Canyon Springs Post-Acute
180 North Jackson Avenue, San Jose, CA 95116 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 199 certified beds · (408) 259-8700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (32% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (53) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 1.6% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.1% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.1% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 6.1% | 7.3% | 6.5% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.2% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 3.7% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 5.6% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.5% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 8.3% | 10.2% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.7% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.8% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.6% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.64 | 2.25 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.60 | 1.57 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
47.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 233 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 68.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 97 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.51 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 47.6%CMS range 41.1–55.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.7%CMS range 7.0–13.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 68.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 60.8% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 49.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 68.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 12.1%CMS range 7.6–16.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.56 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 199 beds and averages 189.1 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.69 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.34 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 3.75 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
53 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 42 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2021-06-14 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 a safe discharge for one of three randomly selected discharged sample residents (Resident 14) when: 1. The facility did not initiate a discharge care plan for Resident 14; 2. The interdisciplinary team (IDT, leaders from different departments discuss the resident's care) did not assess the safety of Resident 14's discharge; Facility discharged Resident 14 to the street and left the resident alone in the street; alone; Facility did not know the Resident 14's whereabouts after the discharge; 3. IDT team members were not involved in the resident's discharge; 4. The facility did not provide Resident 14 the instruction and education for the after discharge care; 5. The facility did not involve the responsible party (RP, a person who is designated to make the care decisions for the resident) regarding the discharge; facility did not inform RP that Resident 14 was discharged to the street; 6. The facility did not follow the doctor orders regarding…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure care and treatment was provided in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of three residents (Resident 1), when a medication was ordered with no indication for use identified. This failure had the potential to compromise Resident 1's health and well-being.Findings:Review of Resident 1's physician order dated 6/24/25 indicated Ivermectin (medication that treats infections caused by roundworms, threadworms, and other parasites [an organism that lives on or in a host organism]) 3 milligrams (mg, a unit of measure) 4 tablets daily for 3 days. The physician order did not identify the indication for the use of the Ivermectin.Review of Resident 1's medication administration record (MAR) indicated Ivermectin Oral Tablet 3 mg. Directions indicated to give 4 tablets by mouth in the evening for parasite infection for 3 days.During an interview and concurrent record review with Licensed Vocational Nurse A on 7/18/25 at 3:15 p.m., she stated she received Resident 1's medication order for Ivermectin from the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for one of four residents (Resident 1) on oxygen therapy when Resident 1's BiPAP (a breathing support method that delivers positive pressure to the lungs through a mask) application was not documented by licensed nurses. This failure had the potential to result in inadequate monitoring of the resident's condition, and the potential to negatively affect the residents' health, safety and well-being. Findings: Review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (inability to keep oxygen and carbon dioxide at normal levels), congestive heart failure (heart works less efficiently and can lead to buildup of fluid in the lungs and shortness of breath), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a lung disease that makes it difficult to breathe), obstructive sleep apnea (a sleep related breathing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-05-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented proper infection control practices when: 1. Staff did not use proper gloving technique during a wound dressing change when hand hygiene was not properly performed for Resident 13; 2. Resident 54's urine drainage bag was not covered with a protective bag and was not kept off the floor; 3. Residents' used basins, bed pans and a urinal were unlabeled and stored on top of residents' bathroom toilet tank and under the bathroom sink beside a garbage container; 4. Registered nurse Z (RN Z) used contaminated (something has become impure or unsuitable due to contact with something unclean, harmful, or undesirable) gloves to administer Resident 151's eye drops to both eyes; 5. Registered nurse J (RN J) placed Resident 192's antibiotic (a medication used to treat bacterial infections) bag, intravenous tubing (IV, a soft, flexible tube used to administer medication or fluids through the vein), alcohol swabs, and normal saline…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-05-09 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — patternPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 three out of 35 sampled residents (Residents 77, 175, and 57) were free from chemical restraints (the use of medications such as psychotropic medications [drugs that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behaviors, example is antipsychotics, antidepressants, anti-anxiety, hypnotics] not for therapeutic reasons, but to restrict a person's freedom of movement or control their behavior) when: 1. Resident 77 continued to receive lorazepam (brand name: Ativan; anti-anxiety - medication to