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

Mission De La Casa

2501 Alvin Avenue, San Jose, CA 95121 · For profit - Individual · 163 certified beds · (408) 238-9751 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Mar 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0740)1 immediate-jeopardy citation$51,753 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (17% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $51,753 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-21)
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1675 Burdette Dr · (408) 270-2880 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1661 Burdette Dr Ste Ab · (408) 622-8531 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2437 Alvin Ave · (669) 265-7615 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Nisich Park, 1401 Suzay Ct · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 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 fell from 5 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.8%10.2%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.6%4.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.0%1.2%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%7.3%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.4%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.5%1.6%3.3%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.1%9.8%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication1.8%13.7%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.5%98.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.1%4.3%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.0%10.2%21.2%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.1%12.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.7%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.6%93.2%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.4%23.0%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit5.4%11.2%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.592.251.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.991.571.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

50.2% 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 254 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.32U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.15hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 130 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 53% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF50.2%CMS range 42.5–56.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.7%CMS range 8.4–13.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge57.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge62.3%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge61.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified99.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting99.1%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.6%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.8%CMS range 4.2–10.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.121.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.68
RN hours/ resident / day
0.65
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.63
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.95
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.42
RN hoursweekends
16.7%
Total nursing turnover
24.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 163 beds and averages 153.8 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.95 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.63 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.65 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.07 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.42 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 17% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

16
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-21)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-27)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

35 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures were implemented during the facility's COVID-19 (name of disease caused from SARS-CoV-2 [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, a type of coronavirus]) outbreak (when a disease spreads to more people than usual, and caused by an infectious agent, such bacteria, viruses, or parasites) when:1. There was no Transmission-Based Precaution (a second tier of basic infection control used in addition to Standard Precautions for patients who may be infected or colonized with certain infectious agents for which additional precautions are needed to prevent infection transmission) related to COVID-19 posted at the double doors, and no isolation cart (a cart used in hospitals and other healthcare facilities to store all the personal protective equipment [PPE, are items like gloves, masks, gowns, and eye protection worn by healthcare workers to create a barrier and prevent the spread of infections] and…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-04-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure supervision was provided to one of three residents (Resident 1) who was assessed to be high risk for falls, totally dependent on staff for transferring, and required close monitoring (staff made rounds and observed the residents at risk of falling) when Resident 1 was left sitting in her wheelchair in the hallway without staff watching and/or supervising her on [DATE], at 6:45 a.m., when staff went inside another resident's room. This failure resulted in Resident 1 falling on the floor and sustaining a subdural hematoma (occurs when a blood vessel in the space between the skull and the brain is damaged; blood escapes from the blood vessel, leading to the formation of a blood clot that places pressure on the brain and damages it) on the right temporal region (a region at the side of the head behind the eyes). This blunt force injury of her head was the immediate cause of her death after 15 days in the general acute care hospital (GACH). Findings:…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0801 — widespread
    Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to have qualified, full-time oversight of Food and Nutrition Services in accordance with State requirements when the Registered Dietitian did not fulfill the role in the Dietitian job description, and the staff put in charge of supervising the kitchen were not qualified. This deficient practice could result in compromising the safety and nutritional status of residents through potential transmission of foodborne illness and decreased quality of food for 144 residents, who received food from the kitchen out of a census of 151.Findings:Review of California Code Regulations Title 22 S 70271 - Dietetic Service Definition, shows Dietetic Services refers to operations in relation to food, specifically providing safe, satisfying and nutritionally adequate food for patients with appropriate staff, space, equipment and supplies. Review of California Code Regulations Title 22 S 70271 - Dietetic Service Staff shall include a full-time qualified person to manage and oversee the day-to-day supervision and management, specifically 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-08-21 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespread
    Provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to employ staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.ADS was unable to accurately demonstrate the procedure for testing the concentration, according to manufacturer specifications, of the sanitizing solution used on food contact surfaces.Cook C was unable to accurately identify the acceptable calibration temperature for two thermometers in an ice water solution.These failures had the potential to result in ineffective sanitation practices and the use of inaccurate temperature-measuring devices for verifying safe food temperatures, thereby increasing the risk of foodborne illness among a high-risk population of 144 residents who consumed food prepared in the facility's kitchen. At the time, the facility's census was 151.Findings: 1. ADS was unable to accurately demonstrate the procedure for testing the concentration, according to manufacturer specifications, of the sanitizing solution used on food contact surfaces. During a concurrent…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to:Discard unused pork leftovers following dinner service on 08/10/2025.Discard 2 expired raw thawing turkey loaves with a use by date of 08/09/2025.Maintain food at or below 41 F in the one-door refrigerator, as required for proper refrigeration.Maintain cleanliness of 4 out of 12 knives.These deficiencies had the potential to compromise food safety and increase the risk of foodborne illness for 144 of the 151 residents who consumed meals prepared in the facility's kitchen.Findings:1. Failure to discard unused pork leftovers following dinner service on 08/10/2025. Potentially hazardous foods (PHF) are those capable of supporting bacterial growth associated with foodborne illness. Protein-based products such as meat are considered to be potentially hazardous and require time/temperature control for food safety. PHF's that are cooked and held must be monitored for time/temperature control to ensure food safety. PHF's must be cooled from 135 degrees F (Fahrenheit) to 70 degrees F within 2 hours and from 70 F to 41…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0813 — widespread
    Have a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
    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 allow residents to store perishable food brought in by visitors and family. This failure had the potential to result in decreased food intake leading to weight loss and/or food related medical complications for 144 residents who ate food by mouth out of a census of 151.Findings:During an interview on 8/11/25 at 3:39 p.m., Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) A, stated perishable food brought in for residents, such as by family or visitors, was not stored for residents. LVN A stated residents and families were provided education that food brought in had to be consumed or discarded within one hour. When LVN A was asked if family brought in perishable food in the morning, but the resident wanted to eat it later in the day, LVN A stated the family needed to take the food home and bring it back later when the resident wanted to eat it. During an interview on 8/13/25 at 2:20 p.m., the Registered Dietitian (RD) stated she was aware food brought by visitors for residents was not stored and it had to be discarded within…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-08-21 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain the outside waste collection area in good condition. This failure had the potential to create unsafe and unsanitary conditions by attracting pests, such as rodents and insects, which could carry and spread disease, posing a risk of foodborne illness to all 151 residents of the facility.Findings:During an observation on 08/11/2025 at 3:46 PM at the waste collection area outside, a large green metal container labeled compost/organics with 2 top covers, had the left top cover closed and the right top cover open. Dark yellow-brown liquid streaks were observed running down the green metal container, actively spilling onto the concrete surface. The spill extended approximately 20 feet from the bin and was accompanied by a strong foul odor. A sign posted on the green metal container displayed the instruction: 'Clean up spills.' A large white metal container labeled recyclable items only with 2 top covers had both top covers closed. Runoff coming from the green metal container was seen in front of the white…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement individualized, resident-centered care plans for 11 of 29 sampled residents (Residents 15, 22, 64, 55, 92, 78, 70, 89, 136, 60, and 67) when care plans for: 1. Resident 15's diagnosis of schizophrenia (a chronic mental health condition that affects a person's thoughts, feelings, and behavior) was not developed;2. Residents 22 and 64's use of bed rails (an adjustable metal or rigid plastic bars that attach to the bed, like side rails, bed side rails, safety rails, grab bars and assist bars) were not developed; 3. Residents 55, 92, 78, 70, 89, 60, and 67's interventions for use of positioning device (e.g. bed rails) were not implemented; and 4. Resident 136's care plan for use of bed rails was resolved, and a new care plan for continued use of bed rails was not developed.These failures had the potential for unmet care needs for Residents 15, 22, 64, 55, 92, 78, 70, 89, 136, 60, and 67. Findings: 1. During a review of…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-21 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' care plan for siderails were reviewed and updated quarterly for safety and effectiveness for 19 of 29 sampled residents (Resident 31, 38, 4. 