Crestwood Manor - 104
1130 Monaco Court, Stockton, CA 95207 · For profit - Corporation · 190 certified beds · (209) 478-2060 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (10% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its facility-reported quality-measure 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 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 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 9.9% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.6% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.9% | 1.2% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.2% | 7.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.9% | 1.6% | 3.3% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.7% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 27.5% | 13.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.9% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.6% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.3% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.0% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.5% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.91 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.03 | 1.57 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 190 beds and averages 175.2 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 15 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 6.26 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 4.53 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 5.80 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.44 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 10% 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
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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-13 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect residents' right to be free from physical abuse (causing bodily harm, pain, or impairment, such as hitting, slapping, or pushing) for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 2, and Resident 3) when:Resident 1 had a physical altercation (a fight between residents) with Resident 2 on 9/6/25, during which Resident 1 hit Resident 2 on the head with a belt; and,Resident 3 had a physical altercation with Resident 4 in Resident 3's bathroom on 9/3/25, after Resident 4 used Resident 3's bathroom without permission and hit Resident 3 in the face with a closed fist.These failures resulted in Resident 2 sustaining a skin tear to the top of his head and resulted in Resident 3 falling to the floor on her left side after being struck resulting in swelling and discoloration to her left eyebrow and left side of her lip as well as Resident 3 stated feelings of being scared of Resident 4.Findings:1. Review of Resident 1's admission RECORD, indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement care planned interventions (a written plan that guides staff on the resident's care, needs, and services) to provide continued psychosocial support (emotional and mental well-being care) for one of three residents (Resident 3) when Resident 3 was assaulted by another resident on 9/3/25 and the care plan indicated Social Services would follow up with Resident 3 once a week for ninety days, but the follow up was not implemented.This failure resulted in Resident 3 expressing fear of the resident who assaulted her and placed Resident 3 at risk for unmet psychosocial needs (the interaction between an individual's thoughts, emotions, behavior, and their social environment), increased anxiety, and delayed identification of emotional distress following the assault.Findings:Review of Resident 3's admission RECORD, indicated Resident 3 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder (mental illness with mood problems and altered thinking), parkinsonism (movement disorders…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) from physical abuse when Resident 2, who had a known history of assaultive, destructive, and intrusive behaviors entered Resident 1's personal space and smeared feces on Resident 1's face on 11/19/25.This failure resulted in Resident 1 experiencing unwanted physical contact with feces, which placed Resident 1 at risk for loss of dignity, psychosocial (emotional and social well-being including how a person feels, thinks, and interacts with others) harm, and potential exposure to infection, and placed other vulnerable residents in the facility at risk for abuse. Findings:Review of Resident 1's ADMISSON RECORD indicated, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder (a chronic mental health condition combining schizophrenia symptoms (hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thinking) with mood disorder symptoms (mania or depression)), bipolar type (a mental health condition that causes mood swings with hallucinations…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a care plan for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when, Resident 1 did not continue to walk in the corridor out of fear of falling and no care plan was developed to address Resident 1's fear of falling and refusal to walk. This failure placed Resident 1 at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to include interventions which could result in a physical decline.Findings: Review of Resident 1's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care plan, initiated on 10/4/21 and last revised on 9/9/25, in the section Focus, indicated, .the resident has an ADL self-care performance deficit. In the section titled