treat agitation and anxiety) and trazodone (antidepressant - a medication used to manage and treat depression [low mood or loss of pleasure or interest in activities for long periods of time]) without clinical documentation of non-pharmacological interventions (treatments or strategies that aim to improve health or manage conditions without using medications, focusing instead on physical, psychological, or behavioral approaches) were attempted or provided for Resident 77's use of anti-anxiety and antidepressant…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-09 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) assessments for one of 35 sampled residents (Resident 158) when Resident 158's five MDS assessments did not reflect Resident 158's feeding tube (a medical device, a thin and flexible tube, used to deliver nutrition and fluids directly into the digestive system when a person cannot eat or drink safely by mouth) and the percentage of intakes by artificial route. These failures resulted in inaccurate MDS assessments and had the potential to affect the residents' care. Findings: Review of Resident 158's clinical record titled, admission Record, dated 5/9/5025, indicated Resident 158 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including aphasia (a disorder that makes it difficult to speak) following cerebral infarction (also known as an ischemic stroke, is a condition where blood flow to the brain is interrupted, causing brain tissue to die), dysphagia…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide services according to professional standards for two 11 sampled residents for medication administration (Residents 88 and 192) when: 1. Licensed vocational nurse I (LVN I) provided the wrong nutritional supplement (Boost Plus - brand name of the nutritional supplement) to Resident 88; 2. Registered nurse J (RN J) did not perform a push-pause method (or pulsatile flushing technique is a method to flush IV [intravenous] and catheters, which involves rapidly injecting fluid into the line, pausing briefly, then repeating the process) when flushing Resident 192's peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC, long slender, flexible tube inserted into a peripheral vein, typically in the upper arm, and advanced until the catheter tip terminates in the chest near the heart to obtain venous access) line with normal saline (NS). These failures had the potential to affect residents' care, health, and well-being. Findings: 1. During medication administration observation on 5/7/2025 at 8:50 a.m., LVN I prepared all…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an account of all controlled drugs (medications with high potential for abuse and addiction) was maintained and reconciled for four of six randomly selected residents (Residents 137, 3, 135, and 16) when: 1. Nursing staff signed out the controlled drugs from the Controlled Substance Accountability Sheet (CSAS - an inventory sheet that keeps record of the usage of controlled medications) but did not document on the Medication Administration Record (MAR - a daily documentation record used by a licensed nurse to document medications and treatments given to a resident) to indicate the controlled medications were given to the resident (Residents 16). 2. Nursing staff documented in resident's MAR that indicated the controlled medications were given but did not document or sign out in resident's CSAS to indicate the controlled medications were taken out of the narcotic box (Residents 3, 135, and 137). These failures had the potential for misuse or diversion of controlled medications. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 16's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-05-09 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility had a medication error rate of 9.68% when three medication errors were observed out of 31 opportunities during medication administration for three of 11 residents (Residents 9, 193, and 79) when: 1. Resident 9 received the second dose of albuterol sulfate (an inhaler used to treat or prevent bronchospasm, or narrowing of the airways in the lungs) inhalation (or puff, the act of taking a substance into the body by breathing) without having to wait for one minute for first inhalation to be fully absorbed by the lungs; 2. Resident 193 received three puffs of budesonide -formoterol fumarate dihydrate (it is a combination of medications used to treat asthma [inflammatory disease of the airway that often causes wheezing, coughing, and shortness of breath] and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD, a long-lasting lung disease]) inhalation instead of two puffs as ordered by the physician; and 3. Resident 79 received five different medications through his gastrostomy tube (or G-tube, a tube inserted through the abdomen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly stored and labeled in two of four medication rooms and in four of seven medication carts when: Multiple opened inhalers, medications, and nasal sprays did not have an appropriate label of resident's named in the bottle or inhaler; [NAME]-dose vials were not labeled with open dates, or with an accurate expiration date, or being used past their discard dates; Opened or used eyedrops did not have a readable resident's name or had an unreadable open and expiration date; Multiple expired home medications were still stored in residents' overflow bin together with other medications that were still within the used by date; An expired over the counter (OTC) medication was still stored with other new OTC medications; and discontinued controlled medications (medications that the use and possession of are controlled by the federal government) and antibiotics (medications that fight bacterial infections) were still…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-05-09 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure clinical records were accurately and timely documented for two sampled residents (Resident 86 and Resident 595) when: 1. Resident 86's Discharge Order and Progress Notes were documented late. 2. Resident 595's Interdisciplinary Team Meeting (IDT, involves various healthcare professionals collaborating to plan and coordinate a resident's care) notes were documented late. These failures resulted in an inaccurate presentation of information. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 86's medical record indicated a discharge date of 4/28/25. A review of Resident 86's progress notes indicated, Physician Notification of Discharge, Ombudsman Notification of Discharge and IDT Meeting notes were documented on 5/5/25. A review of Resident 86's Physician Orders indicated, order for discharge was created on 5/5/25. During a concurrent interview and record review on 5/6/25 at 3:50 p.m. with Case Manager (CM) O, CM O verified Resident 86 was discharged on 4/28/25. CM O also verified the Notice of Proposed Discharge form 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.