59, 96, 54, 97, 109, 110, 11, 138, 142, 145, 151, 150, 26, 81, 62 and 151) when:1. Residents 31, 38, 4. 59, 96, 54, 97, 109, 110, 11,138, 142, 145, and 151 were without revised quarterly care plan; and2. Residents 150, 26, 81, 62 and 151, were without revised bed rails care plan. These failures had the potential to result in the residents not receiving the interventions necessary to maintain their highest level of well-beingFindings: 1a. Review of Resident 31's admission Record, indicated Resident 31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM, a disorder characterized by difficulty in blood sugar control and poor wound healing) with hyperglycemia (high blood sugar), absence of right leg below knee, age-related osteoporosis (weak and…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide necessary care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice for four (Resident 116, 130, 22 and 64) of 59 sampled residents when:For Resident 116, the Blood Glucose (BG) testing was performed one hour prior to insulin given and two hours prior to breakfast being served and there was no monitoring for episodes of hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, andFor Resident 130, 22 and 64, there was no physician order for the use of side rails or positional bars.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 116's blood glucose not being treated appropriately and jeopardize their health and well-being. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 116's admission record indicated Resident 116 was admitted with multiple diagnoses including choledocholithiasis (Choledocholithiasis (also called bile duct stones or gallstones in the bile duct) is the presence of a gallstone in the common bile duct), pneumonia (an inflammation of the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-21 · tag F0700 — pattern
    Try 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the proper use of bed rails (BR, adjustable rigid bars attached to the side of the bed) for 38 out of 114 residents when:1. There was no Bedrail Use and Entrapment Risk Evaluation completed prior to the use of BR for two of 114 residents (Resident 130,and 64 );2. There was no documentation that indicated alternatives were offered and/or attempted prior to the use of side rails for 20 out of 114 residents (Residents 159, 140, 83, 46, 141, 129, 160, 136, 60, 67, 101, 125, 31, 38, 98, 53, 138, 142, 151 and 96) who used them;3. There was no quarterly re-evaluation of the safety and use of bed rails as indicated in the care plan for 35 out of 114 residents (Residents 72, 161, 150, 47, 105, 81, 62, 87, 119, 83, 141, 129, 55, 92, 78, 70, 89, 136, 60, 67, 22, 38, 4, 59, 96, 54, 97, 10, 109, 110, 11, 138, 142, 145, and 151 ); and4. There was no consent for the use of bed rails for two out of 38 residents (Residents 130 and 64).These failures had the potential to place the residents at risk of entrapment and…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    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 pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR, a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals who have mental disorder or intellectual disabilities are placed in facilities that can provide the appropriate care) was accurately completed for one of three residents (Resident 8). This failure had the potential for inaccurate care and services provided to residents with mental disorder (MD), intellectual disability (ID), or related conditions.Findings:Review of Resident 8's clinical record titled, admission Record, dated 8/18/2025, indicated Resident 8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including vascular dementia (a type of cognitive decline caused by damage to the blood vessels in the brain), adult failure to thrive (a syndrome of progressive functional and nutritional decline, characterized by weight loss, poor appetite, inactivity, and other symptoms like fatigue, dehydration, and depression), major depressive…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 23 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review the facility failed to follow its Policy & Procedure (P&P) titled, Dignity and Respect Psychoactive Medications, dated 2025, for one of 30 sampled residents (Resident 15), when the facility failed to monitor Resident 15 for behaviors related to her diagnosed mental illness. This failure had the potential for Resident 15's behavior related to a diagnosed mental illness to go unnoticed by staff, contributing to a potential in psychosocial harm to Resident 15.Findings:During a review of Resident 15's facesheet (one-page summary of a patient's key information within their medical record), dated 8/14/25, the facesheet indicated a diagnosis of Schizophrenia (a chronic mental health condition that affects how a person thinks, feels, and behaves), dated 2/9/23.During a concurrent interview and record review with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 8/15/25 at 3:56 p.m., Resident 15's physician orders indicated no order for behavioral monitoring. DON stated, Resident 15 should have an order for behavioral monitoring, since she has a diagnosed mental…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0800 — isolated
    Provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have a system for physician prescribed fortified diets (a diet with added nutrients, such as calories and protein, to increase the nutritional value of the diet, especially for individuals with or at risk for weight loss and/or malnutrition). This failure had the potential to result in weight loss and or further complicate medical conditions for 1 sampled resident (Resident 3) who was on a physician prescribed fortified diet. Findings:Review of Resident 3's electronic medical record showed Resident 3 was initially admitted on [DATE] and had diagnoses including but not limited to a stage 4 pressure ulcer (most severe stage of a pressure ulcer, characterized by full-thickness skin tissue loss, with exposed bone, tendon, or muscle).Review of Resident 3's electronic medical record showed in the Order Summary Report, Fortified diet Minced & Moist. ordered on 6/15/25. During an observation of trayline lunch service (a food assembly system,…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure lunch menus were followed on 08/11/2025 as evidenced by:Resident 163 received a mixed fruit cup instead of 1 fresh apple as indicated on the menu.Resident 143 received tarter sauce when it was not indicated on the menu.These deficiencies had the potential to compromise the medical and nutritional status of Residents 163 out of 143.Findings:1. Resident 163 received a mixed fruit cup instead of 1 fresh apple as indicated on the menu.During a concurrent observation, interview, and record review on 08/11/2025 at 12:01 PM with Diet Aide K (DA K) in the kitchen during lunchtime tray line, lunch tray for Resident 163 showed a mixed fruit cup that included cubes of melons and peaches. DA K was asked if the mixed fruit cup was appropriate for Resident 163's lunch tray and DA K stated the mixed fruit cup was appropriate. DA K was asked to verify that the mixed fruit cup was appropriate using diet menu spreadsheet for Monday 08/11/2025, and after reviewing the spreadsheet, DA K removed a pink colored juice from…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolated
    Keep all essential equipment working 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 dryer's lint filter compartment and lint trap cleaning log were routinely maintained. The facility's documentation indicated laundry staff did not clean the dryer lint for several hours on multiple days. This failure had the potential to for an excess accumulation of lint that could catch on fire. Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview with the environmental director (ED) in linen room on 8/19/25 at 8:25 a.m., one of the clothes dryer's lint compartment (an area of the clothes dryer designed to catch lint and debris from clothing and linen as they are tumble dried) contained laundry lint fibers from the tumble drying of clothing and linen. The ED stated lint traps were supposed to be cleaned every two hours. During an interview and concurrent record review with the ED on 8/19/25, at 9:03 a.m., the ED reviewed the facility's laundry lint trap cleaning log. The laundry lint trap cleaning log was missing signatures on 8/1/25 at 10:00 p.m., 8/7/25 at 3:00 p.m., 8/9/25 at 1:00 p.m., 7:00…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolated
    Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
    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 kitchen was free from flies. This failure had the potential to compromise food safety and increase the risk of foodborne illness for 144 of the 151 residents who consumed meals prepared in the facility's kitchen.Findings:During an observation on 08/11/2025 at 10:02 AM in the kitchen, multiple flies were observed throughout the kitchen area.During an interview on 08/12/2025 at 9:49 AM with [NAME] B, [NAME] B confirmed the presence of flies and added that the flies have been seen around the kitchen for 1 week.During an observation on 08/12/2025 at 10:15 AM in the kitchen, a fly was observed landing on a can of spray used for coating pans. Another fly was seen landing on the foil covering a pan containing a pureed entree. Additionally, a third fly was observed flying around a pan of cake.During an interview on 08/12/2025 at 11:16 AM with Assistant Dietary Supervisor (ADS), the ADS reported the presence of flies in the kitchen to the Environmental Director (ED) on 08/06/2025, and the ED subsequently…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-06-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to sanitize the food thermometer between measuring the temperatures of different food items. This had the potential to affect 138 of 138 residents who received food from the dietary department. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Safe Food Preparation, revised in March 2023, revealed, Cross-Contamination 2. Cross-contamination can occur when harmful substances, i.e. [id est, such as] chemical or disease-causing microorganisms are transferred to food by hands, (including gloved hands), food contact surfaces, sponges, cloth towels, or utensils that are not adequately cleaned. 3. Examples of ways to reduce cross-contamination include, but are not limited to: d. Clean and sanitize work surfaces, including cutting-boards and food-contact equipment (e.g. [exempli gratia, for example] food processors, blenders, preparation tables, knife blades, can openers, and slicers), between uses and consistent with applicable code. A facility policy titled, Food Temperatures, revised on 03/19/2020, revealed, 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-27 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    2. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #67 on 03/31/2023. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of major depressive disorder (11/04/2018) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (onset date 11/05/2018). Resident #67's Level I PASARR, dated 03/31/2023, revealed the resident was diagnosed with major depressive disorder; however, the resident's diagnosis of PTSD was not reflected. The Level I PASARR was Positive, due to a suspected MI [mental illness]. A letter from the Department of Health Care Services to the facility, dated 04/12/2023, indicated the Level II evaluation was not completed because the resident had no serious mental illness (SMI). The letter indicated the case was closed. During an interview on 06/26/2024 at 12:20 PM, Registered Nurse (RN) #3 stated she was responsible for ensuring the Level I PASARR was completed for new admissions. RN #3 stated the hospital initiated the PASARR, and she checked them for accuracy. RN #3 stated Resident #67's diagnosis of PTSD should be reflected on their…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-27 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was five percent (%) or less. Medication administration observations revealed 2 medication errors out of 25 total opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 8%, affecting 2 (Resident #137 and Resident #105) out of 5 residents observed during medication administration. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Administering Medications, revised in March 2023, revealed, 3. Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders. The policy further revealed, 8. The licensed nurse must check the label three (3) times to verify the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right time and right method (route) of administration before giving the medication. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #137 on 01/02/2024. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included a diagnosis of depression. Resident #137's Order Summary Report, listing active orders as of 06/25/2024, contained…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement their policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of injuries of unknown source for one of two sampled residents (1) to other officials (including to the California Department Public Health (CDPH) and adult protective services (APS) where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures after when Resident 1 sustained a subdural hemorrhage (is a kind of intracranial hemorrhage, which is the bleeding in the area between the brain and the skull) with multiple rib fractures on 2/19/24 and transferred to an acute hospital for intensive care unit (ICU, provides the critical care and life support for actually ill and injured patients) monitoring and management, and facility's investigation did not identify the reason or cause of Resident 1's injuries. Failure to report alleged violations to the proper authorities could compromise the protection 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-07-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented when: 1. Licensed vocational nurse L (LVN L) did not wear face mask properly while in the nurses station with other staff; 2. A certified nursing assistant was wearing a disposable face mask underneath another disposable facemask; 3. Clean linen in the hallway was not covered; 4. Gloves were worn in the hallway; 5. Housekeeping staff did not properly wear a face mask; 6. Resident 119 was not monitored daily for signs and symptoms of COVID 19 (corona virus disease 19; a highly contagious respiratory disease); 7. Activity assistant did not wear face mask properly; 8. Certified nursing assistant did not wear face mask properly; and 9. Certified nursing assistant did not provide hand hygene after care. These failures could result in the spread of infection and cross-contamination that could affect the 119 residents that reside in the facility. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0557 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain residents' privacy, dignity and respect for three of 24 sampled residents (Residents 48, 47 and 99) when: 1. The activity aid (ACA) was standing in front of Resident 48 while assisting the resident in the hallway with the lunch meal. 2. Resident 47 was using the bathroom and the door was left opened. 3. During GT administration observation Resident 99's room door was open, and her abdomen was exposed to public view in the hallway. These failures had the potential to affect Resident 48 47 and 99's self-esteem and self-worth. Findings: 1. During multiple observations on 7/6/21 at 12:15 p.m., 12:30 p.m., 12:40p.m., and 12:51 p.m., the ACA was standing in front of Resident 48 while assisting the resident with her lunch meal. During a concurrent observation and interview on 7/6/21 at 12:51 p.m., with ACA, he confirmed the above observations and stated that he should have been sitting while assisting Resident 48 with her meal. 2. During an observation on 7/6/21 at 10:27 a.m., certified nursing assistant N…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably 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 ensure needs were accommodated for five of 24 sampled residents (Residents 99, 52, 119, 114, 122) when call light devices were not within reach of the residents. This failure had the potential for a delayed response and not meeting the resident's needs. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 99's clinical record indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia (loss of muscle function of one side of the body) hemiparesis (partial weakness of one side of the body) affecting the right dominant side During an observation of Resident 99's room on 7/6/21 at 9:50 a.m., Resident 99 was in bed and her call light was on the floor. Resident 99 was moving her hand but was not able to reach the call light. During a concurrent observation and interview with licensed vocational nurse F (LVN F) on 7/6/21 at 9:52 a.m., she confirmed the above observation and stated Resident 99 could not reach the call light that was on 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    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 an observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change in status assessment (SCSA) in minimum data set (MDS, an assessment tool) for one of 24 sampled residents (Resident 61). The resident had declined in activities of daily living (ADL, daily self-care tasks, e.g., bathing, toileting, and transferring), balance during transition and walking, and declined in bowel and bladder continence. These failures had the potential to result in Resident 61 being unable to achieve or maintain optimal status of health, function and quality of life. Findings: Review of Resident 61's face sheet (summary page of a patient's important information) indicated he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), major depressive disorder (mood disorder that interferes with daily life), dementia with behavioral disturbance (decline in mental capacity affecting daily function) and Alzheimer's disease (progressive