Goal, indicated, .Resident will remain current level of physical function through review date. Review of Resident 1's fall risk care plan, initiated on 10/4/21 and revised last on 9/9/25, in the section titled Focus, indicated, .The resident is at risk for falls.6/23/25: Resident had unwitnessed fall in bathroom…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-18 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) was provided services to maintain the ability to carry out an activity of daily living (ADL's), specifically mobility (walking) when, staff did not consistently document an attempt to walk Resident 1 or a refusal, staff did not always walk with Resident 1 with supervision as recommended according to the documentation, and a care plan with interventions (actions nursing staff and others take to help a resident reach their health goals and improve outcomes) was not created regarding Resident 1's fear of falling. This failure had the potential to result in the decline in Resident 1's ability to ambulate, from Resident 1 being able to ambulate independently for 10 to 50 feet on 6/11/25 according to Resident 1's quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set, an assessment tool), to the activity of ambulation not occurring on Resident 1's next quarterly MDS, dated [DATE]. Findings:Review of Resident 1's fall risk care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure foods were stored, prepared, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service for 176 residents who ate facility prepared meals when: 1. Red onions were found to have mold (a type of fungus that grows in moist environments); and 2. Food products lacked an open date, complete labeling, and/or expiration dates on labels; and 3. Walk-in freezer found with ice buildup; and 4. Washed items were stacked and stored wet; and 5. Fixed can opener had visible food particles and metal worn off the cutting tip, had worn/missing metal on the base, and metal shavings were located on ledge behind the cutting tip; and 6. Coffee cups and pitchers found to be discolored and/or deglazed (no longer having a finished surface), and cutting boards found with deep gouges on both sides; and 7. Fruit and vegetable preparation sink and ice machine lacked an air gap (backflow prevention system that prevents contaminated water from re-entering the sink or ice machine). These failures had the potential to put…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-25 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 4 of 39 sampled residents (Resident 119, Resident 19, Resident 106 and Resident 80) had their rights related to treatment choices known and protected when: 1. Resident 119's signed Advance Directive (a legal document indicating resident preference on end-of-life treatment decisions) documentation was not found in the chart; 2. Resident 19 wanted to formulate an Advance Directive and no follow-up documentation was found in the chart; 3. Resident 106's chart did not contain documentation regarding Advance Directive discussion; and 4. Resident 80's code status (a medical directive that specifies what actions medical professionals should take in the event of a life-threatening emergency) was not found in both the electronic health record (EHR) and physical chart. These failures had the potential to result in not determining and/or honoring the residents' wishes related to the provision of medical treatment and health care services when the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-25 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a healthy nutrition status for two residents (Resident 140 and Resident 126) when: 1. Resident 140's weight was not maintained when an 8 pound (#)/5.8% weight loss occurred in one month; and, 2. Resident 126 was not offered a replacement lunch meal in a timely manner. These failures had the potential for leading to malnutrition, nutrient deficiencies, loss of muscle mass and independence, and increased susceptibility to illness for Resident 140, and had the potential for Resident 126 to experience food insecurity, negatively affecting Resident 126's health and well-being. Findings: 1. During an observation of the lunch meal service on 4/23/25 at 12:17 p.m. with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), Resident 140's meal tray was noted to contain both a shake and an oral supplemental drink, in addition to puréed food. The DS stated resident 140 had a history of poor intake and meal refusals with the nursing staff reporting that the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-25 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a vegetarian (a person who does not eat meat, and sometimes other animal products) menu for the four residents for which a vegetarian diet had been ordered (Residents 30, 99, 129, and 165). This failure had the potential for leading to weight loss and nutrient deficiencies for those residents avoiding animal products. Findings: During an interview with the Dietary Assistant Supervisor (DAS) on 4/22/25 at 8:24 a.m., in the kitchen, facility offered diets were discussed. The DAS stated that the facility did not offer a vegetarian menu, and that they would serve fruit and cottage cheese to those avoiding animal products. During a concurrent observation and interview in the kitchen during the lunch preparation on 4/23/25 at 10:18 a.m., [NAME] 1 stated that residents on a vegetarian diet would get the Manicotti that day since the main entrée was without meat, but fruit and cottage cheese would be provided for other meals when meat 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper and safe infection prevention practices were implemented and followed for a resident census of 176 when: 1. There was no separation between clean area and dirty area in three of three utility rooms observed. 