Show the remaining 42 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. A review of Resident 591's medical record indicated an admission Date of 4/17/25. Resident 591's diagnoses included cognitive communication deficit (trouble communicating because of problems with their thinking and processing abilities, not just their language skills), and dysphagia, oral phase (difficulty with the first stage of swallowing, which happens in the mouth). A review of Resident 591's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident 591's brief interview for mental status (BIMS, a tool used to assess cognition [knowing, learning, and understanding things]) score was 13 (a score of 0 to 7 indicates severe cognitive impairment, 8-12 moderate impairment, 13-15 patient is cognitively intact). During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/5/25 at 8:56 a.m. inside Resident 591's room, Restorative Nurse Assistant (RNA) K was standing at bedside while feeding Resident 591. Resident 591 was sitting on the bed. RNA K stated it was okay…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans that included target symptoms, measurable objectives, and interventions for one of 35 sampled residents (Resident 16) when there were no care plan developed for schizophrenia (chronic brain disorder that affects how a person thinks, feels, and behaves). The failure had the potential for the residents not attaining their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Finding: During a review of Resident 16's clinical record indicated Resident 16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including schizophrenia. During a review of Resident 16's physician's order indicated an order dated 4/24/25 Aripiprazole (Antipsychotic It can treat schizophrenia) 15 mg (milligram, unit of measure) give one tablet by mouth in the morning for schizophrenia . During a review of Resident 16's clinical record indicated there was no comprehensive care plan developed for the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-09 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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 administration of enteral feeding (the delivery of nutrients through a feeding tube directly into the stomach) was consistent with and followed Physician's Order for one (Resident 51) out of three sampled residents when insufficient amount was administered, and oral care was not done. These failures had the potential to put Resident 51 at risk for dehydration, weight loss and infection. Findings: A review of Resident 51's clinical record indicated diagnoses of dysphagia following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (difficulty of swallowing after a stroke), hemiplegia and hemiparesis following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage affecting right dominant side (complete paralysis and weakness on right side of the body after a stroke), aphasia following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (difficulty to speak, understand and write language after a stroke), and type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (high levels of blood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a proper treatment services for oxygen (O2, a colorless, odorless gas) therapy was provided for one of four sampled residents (residents on oxygen therapy) when Resident 139 did not receive the correct flow of oxygen administration. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 139 to have complication related to improper treatment while receiving O2 therapy. Findings: During an observation on 5/5/2025 at 8:24 a.m., inside Resident 139's room, Resident 139 was observed having breakfast in bed and with O2 therapy at 1.5 liters per minute (lpm) thru (via) a nasal cannula (NC - a small plastic tube, which fits into the person's nostrils for providing supplemental oxygen). During a concurrent observation and interview with licensed vocational nurse B (LVN B) on 5/6/2025 at 3:57 p.m., inside Resident 139's room, Resident 139 was observed in bed with O2 therapy at 1.5 lpm via NC. LVN B confirmed the oxygen flow was at 1.5 lpm. During a concurrent interview with LVN B and record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the proper use of side or bed rails (adjustable rigid bars attached to the side of a bed) for one of 35 sampled residents (Resident 57) resident who used side or bed rails when there was no physician's order for bilateral (both) quarter upper bed rails prior to installing the bed rails, the care plan for bilateral quarter upper bed rails was not developed in a timely manner, and the informed consent for bilateral quarter upper bed rails was not obtained prior to installing the bed rails. These failures had the potential risk for injuries to the Resident 57. During an observation in Resident 57's room on 5/5/25 at 9:44 a.m., Resident 57's bed observed with bilateral quarter upper bed rails were up. During a review of Resident 57's clinical record indicated Resident 57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including Alzheimer's disease (a progressive disease that destroys memory and mental functions). During a review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure 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 that one of 35 sampled residents (Resident 160) received the planned menu meal or the food alternative, as indicated on the posted menu and consistent with the resident's preferences. As a result, Resident 160 did not receive the correct food items on multiple occasions. Findings: A review of Resident 160's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment and care screening) dated 4/2/25, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, a brief screening tool used to assess thinking and memory) score of 15. A BIMS score of 13-15 indicates intact cognition (suggests no significant impairment in thinking, reasoning, memory, and problem solving). During a dining observation and concurrent interview on 5/5/25 at 1:23 p.m. in Resident 160's room, the resident's meal tray contained a beef patty and salad. Resident 160 confirmed the food items and stated he had received the same meal the day before. Resident 160's tray ticket documented a dislike of all pork. Resident 160 also reported that, several days…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the call light (a visible and audible alarm activated by a call button) for two of 35 sampled residents (Resident 55 and Resident 148) was within reach. This deficient practice had the potential to result in a delay in meeting Resident 55 and Resident 148's needs for toileting and activities of daily living. Findings: 1. During an observation inside Resident 55's room on 5/5/25 at 9:38 a.m., Resident 55 was observed lying in bed, the call light was not in Resident 55's bed. During a concurrent observation and interview inside Resident 55's room on 5/5/25 at 3:00 p.m., with Certified Nursing Assistant F (CNA F), CNA F looked for the call light button and found it hanging on the feeding tube pole (a device used to support and secure feeding bags or feeding pumps during tube feeding). CNA F confirmed the call light was not within the reach of Resident 55. CNA F further stated Resident 55's call light should not be hanging in the feeding tube pole. During a review of Resident 55's clinical record indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-30 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
