Temecula Healthcare Center
44280 Campanula Way, Temecula, CA 92592 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 115 certified beds · (951) 466-0200 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $17,765 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-22)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 6.5% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 10.3% | 4.0% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.7% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 51.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| 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 | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.5% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.0% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.7% | 4.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.9% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.7% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.8% | 23.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 20.5% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.90 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.33 | 1.57 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
56.5% 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 534 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 50.2% 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 213 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 1.13 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 56.5%CMS range 52.1–61.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.1%CMS range 9.1–13.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 50.2% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 43.2% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 42.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 96.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.2% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.5%CMS range 3.8–7.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.28 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 115 beds and averages 111.8 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.86 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.38 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 4.19 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.13 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% 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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Lcited before2024-02-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on document reviews, interviews, review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines/recommendations, and the facility policy, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to prevent the transmission of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) to staff and residents on 4 of 4 units. Specifically, the facility failed to conduct contact tracing (identification and monitoring of individuals who have been exposed to a disease to prevent further spread) for staff during an outbreak of COVID-19. The facility determined usage of N95 respirators (source control) negated the CDC recommendation/guidelines for testing individuals' exposure to COVID-19. Subsequently, the facility failed to test all residents and staff who had been in close contact with others who had COVID-19. The facility further failed to conduct broad-based COVID-19 testing when contact tracing failed to halt transmission of COVID-19 per the facility's policy. The failed practices had the potential to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-25 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
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 effective discharge planning when the facility did not provide caregiver training on the necessary care required by Resident 1 prior to discharge on [DATE].This failure had the potential to cause anxiety to the resident and the resident's caregiver which could lead to inadequate home care and possible rehospitalization. Findings: A review of Resident 1's admission Record dated February 19, 2026, indicated an admission date of January 12, 2026, with diagnoses which included hypertensive heart disease with heart failure (long term high blood pressure has damaged the heart so it cannot pump blood as well as it should) and morbid obesity (extremely overweight). A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) dated February 13, 2026, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (an assessment tool for cognitive functioning) score of 14 (cognitively intact). A review of Resident 1's MDS Section GG dated January 19, 2026,…
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 before2026-03-25 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the resident or resident representative, and the Ombudsman with a new written notice of proposed transfer or discharge when a resident originally scheduled for discharge to home was instead discharged to a board and care facility. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 1 and his representative not receiving adequate notification of the change in discharge destination, nor the opportunity to appeal, potentially impacting their rights and the discharge process. Additionally, the Ombudsman not receiving the new proposed discharged notice led to a missed opportunity for the Ombudsman to advocate for the resident's safe discharge.Findings: A review of Resident 1's admission Record dated February 19, 2026, indicated an admission date of January 12, 2026, with diagnoses which included hypertensive heart disease with heart failure (long term high blood pressure has damaged the heart so it cannot pump blood as well as it should) and morbid obesity (extremely overweight). A review of Resident 1's physician…
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 before2026-03-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure an alleged incident of physical abuse involving two of seven residents reviewed (Resident 1 and Resident 2), was reported to the state survey agency (SSA) within two hours of the incident. On January 4, 2026, Resident 1 was observed pushing Resident 2, who subsequently claimed to have been choked by Resident 1. The alleged physical abuse occurred on January 4, 2026, at 6:30 p.m., and was not reported to the SSA until 9:15 a.m., on January 5, 2026.This failure had the potential for further abuse and a delay in the investigation of the event.Findings:On January 27, 2026, at 11:22 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility was conducted to investigate allegations of abuse. A review of Resident 1's (alleged perpetrator) admission record indicated the resident was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses which included peripheral vascular disease (PVD - condition in which arteries outside the heart become narrowed or blocked), anxiety disorder, (a chronic…