2. A bucket stocked with clean supplies, used for insulin (a drug used to treat blood sugar disease) administration and blood sugar measurement, were taken inside residents' room without consideration for risk of contamination. 3. Drug administration platform inside the medicine cart was not cleaned with brownish residues. 4. The pill cutter stored in medication cart had white powder-like residue inside the lid. 5. Kitchen swamp cooler vent covers had peeling paint with dust and debris above food preparation areas. These failures had the potential to place the residents at risk for developing an infection and the potential to result in transmission of infection in the facility. Findings: 1a. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/23/25, at 4:13 p.m. with the Infection…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure services provided met professional standards when facility did not provide drug information resources as reference for nursing staff. This failure could contribute to unsafe use of medication and nursing ability to provide quality care to the residents. Findings: During an interview and concurrent record review on 4/24/25, at 1:54 p.m., Licensed Nurse (LN) 2 stated they did not have drug information resources (a drug book or in computer) to look up how to administer Linzess medication (a prescription medication used to treat complicated constipation). LN 2 further stated she was not aware of manufacturer specification to give Linzess on empty stomach 30 minutes before meals. LN 2 stated she was not aware of a drug information book or online drug information via internet that was used in the facility. During an interview on 4/24/25, at 2:03 p.m., Licensed Psychiatric Technician (LPT) 1 stated it would have been nice if MAR (Medication Administration Record, a record that listed drugs to be administered) had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident 39), in a sample of 39 residents, received accurate post fall and comprehensive fall assessments. This failure potentially resulted in Resident 39's subsequent fall 14 days later, negatively impacting Resident 39's health and well-being. Findings: A review of Resident 39's clinical record titled, admission RECORD, indicated Resident 39 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included convulsions (a sudden, involuntary contraction or series of contractions of the muscles, often involving shaking or jerking movements). During a concurrent interview and record review of Resident 39's clinical record, with Licensed Nurse (LN) 3, on 4/25/25, at 9:30 AM, LN 3 confirmed the following clinical documents were filled out incorrectly for Resident 39: Fall Risk Assessment, dated 11/8/24, indicted, in Section H, . PREDISPOSING FACTORS . Seizures . NONE PRESENT . contrary to Resident 39's admission RECORD, which indicated Resident 39 did have a history of seizures. Fall Risk Assessment, dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-25 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate pain management, and develop and implement a resident centered care plan (tool that outlines the plan of action that will be implemented during a resident's care) for 1 of 39 sampled residents (Resident 22) when: 1. The pain management services was not adequately provided to Resident 22; and, 2. The facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for pain for resident 22. These failures led to Resident 22 experiencing unnecessary pain that potentially affected his physical and psychosocial well-being. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 22's clinical record, admission RECORD, indicated Resident was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including, but not limited to, chronic embolism and thrombosis (long-standing blood clots in the deep veins of the legs, often causing leg pain and swelling) of unspecified deep veins of lower extremity, bilateral. During an interview in Resident 22's room, on 4/22/25 11:37 a.m., and again on 04/23/25 09:16 a.m., Resident 22…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure safe medication use practices in three out of 39 sampled residents (Resident 134, Resident 19 and Resident 160) when: 1. Resident 134's long term use of a medication called Protonix (or pantoprazole, belongs to a class of drugs called Proton Pump Inhibitor [PPI], a type of medication that reduces the amount of acid stomach produces) was not re-assessed or evaluated for continued use based on standards of practice and Food and Drug Administration's (FDA, a federal agency responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of drugs) risk warnings on long term use of PPI's. 2. Resident 19's and 160's diabetic (a disease of unregulated blood sugar) medication including insulin (medication given as injection under skin to control high blood sugar) use did not have safe monitoring parameters for blood sugar levels changes. These failed practices had potential to contribute to unsafe medication use and affect…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe medication administration practices when medication error rate was more than 5% (% or percentage- number or ratio that expressed as a fraction of 100) with resident census of 176. Medication administration observations were conducted over multiple days, at varied times, in random locations throughout the facility. The facility had a total of three errors out of 32 opportunities which resulted in a facility wide medication error rate of 9.37% in 3 out of 13 residents (Resident 111, Resident 21 and Resident 163) observed for medication administration as follow: 1. Resident 111's eye drop administration did not follow standards of practice on ophthalmic (eye) drug medication administration. 