disease that destroys…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Review of Resident 47's clinical record indicated she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including schizoaffective disorder (mental disorder including schizophrenia [serious mental disorder in which people cannot distinguish reality] and mood disorder), dementia (memory loss). Further review of Resident 47's clinical record, there was no PASARR documentation found. During an interview with the regional consultant (RC) on 7/8/21 at 10:07 a.m., the RC stated the facility could not find the PASARR. During an interview with the assistant director of nursing (ADON) on 7/8/21 at 11:29 a.m., the ADON stated she could not find Resident 47's completed PASARR. During an interview with the medical records director (MRD) on 7/8/21 at 2:14 p.m., the MRD stated he could not find Resident 47's PASARR. During an interview with the ADON on 7/9/21 at 11:18 a.m., the ADON could not provide a completed PASARR and stated Resident 47's PASSAR should have been done. Review of the facility's undated policy, PASRR indicated 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 5. During observation and concurrent interview with RN G, on 7/6/21 at 8:15 a.m., RN G was observed preparing medications for Resident 84. As RN G withdrew Dutasteride (medication for urine retention), the capsule still containing medication fell to the floor. RN G administered to Resident 84 what she withdrew from the capsule. Further examination of the capsule that fell on the floor indicated medication was left in the capsule. RN G confirmed this observation and confirmed the Resident 84 received a partial dose. Review of Resident 84's physician orders, dated 6/18/19, indicated the order was for Dutasteride capsule 0.5 mg by mouth once daily. During an interview with the director of nursing (DON), on 7/7/21 at 10:25 a.m., the DON stated RN G should not have given a partial dose to Resident 84. The DON stated RN G should have discarded the medication she withdrew and given Resident 84 the full dose the physician ordered. Review of the facility's policy, Medication Administration, revised 6/1/2020, 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide showers for one of 24 sampled residents (Resident 88) when the resident was unable to carry out showers independently. This failure had the potential to negatively affect the resident's physical and psychosocial well-being. Findings: Review of Resident 88's clinical record indicated she was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including urinary tract infection (infection in any part of urinary system), diabetes (increased blood sugar), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD, circulatory problem in which narrowed blood vessels and reduce blood flow). Review of Resident 88's minimum data set (MDS, an assessment tool) dated 6/11/21, indicated Resident 88 was moderately impaired in cognition, required staff assistance for bed mobility, transfer, toileting, and personal hygiene. The MDS also indicated bathing did not occur the entire 7 day look back period. During an observation and interview with Resident 88 on 7/6/21 at 9:50 a.m., Resident…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to initiate new intervention on a fall care plan for a resident with multiple falls, revise, update an individualized and comprehensive person-centered fall care plan and person-centered interventions for three of 24 sampled residents (Residents 32, 61 and 16.) This failure had the potential to put the resident at risk of sustaining injuries and had the potential to result in not meeting the resident's needs. Findings: 1. During a record review of Resident 32's care plans for her five falls, one of the care plans did not have a new intervention to decrease her chance of falling. The care plan initiated on 12/12/2020 indicated an intervention to reinforce staff to frequently check the resident for safety. The care plan initiated on 12/14/2020 indicated an intervention to reinforce staff to monitor the resident closely for safety. During an interview with licensed vocational nurse F (LVN F) on 7/12/21 at 1:33 p.m., LVN F stated 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement the policy and procedure for continence management for one of 24 sampled residents (Resident 88) when the resident was not properly assessed for bowel and bladder (B&B) training. This deficient practice had the potential to cause a decline in B&B control. Findings: Review of Resident 88's clinical record indicated she was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including urinary tract infection (infection in any part of urinary system), diabetes (increased blood sugar), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD, circulatory problem in which narrowed blood vessels and reduce blood flow) Review of Resident 88's minimum data set (MDS, an assessment tool) dated 6/11/21, indicated Resident 88 was moderately impaired in cognition, required staff assistance for bed mobility, transfer, toileting, and personal hygiene. Review of Resident 88's nursing bowel and bladder assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident 88 was continent and the recommendation was to assist…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide 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 consistently with professional standards and to ensure staff had coordinated residents' care with the dialysis center for one of five sampled residents (Resident 53) receiving 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 center was not properly coordinated when dialysis communication records (DCR) were not completed; 2. Inaccurate access site information and communication with the facility to dialysis center; 3. There was no emergency dialysis kit available in the unit; and 4. The dialysis care plan was not resident- person centered. These failures may affect the quality of dialysis care being provided to the residents. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 53's clinical record indicated she was admitted 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to properly store medication when: 1. One of two medication refrigerators were not within the facility's acceptable temperature range of 36 to 36 degrees Fahrenheit (F); 2. A&D ointments were found at Resident 41 and Resident 43's bedside tables. These failures had the potential for medications to lose their potency and effectiveness when administered to the residents. Findings: 1. Record review of the Temperature Log, on 7/6/21 at 12:31 p.m., for the medication refrigerator in medications room one indicated for the month of May 21 the temperature written on the log was out of range eight times. The form indicated the acceptable range was 36 to 46 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and if outside the range to call maintenance. During observation, interview, and concurrent record review with Unit Manager B (UM B), on 7/6/21 at 12:32 p.m., the UM B confirmed refrigerator temperatures were to be checked by staff twice daily and confirmed medications…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-12 · tag F0801 — isolated
    Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen staff are aware of the process to measure the sanitizer level of the dishwasher, when cook E (KC E) did not dip the test strip in the sanitizer water for the directed length of time. This failure had the potential to cause food-borne illness in the already immune compromised residents. Findings: During an observation and concurrent interview on 7/07/21 at 1:55 p.m., KC E dipped the chlorine test paper in the water of the dishwasher, which contained the chlorine sanitizer, for approximately three seconds, then took it out and compared the color to the insert of the strip container. KC E stated she had the test strip in the water for longer than three seconds. During a review of the direction insert of the test strip container on 7/07/21 at 1:57 p.m., the directions indicated to dip the strip into the solution to be tested, without agitation and compare immediately with the color chart on the label. The directions also indicated Time of Test - one second.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-12 · tag F0813 — isolated
    Have a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
    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 properly store food for one of 24 sampled residents (Resident 74) when a family member brought food from home and the resident did not consume it within one (1) hour after receiving it. This failure had the potential to lead to food-borne illness (an illness caused by food contaminated with bacteria, viruses, parasites, or toxins) and could compromise the medical condition of the resident. Findings: Review of Resident 74's clinical record indicated she had diagnoses including diabetes (increased blood sugar), hypertension (increased blood pressure), dysphagia (difficulty in swallowing) and hyperlipidemia (an abnormal high concentration of fats and lipids in the blood). Review of Resident 74's physician order dated 5/31/21, indicated Resident 74 was on CCHO (controlled carbohydrate) and NAS (no added salt) diet. During an observation and interview with the resident on 7/6/21 at 11:58 a.m., Resident 74 was observed eating food from home and she stated she would also eat the food for dinner. Resident 74 stated…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-12 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolated
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    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 appropriate use of antibiotic (medication for the infection) for one of 24 sampled residents (Resident 66). This failure had the potential for the resident to take unnecessary antibiotics which could lead to resistance to the antibiotic. Findings: Review of Resident 66's clinical record indicated he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), dementia (memory problem), hypertension (increased blood pressure), and a history of falling. Review of Resident 66's surveillance data collection form for urinary tract infection dated 7/1/21, indicated Resident 66 was on Amoxicillin 500 milligrams every eight hours for 10 days. It also indicated Resident 66 had a urine culture on 6/28/21 with invalid results and the criteria for urinary tract infection was not met for the antibiotic. During an interview with the infection preventionist (IP) on 7/721 at 2:26 p.m., she confirmed Resident 66 was 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$51,753 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $51,753 — penalty dated 2025-08-21

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
NGUYEN, NGAIIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 10/27/1999
AOAY, NORIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/03/2024
EIETA, JULIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2017
EVANS, JOYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/14/2025
GUPTA, ATINIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2024
HEDGER, JOSHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/17/2017
LUC, HAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/16/2020
LUCAS, ALETHEAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/08/2023
NGUYEN, ANHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2007
NGUYEN, KYMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2018
PEREZ, ANGELICAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/16/2025
RABARA, ROSANAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2018
TSE, DANIELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2002
VETSA, SUREKHAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 31 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$24.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+6.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.2M
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 82%Medicare 14%Other / private 5%

About 82% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

$428per resident / day
operating cost
$13,002per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$457per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in CA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 555487. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-21, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next