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 lab results were communicated to the physician for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential to delay treatments and interventions that Resident 1 may have needed. Findings: Review of Resident 1's medical record indicated he was admitted on [DATE] and had a history of pneumonia (an infection of the lungs) and urinary tract infection. Review of Resident 1's situation, background, assessment, recommendation (SBAR, a communication tool), dated 4/12/25, indicated he had an episode of vomiting. The SBAR also indicated Resident 1 had decreased appetite, fluid intake, and urine output. Review of Resident 1's Order Summary Report indicated he had a physician's order, dated 4/12/25, for a repeat CBC (complete blood count, a blood test that evaluates the number and types of blood cells) and CMP (comprehensive metabolic panel, a blood test that provides an overview of the body's chemical balance). Review of Resident 1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented in four out of six shower rooms when: 1. Shower room [ROOM NUMBER] had a brown substance on the floor; 2. Shower room [ROOM NUMBER] had cotton swabs and a shaver cover on the floor drain; 3. Shower room [ROOM NUMBER] had a used white towel on the shower handlebar, and 4. Shower room [ROOM NUMBER] had a used shaver, toilet tissue, wheelchair footrests, and socks in the bathtub. These failures could result in the spread of infection and cross-contamination that could affect staff, visitors, and the 194 residents who reside in the facility. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 12/4/2024 at 10:12 a.m., with the Maintenance Director (MD), there was a brown substance on the floor in shower room [ROOM NUMBER]. The MD confirmed the brown substance was feces (bodily waste discharged from the bowels after food has been digested). The MD further stated staff should clean…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to notify a responsible party (RP, person who makes healthcare decisions on behalf of a resident) regarding change in condition (clinically important change of a person's health status) when a resident sustained an injury to his left elbow for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure resulted in the RP not being informed. Findings: Review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated a physician's order was obtained on 1/20/23 at 3 p.m. to treat the resident's left elbow injury. The clinical record lacked documentation the RP was notified of the wound. During an interview on 6/4/24 at 1:38 p.m., the director of nurses (DON) reviewed Resident 1's clinical record and stated the elbow wound was a change in condition (new wound). The DON stated could not find documentation of RP notification in Resident 1's clinical record. Review of the facility's Change in a Resident's Condition or Status policy, dated February 2021, indicated a nurse was to notify the resident's representative when there was a significant change in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure staff provided treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice when Resident 1's: 1. physician's orders were obtained late for wound treatments, and these orders were then implemented late, 2. physician's order for the right third toe was not obtained, 3. change of condition (clinically important change of a person ' s health status) was not documented regarding a (3a.) a STAT (urgent) lab that was ordered and (3b.) elbow wound, 4. clinical record lacked documentation relevant to an elbow wound. These failures placed the resident's health at risk. Findings: Review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated he was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus (chronic condition in which a person's body has trouble controlling blood sugar) and malnutrition. Resident 1 was at risk for dehydration. Resident 1 also tested positive for COVID-19 on 1/14/23. Review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-26 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 pharmacist failed to report drug irregularities for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1), when Resident 1 received a diuretic (Lasix) with a black box warning (BBW, medications identified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to have serious side effects to alert consumers) label; however, the consultant pharmacist (CP) did not address side effects monitoring for it. This failure left the potential side effects of Lasix to be unmonitored for Resident 1. Findings: Review of Resident 1's physician's medication orders, dated 12/23/22, indicated furosemide (Lasix) 40 milligrams (mg, a metric unit of measurement) twice daily. Resident 1's hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], indicated he presented to the hospital on 1/25/23 with hypernatremia (high sodium in blood), confusion more than baseline. Lab results drawn on 1/24/23 indicated a critically high sodium value of 161 mEq/L (milliequivalents per liter, units of measure; normal range is 135 mEq/L to 145…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-26 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
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 a STAT (urgent) laboratory result was obtained timely for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). Resident 1's STAT laboratory order was not obtained until a day after it was ordered and one test result had a critical value (potentially life-threatening requiring immediate medical attention). This failure resulted in a delay in hospital transfer and placed the resident's health at risk. Findings: Review of Resident 1's care plan, dated 12/23/22, indicated the resident was at risk for dehydration. Review of Resident 1's physician order dated 1/24/23 at 9:44 a.m. indicated STAT lab tests including a comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP, blood test that measures different substances to provide information about a person's chemical balance and metabolism). Review of Resident 1's Nurses Note, dated 1/25/23 at 11:21 a.m., indicated the facility received lab results drawn on 1/24/23 that had a critical high sodium 161 mEq/L (milliequivalents per…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-26 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
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 promptly notify an abnormal lab result to the physician/nurse practitioner (NP) for one of four sampled residents. This failure resulted in the delay of the resident's change in prescription. Findings: Review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated he was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (long term condition in which the body has trouble controlling blood sugar). Review of Resident 1's clinical record indicated he had a lab drawn on 12/29/22 at 6:25 a.m. with an elevated A1c (a test that measures the average amount of sugar in a person's blood over the past few months) level of 9.1% (desired range is below 5.7%). Review of a Nurse's Note, dated 1/5/23 at 2:33 p.m., indicated the NP made changes to Resident 1's diabetic medications and reordered lab tests. Review of a physician's order, dated 1/10/23, indicated Resident 1's dosage of a diabetic medication was increased and noted his A1c result was 9.1%. Review of Resident 1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-15 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurately coded. Specifically, MDS assessments did not reflect the use of oxygen for 1 (Resident #34) of 4 sampled residents reviewed for respiratory care and did not accurately reflect the discharge location for 1 (Resident #183) of 6 sampled residents reviewed for hospitalizations. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Certifying Accuracy of the Resident Assessment, revised in November 2019, revealed, 2. Any person who completes any portion of the MDS assessment, tracking form, or correction request form is required to sign the assessment certifying the accuracy of that portion of that assessment. 3. The information captured on the assessment reflects the status of the resident during the observation (look-back) period for the assessment. 1. A review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #34 on 02/07/2013. According to the admission…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-15 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, facility policy review, and review of the California Department of Health Care Services Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level 1 Assessment Guide, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #117) of 8 sampled residents reviewed for PASRR requirements was referred for further evaluation after the addition of a new mental illness diagnosis. Findings included: Review of an undated facility policy titled, admission Criteria, revealed, 9. All new admissions and readmissions are screened for mental disorders (MD), intellectual disabilities (ID) or related disorders (RD) per the Medicaid Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) process. The policy further indicated, b. When/if the level I screen indicates that the individual may meet the criteria for a MD, ID, or RD, he or she is referred to the state PASARR representative by the system for the Level II (evaluation and determination) screening process. Review of the California Department of Health Care Services Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level 1…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-15 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, facility policy review, and review of the California Department of Health Care Services Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level 1 Assessment Guide, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level 1 Screening for 1 (Resident #117) of 8 sampled residents reviewed for PASRR requirements. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #117's PASRR Level 1 Screening reflected the resident's diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Findings included: Review of an undated facility policy titled, admission Criteria, revealed, 9. All new admissions and readmissions are screened for mental disorders (MD), intellectual disabilities (ID) or related disorders (RD) per the Medicaid Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) process. Review of the California Department of Health Care Services Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level 1 Assessment Guide, dated 01/12/2023, revealed, Section III-Serious Mental Illness Questions 10-12 This section helps determine…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 2 (Resident #106 and Resident #128) of 33 sampled residents' care plans reflected the residents' current conditions and needs. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, revised in December 2016, revealed, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. The policy further indicated, 2. The care plan interventions are derived from a thorough analysis of the information gathered as part of the comprehensive assessment. Additionally, the policy indicated, 8. The comprehensive, person-centered care plan will: a. Include measurable objectives and timeframes; b. Describe the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. The policy further indicated, 13. Assessments of residents…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-01 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide services in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when: 1. Licensed nurses did not complete Resident 1's quarterly fall risk assessment; 2. Licensed nurses did not document the assessment and reassessment of skin discolorations that were discovered on Resident 1's body; and 3. Licensed nurses did not accurately complete Resident 1's Nursing Weekly Summaries (weekly assessments of the resident's overall condition). These failures had the potential to compromise the facility's ability to provide resident-centered interventions based on assessment data. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 1's medical record indicated she was admitted on [DATE] and had the diagnoses of muscle weakness and history of falling. The medical record indicated the facility completed a fall risk assessment for Resident 1 on 4/7/22. Further review of the medical record indicated the facility did not complete another…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2021-06-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices when: 1. Multiple residents did not wear their face masks properly when they were outside the room; 2. Dirty hamper in the hallway was overflowing with linens; 3. Electric fan on top of the Room J has grayish substance inside and out; 4. Residents 51, 61 and 84's oxygen concentrator filters were dusty; 5. There were no documents that indicated multiple residents refused Coronavirus Disease 2019 vaccine (COVID-19, a respiratory disease spreads from person-to-person through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes, or talks); 6. Incomplete Visitor Respiratory Screening Questionnaires for COVID-19; 7. Multiple facility staff did not maintain infection control practices; 8. The facility staff did not maintain droplet precaution practice. These failures have the potential to result in transmission of infection among residents. Findings: 1a. During an observations on 6/7/21…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-14 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
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 accommodate residents' needs for six of 31 sampled residents (Residents 22, 43, 60, 110, 122, and 563) when: 1. Four residents' call lights (Residents 43, Resident 122, Resident 563 and Resident 60) were not functioning for four consecutive days; 2. Facility staff did not answer Resident 22's call light in a timely manner to assist her with bowel care; 3. Resident 110 was using the small size incontinent brief pad instead of the proper large size; 4. Resident 60 was using a wheelchair that was not fitted for him. These failures had the potential to result in the residents' needs being unmet and affecting residents' well-being. Findings: 1. During multiple observations in room I on 06/07/21, 6/08/21, 6/09/21 and 6/10/21 at 12:06 p.m., four residents' call lights (Resident 43, Resident 60, Resident 122 and Resident 563) were not functioning as there was no light from the outside door (to alert staff to check the resident's needs) and no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-14 · tag F0655 — patternCreate 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 for four of 31 sampled residents (Residents 134, 150, 560 and 566). This failure had the potential to result in the facility being unable to identify residents' individualized concerns/needs and outline the care and services required to meet the residents' identified needs. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 134's facesheet (document that summarizes a resident's information) indicated she preferred to speak a language other than English. During observations with certified nursing assistant C (CNA C) on 6/8/21 at 12:01 p.m., and observation with CNA T on 6/11/21 at 8:25 a.m., Resident 134 was observed talking to both CNA C and CNA T in her native language, which neither CNAs understood. Both CNA C and CNA T confirmed Resident 134 had difficulty understanding them during the resident's care. During a telephone interview on 6/09/21 at 11:37 a.m., Resident 134's family member stated Resident 134 could not speak…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-06-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 4. During observation and record review of Resident 7's face sheet on 6/8/21 at 8:50 a.m., Resident 7 was awake and resting in bed. Resident 7 has a BIMS score of 14. Resident 7 has a history of heart failure (heart struggles to work properly), asthma (respiratory condition making breathing more difficult), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (respiratory condition making breathing more difficult), and chronic bronchitis (respiratory condition making breathing more difficult). During an observation, interview, and record review with licensed vocational nurse H (LVN H) on 6/8/21 at 8:50 a.m., LVN H gave Resident 7 the Spiriva inhaler and gave no instruction on administration. Resident 7 inhaled the medication and immediately exhaled. LVN H confirmed the order for Spiriva 18mcg daily at 0800. LVN H confirmed the observation that the resident inhaled and immediately exhaled the medication. LVN H stated she should have instructed the resident regarding inhaler administration and should have asked the resident to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 develop, revise, and update an individualized and comprehensive person-centered care plan with measurable objectives, goals and person-centered interventions for four of nine sampled residents who had falls or risk for falls (Residents 3, 41,102 and 143) These failures had the potential to put the residents at risk of sustaining injuries and falls. Findings: 1. During multiple observations on 6/7/21 at 9:32 a.m., and 6/9/21 at 11:21 a.m., Resident 3 was lying in bed with a floor mat on the floor next to her bed and the bed was in a low position. Resident 3 had difficulty communicating. Review of Resident 3's clinical record indicated Resident 3 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including difficulty in walking, muscle weakness (decrease in strength in one or more muscles), lack of coordination, repeated falls and Dementia (decline in mental capacity affecting thinking and social abilities interfering with 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-06-14 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — patternEnsure 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 follow the physician's orders regarding gastrostomy tube (GT, a soft tube surgically inserted from the abdomen area into stomach for medication and nutrition use) feeding for three of seven residents (Residents 52, 77 and 114). This failure had the potential to result in complications of tube feeding. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 52's clinical record indicated Resident 52 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses included hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), dysphagia (difficulty in swallowing) and dementia (memory loss). Review of Resident 52's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) dated 4/12/21 indicated Resident 52 had severe cognitive impairment and required total dependence with one-person assist in activity daily living (ADL, like walking, eating, dressing, toileting and personal hygiene). During observation on 06/9/21 at 11:30 a.m., Resident 52 was connected to one liter of Jevity 1.2 (feeding solution) with 800…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-14 · tag F0694 — patternProvide 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 ensure the peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC, a thin flexible tube inserted into a vein in the upper arm and guided into a large vein above the right side of the heart to obtain intravenous access for medication administration) line care for three of four residents (Residents 150, 555 and 566) were done per professional standards of practice when: 1. Registered nurses (RNs) did not follow the physician's orders of the PICC line flushing for two of four residents (Residents 555 and 566). 2. Licensed nurse did not notify MD (doctor of medicine) when Resident 555's PICC line was pulled out and the IV antibiotics were not administered on time. 3. Registered nurses did not change the PICC line dressing as ordered for two of four residents (Residents 150 and 555). 4. Registered nurse did not follow the correct procedure during PICC line dressing change observation. 5. Registered nurses did not develop PICC line care plans, document…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-14 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services 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 provide dialysis services consistent with professional standards and to ensure staff had coordinated a resident's care with the dialysis facility for one of nine sampled residents (Resident 32) who received hemodialysis (medical procedure to remove fluid and waste products from the blood and to correct electrolyte, i.e. salts and mineral imbalances by using a machine and an artificial kidney) when: 1. Communication with the dialysis facility center was not properly coordinated when dialysis communication records (DCR) were not completed; 2. Staff was not trained on emergency care for residents with renal diseases, dialysis care and there was no emergency dialysis kit available, and; 3. The dialysis care plan was not resident-centered. These failures may affect the quality of dialysis care being provided to the residents. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 32's clinical record indicated he was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-06-14 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate accountability and storage of controlled substance (CS) medications (drugs with high potential for abuse or addiction); and the security of medications stored in the automated drug dispensing system (ADDS, a mechanical system that performs operations or activities, other than compounding or administration, relative to the storage, dispensing, or distribution of drugs) according to the facility policy and procedures, when: 1. The amount of oxycodone (a potent CS medication for pain) liquid for Resident 30 was inaccurate; 2. A CS medication for a discharged resident was transferred from the pharmacy's original packaging and without any identifiers; 3. Transactions of activities (includes user access of, and all drugs added to or removed) from the ADDS were not maintained in the facility since implementation in October 2019; and 4. Two of two employees, who were no longer employed by the facility, were on the active user…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-14 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure 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