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 before2026-03-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure for one of seven residents (Resident 3), that the correct laboratory test was carried out and completed. The physician ordered a stool culture for C-diff (a highly sensitive, specialized laboratory test used to detect the presence of Clostridioides difficile bacteria in feces, usually in patients with persistent, antibiotic diarrhea); however the facility carried out a stool culture (a laboratory test that detects disease-causing bacteria, viruses, or fungi in a stool sample to diagnose infections causing diarrhea, fever, or abdominal pain). This failure had resulted in undiagnosed and untreated underlying cause of diarrhea leading to Resident 3 to continuously experience diarrhea until December 31, 2025. This ongoing condition substantially contributed to an elevated white blood cells (WBC-essential immune system cells produced in the bone marrow that protect the body against infections, viruses, and foreign invaders) count of 36.91(normal…
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 before2025-12-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice for ostomy care were provided to one of three sampled residents (Resident 2), when the Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN 1) used a wound cleanser ([NAME] Dermal Wound Cleanser) containing sorbitol (a sugar alcohol) to cleanse the peristomal skin (the area of skin around a stoma [opening] for a colostomy [a surgical procedure that creates an opening in the abdomen connecting part of the large intestine [colon] to the outside of the body, allowing stool and gas to exit through it into a collection bag). This failure caused Resident 2 to suffer pain and had the potential to irritate and damage fragile peristomal skin. Findings:On December 10, 2025, at 10:07 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility on a complaint and Facility Reported Incident were initiated. A review of Resident 2's medical records indicated the resident was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of encounter for surgical aftercare…
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 before2025-09-23 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure use of the Hoyer lift (a portable total patient lifting tool to assist in transferring patients in and out of bed) was operated with two persons for one of four residents (Resident 1). This failure placed Resident 1 at risk for falls and physical injury due to lack of adequate staff support during mechanical lift transfer. Findings:On September 9, 2025, at 2:12 p.m., observed the Physical Therapist (PT) operating the Hoyer lift to transfer Resident 1 from bed to wheelchair without a second staff member assisting. The PT roll the Hoyer lift over towards the wheelchair, with Resident 1 in the Hoyer lift. On September 9, 2025, at 2:17 p.m., during an interview with the CNA, the CNA stated that the Hoyer lift was to be used with two people to ensure resident safety. On September 9, 2025, at 2:51 p.m., during an interview with the PT, the PT stated that Resident 1 required maximum assistance for bed transfers. The PT stated that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-23 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation of an incident for one of four sampled residents (Resident 3), when the facility did not document a verbal altercation and related behaviors in the medical record.This failure had the potential for events to go unreported, increasing the recurrence, inadequate monitoring, and poor resident outcomes.Findings:On September 9, 2025, at 11:13 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility was conducted to investigate an allegation of abuse.A review of Resident 3's medical records indicated resident was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of monoplegia, (paralysis restricted to one limb or region of the body), of lower limb following cerebral infarction, (stroke), affecting left non-dominant side.A review of Resident 3's History and Physical dated June 28, 2025, indicated .doing well overall. In goodspirits (sic).A review of Resident 4's medical records indicated resident was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses 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 before2025-04-30 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an injury of unknown origin involving one of five residents, (Resident 2) was reported to the State Survey Agency, (SSA), within two hours. Resident 2 was found by staff on April 22, 2025, visibly distressed, and verbally expressing severe pain with a bleeding wound on the right posterior scalp, which the resident could not explain the cause. This failure had the potential for a delay in the SSA investigation, which could result in missed opportunities for safety improvement and implementation of corrective actions. Findings: On April 22, 2025, at 4:38 p.m., the state survey agency received a call from the facility ' s Director of Nursing (DON), to report Resident 2 ' s injury of unknown origin that occurred on April 22, 2025, at approximately 3 a.m. A review of Resident 2 ' s admission record indicated Resident 2 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of displaced (the bone fragments are not properly aligned) intertrochanteric fracture of left…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-30 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 a copy of the discharge notice was sent to the Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman at the same time the notice was provided to one of four sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential for the LTC Ombudsman not to be able to advocate for the resident in protecting their rights from inappropriate transfer and discharge. Findings: On April 30, 2025, at 9:14 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility was initiated to investigate an admission, transfer, and discharge rights concern. A review of Resident 1 ' s History and Physical, dated April 3, 2025, indicated Resident 1 was alert and oriented to person, place, and time. On April 30, 2025, at 10:29 a.m., during an interview, the Social Services Designee (SSD 1) stated that the discharge notice for Resident 1 should be sent to the LTC Ombudsman office at the same time the discharge notice is sent to the resident or the resident representative, which should have been on April 22, 2025, for Resident 1. On April 30, 2025, at 