Mount Miguel Covenant Village

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

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.

63.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 151 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 71.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 100 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 32% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 90 beds and averages 75.3 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 15 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.69 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.63 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.81 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 20% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

28 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-29 · 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

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 1) from falling, when Resident 1 was not provided with adequate supervision and appropriate support to prevent an accident. As a result, Resident 1 fell out of bed, sustaining a left finger fracture and subsequent infection. Findings: A review of Resident 1's undated Face Sheet indicated that the resident was admitted to the facility 3/28/25, with diagnoses that included encephalopathy (damage or disease that affects the brain) and dementia (decline in mental ability). An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted on 7/17/25 at 10:33 A.M. The Director of Nursing (DON) stated Resident 1 had an unwitnessed fall on 7/8/25. According to the DON, while CNA 1 and a SNA were changing Resident 1, the wife of Resident 1's roommate informed CNA 1 that her husband was vomiting and needed help. The DON stated CNA 1 left Resident 1's room to get the nurse, leaving Resident 1 alone with the SNA. The DON stated when CNA 1 returned to Resident 1's room with the nurse, Resident 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — pattern
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide Range of Motion (ROM-the extent or limit to which a body part can be moved; the totality of movement a joint is capable of doing. ROM is gauged as passive PROM {needs assistance} or AROM {independent}, exercises for three of four residents .(7, 52, 78), reviewed for Mobility and Positioning. This failure had the potential for Residents 7, 52, and 78 to have a reduction in mobility and flexibility, causing them to become more dependent on staff for activities of daily living. (Cross Reference F641)Findings: 1. Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included cerebral palsy (a brain disorder that affects movement, balance, and posture), per the facility's admission Record. An observation and interview was conducted with Resident 7 on 08/4/25 at 9:07 A.M., in her room. Resident 7 was sitting up in bed, eating breakfast with her left hand. Resident 7's right hand was contracted (a condition 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to practice safe food handling practices in the kitchen when:1. Hot dogs were not discarded by the discard date,2. Bread pudding was not covered before placing in the refrigerator, and3. A hair net was not worn by the cook, and4. Hand washing and glove changes were not made after touching contaminated surfaces during tray line.These failures had the potential for residents to be exposed to food borne illness. Findings:1. During an initial tour of the kitchen, an observation was conducted on 8/4/25 at 8:04 A.M., of one kitchen freezer (labeled #4) with the Registered Dietitian (RD). On the left side of the freezer, on the second shelf was a clear sealed plastic bag containing eight hot dogs. The clear plastic bag was labeled with a discard date of 7/24/25. An interview was conducted with the RD on 8/4/25 at 8:06 A.M. The RD stated the hot dogs should have been thrown away on or before the discard date. The RD stated if the hot dogs were served, they could have caused food borne illness to whoever ate…