2. Resident 21's Linzess (a medication used to treat bowl motility and promotion of bowel movement) was given after morning breakfast against manufacturer specification to be given before meal and on an empty stomach. 3. Resident 163's Blood Pressure (BP, the force of blood pushing against the walls of arteries as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure safe medication storage and labeling practices in three out of three medication rooms and one out of 4 medication carts when: 1. Unlabeled and discontinued medications were stored in active storage areas in the medication rooms at Station 2 and Station 3. 2. Hazardous (drugs known to pose a health risk to healthcare workers due to their toxic properties upon skin contact) liquid medication with spills on the outer body of the medication bottle was stored in medication cart A at Station 3. 3. The pre-pour medication bins were observed to have sticky looking brownish spills in the top drawer of medication cart B at Station 1. 4. Supplies and discontinued medications were stored under the sink in medication rooms at station 1 and Station 2. 5. The refrigerator temperature upon inspection was above the temperature range listed on the temperature log for Station 2. These failed practices could contribute to unsafe medication use,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ddisputed · IDR2024-08-20 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) was permitted to return to the facility after Resident 1 was transferred from the facility to an acute care facility (hospital) for stabilization. This failure resulted in Resident 1 being held in a temporary facility (acute care) for five days and not returning to the facility she had been at for nearly nine months, which could have resulted in emotional distress. Findings: A review of Resident 1 ' s clinical record titled, admission Record (a document that contained the resident ' s demographic information), indicated Resident 1 ' s diagnoses included Schizophrenia (a serious mental health condition that affected how people think, feel, and behave) and an anxiety (worried) disorder. A review of Resident 1 ' s clinical record titled, Progress Notes, dated 8/17/24, at 1:00 p.m., by the Psychiatric Technician (PT), indicated Resident 1 showed signs of aggression toward staff and lorazepam (anti-anxiety medication) was administered to Resident 1 via an intramuscular (IM - in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-23 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — patternProvide or obtain dental services for each 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 residents received dental services for 2 of 35 sampled residents (Resident 166 and Resident 75), when: 1. Dental services were not provided for Resident 166; and, 2. Dental recommendations were not followed up on for Resident 75. These failures resulted in Resident 166 and Resident 75 not obtaining dental services and had the potential to cause health complications for Resident 166 and Resident 75. Findings: 1. A Review of Resident 166's admission Record indicated Resident 166 was admitted to the facility in September of 2023 with multiple diagnoses including disturbances of salivary secretions (a combination of signs and symptoms associated with a decrease in the secretion of saliva). During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/20/24, at 3:30 PM, Resident 166 stated he had not been seen by a dentist since being in the facility. Resident 166 stated, while pointing to his upper gum, that two of his teeth were gone and one tooth had something stuck in it. Resident 166's mouth was observed to have…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-23 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one unsampled resident (Resident 19) was treated with dignity and respect when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2 stood over Resident 19 while assisting her with her lunch meal on 5/20/24. This failure had the potential for CNA 2 to miss a choking event and result in a loss of dignity for Resident 19. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/20/23, at 12:31 p.m., in the large dining room located in Station one, CNA 2 was standing next to Resident 19 while assisting her with her meal. CNA 2 stated Resident 19 needed assistance and supervison with her meals. CNA 2 confirmed she should have been sitting next to Resident 19 while assisting her with her meal, not standing. CNA 2 stated, I forgot. A review of Resident 19's care plan, revised 3/4/24, indicated, .