2. During concurrent observation and interview with licensed vocational nurse H (LVN H) on 6/8/21 at 8:56 a.m., LVN H applied a nitroglycerin transdermal patch to Resident 7's left upper arm. LVN H failed to check Resident 7's skin to make sure the previous nitroglycerin patch had been removed prior to the application of the new patch. Shortly after the medication administration, LVN H stated another shift was responsible for removal of the patch. LVN H stated she should have checked prior to putting it on and confirmed the failure to remove it, and the application of an additional patch can result in extra medication being delivered by the medication patch. LVN H then checked Resident 7's left upper arm, found another undated nitroglycerin patch on Resident 7's upper left arm, and removed the older nitroglycerin patch. Review of Resident 7's physician's order, dated 12/22/2018, indicated nitroglycerin 0.1 mg/hour 1 patch to be applied once daily at 8 a.m. Another physician's order, dated 12/22/2018, indicated the nitroglycerin patch was to be removed daily at 8:00 p.m. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-06-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of three medication refrigerators (Refrigerators #1 and #2) were within the accepted range of 36 to 46 degrees Fahrenheit (ºF). Also, the staff failed to take appropriate actions, such as notification to the director of nursing or maintenance, when the temperature was out of range. This failure had the potential for medications to lose their potency and effectiveness when administered to the residents. Findings: During a concurrent observation, interview, and record review, on 6/7/21 at 10:32 a.m., with licensed vocational nurse D (LVN D) in Medication room [ROOM NUMBER], LVN D stated there were two medication refrigerators with Refrigerator #1 on top of Refrigerator #2. LVN D stated the temperatures of both refrigerators were checked by staff twice daily. Refrigerator #2 was observed to contain various types of insulin (medication to control high blood sugar) pens and vials, PPD (purified protein derivative; used in a skin…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions in the kitchen when: 1. Four dietary staff did not cover their hair completely with a hairnet; 2. One pair of used gloves was on top of the kitchen cart; 3. Dietary staff did not do hand hygiene after touching his hairnet and face shield; 4. Dietary staff dropped his face shield on top of the kitchen table and did not disinfect the food preparation table and 5. Two out of four chopping boards had multiple deep cuts. These failures had the potential to cause food-borne illness for residents. Findings: 1. During an initial kitchen tour with the director of dietary services (DDS) on 6/7/21 at 8:45 a.m., DSS, registered dietitian (RD), worked to supervise and check kitchen staff within the food preparation areas. Their hair on the sides and back were not completely covered with a hairnet. During puree preparation observation with dietary cook (DC) on 6/7/21 at 11:10 a.m., DC's left side burn was sticking out and not completely covered with a hairnet. During a concurrent observation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to treat Resident 68 with dignity and respect when staff did not ask permission and provide privacy when requested to show Resident 68's right hip wound. This failure had the potential to cause emotional distress to the resident. Findings: During an observation on 6/9/21 at 10:14 a.m., when certified nursing assistant C (CNA C) was requested to show Resident 68's right hip wound, CNA C unfastened Resident 68's incontinent pad without asking the resident's permission. CNA C also did not draw the privacy curtain while the door was wide open, and exposed Resident 68's genitals to the public view. The resident immediately pulled back his incontinent pad to cover himself. Resident 68 was hesitant to show his right hip when he noticed people could see him from the outside of the room. CNA C was apologetic to Resident 68 that she did not provide him privacy or asked permission before doing what she did. During a concurrent interview with CNA C, she stated she should have provided privacy to Resident 68 and informed 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.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the licensed staff or interdisciplinary team (IDT, facility staff members from different departments who coordinate care provided to residents) assessed and developed care plans for two of 31 sampled residents (Residents 97 and 150) regarding their abilities to self-administer of their own medications. These failures had the potential for improper medication administration and not addressing their clinical conditions. Findings: During an initial facility tour on 6/7/21 at 9:44 a.m., Resident 97 was in his bed awake, a bottle of Phenylephrine nasal spray (medication to relieve nasal discomfort caused by colds, allergies, and hay fever) was seen at his bedside table. Resident 97 stated he self-administered this nasal spray. During an interview with licensed vocational nurse D (LVN D) on 6/7/21 at 9:48 a.m., LVN D stated, no resident should have meds at bedside. A review of Resident 97's clinical record indicated there was no documented evidence that IDT did self-admministration medication assessment for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary, orderly and comfortable environment for six of 31 sampled residents (Residents 27, 34, 95, 110, 117, and 563), when: 1. Toilet seat and tanks were not securely installed for Rooms G, H and I. 2. Television (TV) reception was blurred for Residents 110 and 117. 3. There was no adequate bedroom space for Resident 563. 4. The walls of Room E and Room F were unmaintained. These failures had the potential to result in affecting the residents' safety, emotions, and well-being. Findings: 1. During an observation on 06/07/21 at 10:51 a.m., the toilet seat in room H was not securely installed with screws on the floor. The toilet seat moved when touched or seated. Also, the toilet tanks in room G and I wiggled as if they were not properly mounted. During an interview with Resident 34 on 06/07/21 at 12:31 p.m., Resident 34 stated he felt dismayed that he already told the maintenance staff about the concerns but the toilet seat and tanks were not fixed. During an interview with maintenance staff (MS) 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-14 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) Section N (Medications) for one of 31 sampled residents (Resident 568). This failure had the potential to result in unmet care needs for Resident 568. Findings: During a review of Resident 568's clinical record, it indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a physician order that included Lovenox (Enoxaparin, anticoagulant) 40 mg. (milligrams, unit of measurement) subcutaneous daily for DVT (deep vein thrombosis, blood clot) prophylaxis. Resident 568 was not on insulin (medication to lower blood sugar). A review of Resident 568's initial MDS dated [DATE], Section N Anticoagulant indicated 0 (zero, the resident did not receive the medication during the last 7 days since admission) and the Insulin injections were coded 3 (number of days insulin was received during the last 7 days since admission). During the record review and concurrent interview with the assistant director of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to update and revise the individualized and comprehensive care plans to meet individual needs for three of five reviewed residents (Residents 68, 88 and 136). This failure had the potential to result in not meeting the resident's needs. Findings: 1. During multiple observations on 6/7/21 at 9:40 a.m., 10:05 a.m., 11:08 a.m., and 6/8/21 at 11:30 a.m., Resident 136 was propelling himself in the hallway with his contracture right hand with no splint