  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 before2025-08-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide dignified and person-centered feeding assistance with certified nursing assistants (CNA) observed feeding residents while standing instead of sitting at eye level for two of eight reviewed residents (Resident 60 and 64) who required assistance.This deficient practice placed two residents (Resident 60 and 64) at risk for loss of dignity, reduced quality of mealtime experience, and potential difficulty or discomfort during mealtimes.Findings:1. A review of Resident 60's admission Record indicated Resident 60 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included a history of dementia (a progressive state of decline in mental abilities).A record review of Resident 60's minimum data set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) dated 7/30/25 indicated, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- developed by reviewing the resident's status during the prior seven-day period) score of three points out of 15…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately code a hospice resident's limitation in range of motion (ROM) for the upper extremities on the Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment tool) for one of four residents reviewed with hand contractures. As a result, inaccurate information was sent to the federal database and placed Resident 78 at risk for inaccurate care planning and avoidable decline in functional mobility.Cross Reference F688 Findings:Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately code a hospice resident's limitation in range of motion (ROM) for the upper extremities on the Minimum Data Set (MDS- a federally mandated resident assessment tool) for one of four residents reviewed with hand contractures. As a result, inaccurate information was sent to the federal database and placed Resident 78 at risk for inaccurate care planning and avoidable decline in functional mobility.Cross Reference F688Findings:A…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess and treat multiple skin abrasions and scabs for one of one residents reviewed for skin conditions (Resident 35). This failure had the potential to result in delayed provision of care and treatment for Resident 36's skin condition.Findings:Resident 35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include a history of falling, per the Face Sheet. A concurrent observation and interview was conducted with Resident 35 on 8/4/25 at 2:20 P.M. Resident 35 was in bed, with his arms exposed. A large reddened area, approximately two inches wide by six inches wide was visible on his left forearm. A large scab was on Resident 35's right hand, on the webbing between the thumb and index finger. Several more abrasions and bruises were observed along both arms. The skin on both of Resident 35's arms was dry and flaky. A single square dressing, approximately two inches by two inches was hanging loosely from the scab on the right hand. 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 · Dcited before2025-08-07 · 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 1. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess, monitor and provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents for three of four residents (Resident 15, 21 and 60) reviewed for falls when:1. Resident 15 was not reassessed for fall risk following a fall, 2. Resident 21 was not accurately reassessed for fall risk following a fall, and,3. Resident 60 was left unsupervised in the facility dining room.This deficient practice placed residents with fall risks for potential accidents with recurrent falls, injuries and further health decline.Findings:1. Resident 15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include unsteadiness on feet and history of falling, per a facility Face Sheet.An observation of Resident 15 was conducted on 8/4/25 at 9:45 A.M. Resident 15 was in bed and did not respond to questions asked.A record review was conducted on 8/5/25.Resident 15's Staff Assessment for Mental Status (an assessment conducted when the resident cannot respond to interview…

  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 · D2025-08-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent. The facility's medication error rate was 10.71%. Three medication errors were observed, a total of 28 opportunities during the medication administration process for one of three randomly observed residents (Residents 22, 75 and 76)As a result, the facility could not ensure medications were correctly administered to all residents.Findings:On 8/6/25 at 8:03 A.M., an observation of medication administration was conducted with Licensed Nurse (LN) 1. LN 1 prepared and administered medication to Resident 76. Eight pills or capsules were administered.A record review was conducted on 8/6/25. Resident 76 had a physician's order for the following medications:Artificial Tears 1%00.2%-0.2% eye drops, three times daily,Artificial Eye Lubricant 83%-15% ointment both eyes daily, andbudesonide 0.5 milligrams/2 milliliters suspension for nebulization inhalation (an inhaler for breathing problems)…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · 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 ensure foods in a residents' personal food refrigerator (located in the resident dining room) were labeled and dated with the discard date, per facility policy.This failure had the potential for residents to experience food borne illness. Findings:An observation and interview was conducted with Licensed Nurse 1 (LN 1) on 8/4/25 at 12:02 P.M., of the residents' personal food refrigerator located in a resident dining room. The refrigerator contained a large clear plastic zip-lock baggie, with two cupcakes inside. One cupcake was green with white frosting and the other cupcake was yellow with white frosting. The clear plastic bag had no label to indicate which resident the cupcakes belonged to, or the date the cupcakes were placed in the refrigerator. LN 1 stated, the food should be labeled and dated, because no one knows who it belongs to or how long it has been in the refrigerator. LN 1 stated the cupcakes might be old and someone could get sick if the food was not discarded within three days. An interview was…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control practices for one of eight residents (Resident 58) reviewed by not promptly removing a used meal tray that was left within reach of other residents in the dining room.This deficient practice placed all residents using the dining room at risk for exposure to germs that could cause illness, choking hazards, and potential allergic reactions from consuming food that was not theirs.Findings: On 8/4/2025 at 12:02 P.M., an observation for dining was conducted in the Valley View dining room. Resident 58 was observed sitting on a wheelchair wheeling self towards the hydration cart and grabbed a waffle from a used meal tray that was stored below the hydration cart and ate it.On 8/4/2025 at 12:10 P.M., an interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1, in the Valley View dining room. CNA 1 stated that they (nursing staff) should be checking the dining room and putting away used meal trays that are outside of the dining room. CNA 1 stated residents in the Valley View nursing…

  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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to COVENANT LIVING — 15 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in CA