[Resident 19] has .self-care performance deficit r/t [related to] Dementia [impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions], left hand contracture [inability to straighten fingers and wrist], and Schizophrenia [affects 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each 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 1 of 35 sampled residents (Resident 141)'s needs were met when his call light was found on the floor and not within reach. This failure could have resulted in a fall, injury, and/or immediate needs not being met for Resident 141. Findings: A review of Resident 141's clinical record titled, admission Record, indicated Resident 141's diagnoses included ataxia (loss of coordination and muscle control in arms and legs - leading to a lack of balance and trouble walking). A review of Resident 141's clinical record titled, Fall Risk Assessment, dated 5/13/24, indicated Resident 141 received a score of 10 (high fall risk), due to factors that included low blood pressure (can cause dizziness), unstable gait (a person's manner of walking), being chair bound, balance problems, required use of wheelchair, and was on medications that increased the risk for falls. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/20/24, at 10:48 a.m., with the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1, Resident 141's call light 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 an evaluation or assessment was documented in the medical record for 1 of 35 sampled residents (Resident 75) when the use of a lap buddy (a device used to secure a resident in a seated position in a wheelchair) was initiated on 10/13/21, after multiple falls, without a documented initial evaluation for its use, or documented assessments for continued use of the lap buddy for Resident 75. These failures resulted in Resident 75 never being assessesed for a device that could potentially be a restraint. Findings: During an observation on 5/21/24, at 7:40 a.m., Resident 75 was observed sitting in Station one's large dining room in a wheelchair with a lap buddy secured across her lap. During an observation on 5/22/24, at 4:26 p.m., Resident 75 was observed sitting in Station one's activity room in a wheelchair with a lap buddy secured across her lap. During an interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 4 on 5/22/24, at 4:40 p.m., CNA 4 stated Resident 75's lap buddy was used every time she was in her…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's assessment was completed accurately for one of 35 sampled residents (Resident 166) when Resident 166's comprehensive assessment did not accurately reflect his dental condition. This failure increased the potential for a delay in dental care services. Findings: Review of Resident 166's admission Record indicated Resident 166 was admitted to the facility in September 2023 with multiple diagnoses including disturbances of salivary secretions (a combination of signs and symptoms associated with a decrease in the secretion of saliva). During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/20/24, at 3:30 PM, Resident 166 stated he had not been seen by a dentist while in the facility. Resident 166 stated, while pointing to his upper gum, that two of his teeth were gone and one tooth had something stuck in it. Resident 166's mouth was observed to have two missing teeth on his left upper jaw, and the first upper tooth (molar) on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-23 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure necessary care and services were provided to 1 of 35 sampled residents (Resident 166), when Resident 166 did not have oral hygiene supplies and did not receive oral hygiene from staff. This failure resulted in poor oral hygiene and had the potential to cause health complications for Resident 166. Findings: Review of Resident 166's admission Record indicated Resident 166 was admitted to the facility in September of 2023 with multiple diagnoses including disturbances of salivary secretions (a combination of signs and symptoms associated with a decrease in the secretion of saliva). During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/20/24, at 3:30 PM, Resident 166 stated, while pointing to his upper gum, that two of his teeth were gone and one tooth had something stuck in it. Resident 166's mouth was observed to have two missing teeth on his left upper jaw, and the first upper tooth (molar) on the right side was black and broken. Resident 166 stated it was hard to chew his food and took longer to chew his…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 35 sampled residents (Resident 75 and Resident 141) were free from potential accidents and injury when: 1. A fall mat (a soft mat laid on the floor to cushion a fall) was not laid on the floor while Resident 75 was in bed on 5/21/24 per Resident 75's care plan; and, 2. Resident 141's bed side rails (metal rail attached to the sides of the bed that could be used for assistance with repositioning) was left in an unsafe position (sticking out from the bed at the floor level). Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview with Licensed Nurse (LN) 4 on 5/21/24, at 8:52 a.m., Resident 75 was observed lying in bed asleep with her fall mat folded up and positioned upright next to Resident 75's nightstand. LN 4 confirmed Resident 75's fall mat was not laid out on the floor next to Resident 75's bed and stated the risks for not implementing the fall mat included a fall with injury that could lead to death. During a concurrent interview and record review with LN 1 on 5/23/24, at 10:47 a.m.