to be served. [NAME] 1 used the regular size ladle and would shake off some meat sauce for a small portion and add some additional meat sauce for the large portions. [NAME] 1 stated: I estimate. In addition, [NAME] 1 would use tongs to pick up the pasta, and shake some off for a small portion and add some extra for a large portion. No measuring device was used for the pasta. [NAME] 1 stated, I…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have complete accurate medical records for two of 20 residents reviewed for documentation (22, 77) when: 1. Documentation was not completed regarding a lab result for Resident 22. 2. Documentation for a vaccine was not completed for Resident 77. These failures had the potential to result in Resident 22 and Resident 77 to not receive the appropriate treatment or care. 1. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] per the facility's admission Record. Findings: On 10/10/19 a review of Resident 22's medical record was conducted: According to Resident 22's progress notes, dated 9/17/19, a urine specimen was collected for a urinalysis (analysis that examines the urine contents for abnormalities that indicate a disease condition or infection). According to Resident 22's Laboratory Report, dated 9/18/19, Resident 22's urinalysis had abnormal results and was sent to MD on 9/19/19. On 10/8/19 at 3:49 P.M., an interview and record review with LN 22 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide 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 ensure infection prevention practices were followed for three of 22 residents (40, 70, CR 1) when: 1a. The DSD failed to wash hands before performing wound care for one resident (40), in between glove changes while performing wound care for two residents (40, 70) and after performing wound care for one resident (70) and, 1b. One staff member did not wash his hands after providing peri-care (cleaning of private areas) to CR 1. 2. In addition, two staff members did not follow the facility's dress code/infection control regarding fingernails. These failures had the potential to cause the spread of infection to residents, staff and visitors. Findings: 1a. Resident 70 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, chronic respiratory failure (narrowing of the airways in the lungs), anoxic brain damage (occurs when the brain is deprived of oxygen) per the Resident admission Record. Per the facility physician order, dated 10/1/19, cleanse…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2026-05-01 for 5 days

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.2-0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aspen Health And WellnessOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Bennett Hills Rehabilitation and Care CenterGooding, ID 1 of 5Broadway By The SeaLong Beach, CA 1 of 5Chatsworth Park Health Care CenterChatsworth, CA 1 of 5Clarion Wellness and Rehabilitation CenterClarion, IA 1 of 5Colonial Manor of RandolphRandolph, NE 1 of 5Durango Health And RehabilitationDurango, CO 1 of 5Fort Dodge Health and RehabilitationFort Dodge, IA 1 of 5Greater Southside Health and RehabilitationDes Moines, IA 1 of 5Hearthstone Health And RehabilitationSparks, NV 1 of 5Heritage Gardens Rehabilitation and HealthcareCarrollton, TX 1 of 5Hillcrest Health Care CenterHawarden, IA 1 of 5Lake Village Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterLewisville, TX 1 of 5Lakeside Rehabilitation and Care CenterCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - NorthAustin, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - WaxahaWaxahachie, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation - Fort WKeller, TX 1 of 5Madera Post Acute CenterEl Monte, CA 1 of 5Medallion Post Acute RehabilitationColorado Springs, CO 1 of 5Mesquite Post Acute CareLubbock, TX 1 of 5Millbrook Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterLancaster, TX 1 of 5Misty Willow Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterHouston, TX 1 of 5New Orange HillsOrange, CA 1 of 5Northeast Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Northgate PlazaIrving, TX 1 of 5Oak View Health And RehabilitationConway, SC 1 of 5Oakwood Care And RehabilitationLakewood, CO 1 of 5Omaha Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterOmaha, NE 1 of 5Onion Creek Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterAustin, TX 1 of 5Park Manor Bee CaveBee Cave, TX 1 of 5Pelican Pointe Health And Rehabilitation CenterWindsor, CO 1 of 5Premier Care Center For Palm SpringsPalm Springs, CA 1 of 5Provo Rehabilitation and NursingProvo, UT 1 of 5Rock Canyon Respiratory And Rehabilitation CenterPueblo, CO 1 of 5Rosewood Rehabilitation CenterReno, NV 1 of 5San Marcos Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Marcos, TX 1 of 5Sonterra Health CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5SouthlandNorwalk, CA 1 of 5Southland Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterLufkin, TX 1 of 5Spencer Post Acute Rehabilitation CenterSpencer, IA

Showing 40 of 341; 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
AFSHAR, POUYAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/21/2025
ALKEMA, SHAUNIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2021
WILLITS, ADAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/24/2019
BURNAM, SOONIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/24/2019
KEETCH, CHADIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2011
PORT, BARRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/09/2024
SATO, AMIIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/20/2024
ENSIGN SERVICES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/24/2019
GOLDEN HILL REAL ESTATE COMPANY, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$16.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-0.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.9M
Related-party expense11% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 81%Medicare 5%Other / private 14%

About 81% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$504per resident / day
operating cost
$15,322per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$501per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in California
$12,167/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$15,178/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,000/mo
Assisted living

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 056182. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, 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.

What to do next