or device applied. During a review of Resident 136's clinical records, it indicated Resident 136 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including hemiplegia (paralysis that affects one side) and hemiparesis (weakness on half of the body) , cerebrovascular disease cerebrovascular accident (CVA/stroke, a condition resulting from a lack of oxygen in the brain potentially causing a loss of sensory and motor function), type 2 diabetes mellitus (chronic condition that affects the way the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate care and treatment for one of 31 sampled residents (Resident 68) when the treatment nurse (TX) did not follow the physician's order for the right hip pressure ulcer (PU, skin injury caused by unrelieved pressure resulting in full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon or muscles) treatment, and staff did not apply the heel protector/bootee (a device to help prevent pressure injury per Resident 68's care plan. These failures could compromise Resident 68's PU wound healing and possible recurrence of his healed right heel PU. Findings: Review of Resident 68's clinical record indicated Resident 68 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The physician's updated order dated 6/8/21 indicated to do daily treatment to Stage 4 PU on the right hip as: cleanse site with NS (normal saline), pat dry, apply santly (wound debridement), apply gentamicin (antibiotic) ointment to wound bed, apply calcium alginate (absorb…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure bladder care was provided for one of two residents (Resident 30) who had an indwelling urinary catheter (hollow tube that is inserted into the bladder to drain urine) when Resident 30's urinary collection bag was not emptied on the day shift. This failure had the potential to cause the resident's urinary tract infection (when bacteria gets into urine and travels up to the bladder). Findings: A review of Resident 30's clinical record indicated Resident 30 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses included COVID-19 (highly contagious respiratory disease), asthma (a condition in which a person's airways become inflamed, narrow and swell, and produce extra mucus, which makes it difficult to breathe) and neuromuscular bladder dysfunction (leaking of urine that a person cannot control). A review of Resident 30's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) dated 3/15/21 indicated Resident 30 was cognitively alert and required supervision with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide 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 31 sampled residents (Resident 120) when the attending physician was not informed when the resident's pain was not relieved after the PRN (as needed) pain medication was administered, and there was no pain management care plan developed. These failures could result in Resident 120 having ineffective pain management. Findings: During an observation and interview on 6/8/21 at 1:30 p.m., Resident 120 was in bed and stated she was still having pain and the pain comes and go because of the fracture. A review of Resident 120's clinical record indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture (break in the continuity of the bone) of upper end of left tibia (stronger, longer and anterior (frontal) of the two bones in the leg), wedge compression fracture of first lumbar vertebrae (a common fracture of the spine resulting from crush or injury), fracture of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
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 provide medically-related social services for one of three randomly reviewed discharged residents (Resident 14) when social services (a department aiming to promote welfare of the residents in a facility) failed to: 1. Initiate a discharge care plan; 2. Include in the discharge process the responsible party (RP) and the interdisciplinary team (IDT, leaders from different departments to discuss the resident's care) in discharge planning; 3. Follow the physician's orders regarding the discharge; 4. Pursue other options outside of family, shelter, or street for discharge; 5. Arrange for necessary supplies and after care/follow-up for Resident 14. These failures resulted in the facility unsafely discharging Resident 14 to a local street corner at two streets with a walker on 6/7/21. The facility did not verify where the resident was discharged and left the resident alone on the street. One day after the facility discharged Resident 14 to the street,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 two of 12 residents (Residents 11 and 14) were free from unnecessary medications when behaviors were not monitored correctly for Seroquel and behavior monitoring for Geodon was not updated when the Geodon dosage was increased. This failure had the potential of an incorrect dosage being administered and the residents received unnecessary medications. Findings: 1. During an interview and subsequent document review on 6/14/21at 1:10 p.m. with the director of nursing (DON), DON reviewed Resident 14's Behavior Monitoring Administration History (BMAH) for 3/2021, 4/2021, 5/2021, and 6/1/21to 6/14/2021. DON stated Resident 14's administration of Risperdal was monitored by episodes. Resident 14 had episodes of striking out, yelling, and demanding attention. DON stated all of the episodes were counted together. DON state if all three episodes occurred at the same time, it was counted and documented. If only one or two of the episodes occurred, then it was not counted/documented. 2. A review of Resident 11's facesheet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-14 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 one of five residents (Resident 79) were offered and/or received influenza vaccination. This failure had the potential to place the resident at risk of becoming infected with influenza. Findings: Review of Resident 79's admission Record indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 79's medical record indicated Resident 79 did not receive influenza vaccination for the year 2020 - 2021. During an interview with the infection preventionist (IP) on 6/14/21 at 10:25 a.m., she stated Resident 79 refused the influenza vaccine. However, IP was unable to provide the informed consent (a process in which residents were given important information, including possible risks and benefits, about a medical procedure or treatment; this was to help the residents decide if they wanted to be treated) of Resident 79's refusal and the document that Resident 79's health care responsible party was informed of her refusal, and that the risks…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 273; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HUDSON RIVER OPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 10/01/2019 |
| BAY BRIDGE CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 11/02/2015 |
| VETSA, SUREKHA | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 03/01/2018 |
| BENNETT, JOHN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/07/2023 |
| APT, FREDERICK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| HANCOCK, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| JERGENSEN, JOSHUA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| MITCHELL, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.8M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 056082. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-09, 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.