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-14 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse by a resident when Resident 2 punched Resident 1 in the nose with a closed fist on [DATE], which caused Resident 1's nose to bleed. This failure caused Resident 1 to experience emotional distress and a physical injury. Findings: A review of Resident 1's face sheet (include's the patient's name, address, date of birth , insurance information, diagnoses, and emergency contact information) revealed a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type (seeing and hearing things that are not reality, depression, and episodes of hyper activity). A review of Resident 1's nurse's progress note, dated [DATE], indicated [Resident 1] attempting to go to the bathroom, demanded roommate to get off the toilet so he could go. [Resident 2] upset and punched [Resident 1] in the face in bathroom both residents share. [Resident 1] had slight bleeding from nose, ice pack applied at nurses station and kept at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-05-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly store, label, and prepare food in accordance with the professional standards for food service safety for 177 of 177 residents who received food from the facility kitchen, when: 1. One jug of lemonade, one jug of cranberry juice and one jug of tea in the kitchen refrigerator were available for use after the labeled use by date, and one expired bread bag with five whole wheat breads was available to use on the bread rack in the kitchen; 2. Four bags with 12 burger buns in each bag on the bread rack were not dated when taken out of the freezer and 13 boxes with 24 ice cream cups per box in the kitchen freezer were not labeled with a received date and use by date; 3. The kitchen thermometer was not calibrated weekly; 4. Expired test strips were used to test dishwasher solution; 5. Wet dishes were stacked together; 6. The ice machine filter was not changed annually; 7. One sherbet ice cream in the freezer at nurses' station 1, six vanilla ice creams in the freezer at nurses' station 2 and three sherbet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-05-05 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep 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 maintain kitchen equipment in a clean and safe manner, when four ovens had baked-on grease and food. This failure had the potential to cause a fire, food contamination and health hazards. Findings: During the initial kitchen tour with Assistant Dietary Services Supervisor (ADSS) 1 on 5/2/23, at 8:51 a.m., double wall ovens and two under range ovens were not clean, had baked-on dark brown grease and food on the racks, oven doors and on the bottom of the ovens. During a continued initial kitchen tour with the Dietary Services Supervisor (DSS) on 5/2/23, at 10:17 a.m., the DSS confirmed all four ovens were not clean and had baked-on grease and food. The DSS stated, That's dirty. The DSS stated ovens were cleaned weekly on Tuesdays. The DSS verified the oven cleaning task was not on the daily cleaning schedule for today (Tuesday). The DSS stated he could not find a cleaning log for the ovens. The DSS stated he did not know when the ovens were last cleaned. During an interview on 5/5/23, at 10:53 a.m., the DSS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-05 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 acceptable parameters of nutritional and hydration status for 2 of 36 sampled residents (Resident 119 and Resident 174) when: 1. Resident 119's order to be fed by staff and nutritional care plan was not followed; and, 2. Resident 174's fluid intake was not monitored. These failures had the potential to cause further weight loss for Resident 119 and risk for dehydration for Resident 174; with the potential for a decline in each residents' physical health and functional status. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 119's admission Record indicated Resident 119 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses which included abnormal weight loss and adult failure to thrive (a decline in adults that involves weight loss, decreased appetite, and poor nutrition). According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) dated 4/14/23, Resident 119 required extensive assistance for her activities of daily living including eating. A review of Resident 119's electronic health record, titled, Progress Notes,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-05 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe medication administration practices for a census of 177, when the medication error rate was over 5% (% or percentage was a fraction of a number out of 100) during medication administration. The calculated medication error rate was 10.71%. Medication observations were conducted over multiple days, at varied times, in random locations throughout the facility. 1a. Licensed nurse administered a topical prescription medication to Resident 42 when it belonged to, and was labeled for Resident 70. 1b. Licensed staff pre-poured 10 medications for Resident 54 and: i. documented the administration 40 minutes after it was given, ii. did not follow the doctor's order and manufacturer instruction during medication administration of Zyprexa Zydis (Olanzapine, a mind altering/calming medication) iii. medications names or purpose were not explained to Resident 54. 1c. Licensed staff pre-poured medications for Resident 164 and, i. documented the drug administration 40 minutes after it was given, ii. a sleep…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-05 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe medication storage practices when: 1. Expired medications were found in one of three medication rooms (Medication room Unit 2). 2. Multiple unopened injectable medication called Ozempic (diabetic drug in a pen-style injection delivery system) labeled, Refrigerate Until Opened, were stored at room temperature in a storage area in one out of three medication rooms (Medication room Unit 1). 3a. Food items were stored along with medications in three of three medication room refrigerators (located in Unit 1, Unit 2, and Unit 3), where refrigerated ophthalmic (for eyes), oral, and injectable medications were kept in a storage container inside each refrigerator. 3b. Twice daily temperature monitoring was not completed of a refrigerator located in the Director of Nursing (DON) office which contained vaccine products, and the vaccine product temperature was not monitored twice daily. 4. A hazardous liquid medication called valproic acid (a medication used to treat mood and seizure) was stored in two out of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to treat one of thirty six sampled residents (Resident 174) with dignity and respect when his request for drinking fluids was not honored. This failure had the potential to cause emotional distress and dehydration for Resident 174. Findings: Review of the admission Record indicated Resident 174 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with multiple diagnoses including abnormalities of gait and mobility. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/2/23 at 10:42 a.m., Resident 174 stated one of his concerns was not getting enough fluids to drink. There was no water or fluid available at his bedside. During an interview on 5/3/23 at 8:42 a.m., Licensed Nurse (LN) 12 stated water pitchers were not kept at residents' bedsides due to behaviors and safety risk. LN 12 stated water was available at the nurses' station and was provided to the residents upon request. LN 12 added residents were provided fluids with meals and nourishments each shift. LN 12 further stated fluids were also offered to residents during…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-05 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure daily quality control monitoring was completed for one of three glucometer devices in facility's Station 3. This failure had the potential for a resident to receive an inaccurate blood glucose test result and an incorrect amount of blood glucose medication. Findings: During concurrent observation and interview on 5/4/23, at 11:32 a.m., in Unit 3 hallway, Licensed Psychiatric Technician (LPT) 2 received permission to enter Resident 96's room for a scheduled blood glucose test (a measurement of blood sugar). LPT 2 used a lancet (a small device with a sharp point used to sample blood from a finger) to obtain a blood sample from Resident 96. LPT 2 then used a test strip (a small disposable plastic strip used to collect a drop of blood) to collect the blood sample from Resident 96's finger. LPT 2 inserted the strip into the glucometer (a small handheld device that measures blood sugar levels), and stated the glucometer was not working properly. LPT 2 stated she would return to the Unit 3 medication room 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-05 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure high-risk blood thinning medication (medications with bleeding risk) monitoring was completed on a daily basis for two of the five sampled residents (Resident 33 and Resident 69). This failure had the potential to result in undetected adverse effects that could occur when blood thinning medications were administered. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 33's medical record, titled Medication Administration Record (or MAR, a legal document in medical records that listed medications use and monitoring), dated 5/2023, the MAR indicated Resident 33 received apixaban (also known as Eliquis, a blood thinning medication) 2.5mg (mg-a unit of weight) by mouth two times per day for DVT (Deep Vein Thrombosis, or blood clot) since 2/1/23. Further review of the MAR did not show any apixaban side effects (or adverse effect of the blood thinner medication such as bleeding or bruises) to watch for, or documentation of monitoring performed. During a review of Resident 33's care plan (a document containing a record of health…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 maintain a safe and sanitary environment for a census of 177 when water drainage (the system or process by which water or other liquids are drained from a place) from the washing machines was overflowing into the laundry area. This failure had the potential for clean laundry to be contaminated and increased the risk of infection for residents in the facility. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/4/23, at 10:58 a.m., with the Laundry Aide (LA) in the laundry area, the LA confirmed water was overflowing from the drainage area behind the running washing machines. The LA stated water overflowed from the drainage when all three washing machines were running at the same time. The LA further stated water overflow was happening every day and laundry staff was mopping the floor two to three times a day. LA explained the maintenance supervisor was aware of the overflow. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/4/23, at 1:49 p.m., the Maintenance Supervisor (MS) confirmed water 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.
“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.
“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in CA
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 05A340. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-25, 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.