10:54 a.m., 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-17 · 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 safe and sanitary food preparation and storage practices when: 1. One sandwich snack was observed to be expired; 2. One dispensing scoop was left inside the container and not stored outside or on top of the mashed potato powder; 3. The kitchen door located near the garbage container area was left open for 20 minutes; and 4. Three garbage containers did not have covers. These failures had the potential to cause foodborne illness (stomach illness acquired from ingesting contaminated food) among a vulnerable population of 112 out of 115 residents who received food prepared in the facility's kitchen. Findings: 1. On April 13, 2025, at 9:20 a.m., during an initial kitchen observation, with the Assistant Dietary Supervisor (ADS), one peanut butter and jelly sandwich was found in the snacks refrigerator with a label that read Expired on April 9, 2025, readily available. During a concurrent interview with the ADS, the ADS stated the sandwich was prepared on April 6, 2025, and should have been discarded 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.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-17 · 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, 11 of 14 residents reviewed for Advance Directive (AD - written statement of a person's wishes regarding medical treatment) (Residents 13, 17, 19, 70, 78, 84, 90, 97, 319, 320, and 322) a copy of the AD was available and the resident or their resident representative (RP) had been provided follow up information regarding the formulation of an AD. These failures had the potential to result in the ADs for Residents 13, 17, 19, 70, 78, 84, 90, 97, 319, 320, and 322 not being readily accessible to staff and physicians, which could lead to the residents' wishes regarding medical treatment being unknown and ultimately not honored. Findings: 1. On April 14, 2025, at 3:58 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident 70. Resident 70 stated that he was unsure of having an AD and unsure if asked if he would like to formulate one. Resident 70's record was reviewed. Resident 70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the Advance Directive…
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 · E2025-04-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the policy and procedures for oxygen use for two of two sampled residents (Resident 17 and 70) when: 1. Resident 70 was observed receiving continuous oxygen at an incorrect flow rate, without proper documentation or assessment; and 2. Resident 17 had an unlabeled nasal cannula (oxygen tubing - a device that delivers oxygen). These failures had the potential to result in unnecessary or unsafe oxygen administration and increased risk of infection for Residents 17 and 70. Findings: 1. On April 14, 2025, at 2:21 p.m., a concurrent observation and interview was conducted for Resident 70. Resident 70 was alert, oriented and able to verbalize his needs. Resident 70 was observed with oxygen on at six liters per minute (a unit of measure) via nasal cannula. Resident 70 stated he had been on oxygen since the early morning. On April 14, 2025, Resident 70's record was reviewed. Resident 70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis…
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 · E2025-04-17 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — patternProvide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the dietary staff were adequately trained to carry out duties in a sanitary and safe manner when one dietary staff did not follow the manufacturer's instructions for the testing of Quaternary (Quaternary ammonium compounds [quats]are a group of chemicals used for disinfectants) sanitizer. This failure had the potential to result in inaccurate readings of the sanitizing solution, which could lead to cross-contamination. Findings: On April 15, 2025, at 10:23 a.m., during an observation of a Dietary Aide (DA) testing the sanitizing solution in the three-compartment sink, the DA was observed dipping the Quat strip into the sanitizing solution for four seconds before comparing the strip to the color comparator chart. A review of the Directions for use Quat-10 Testing Paper indicated .Dip paper for 10 seconds then compare to colors on test strip package . During a concurrent interview with the DA, he stated he should have waited for 10 seconds before comparing the test strip to the color chart. The DA…
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 before2025-04-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accommodate the needs for one of three sampled residents (Resident 275), when the call light button was observed on the floor and not within reach. This failure had the potential for Resident 275 not to be able to call staff for assistance which could result in needs of the resident not being met as well as a delay in the provision of care. Findings: Resident 275's record was reviewed. Resident 275 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included right below knee amputation (removal of leg). A review of Resident 275's Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), dated April 9, 2025, indicated, Resident 275 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS - a tool to assess cognitive function of an individual) score of 12 (moderate cognitive impairment). A review of Resident 275's Care Plan, initiated on April 2, 2025, indicated, .ADL (Activities of Daily Living) Self-Care Performance Deficit .Encourage the use of call light for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one of three residents reviewed for accidents (Resident 40) was free from exposure to chemical hazards when a housekeeper (HK) left a toilet bowl cleaning solution within the resident's reach. This failure had the potential for Resident 40 to be exposed to chemical poisoning or chemical burn if the substance was ingested or mistakenly taken. Findings: On April 16, 2025, at 12:57 p.m., during an interview with Resident 40's Family Member (FM), she stated, on April 15, 2025, at 11 a.m., she found a white cup containing a pink solution with a brush inside, placed on the bedside table near Resident 40's drinking cup. The FM stated, the nurse told her that the brush was a toilet brush and the pink solution was a toilet cleaner. A review of Resident 40's admission record, indicated, Resident 40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included dementia (forgetfulness). A review of Resident 40's History and Physical Examination 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 · D2025-04-17 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — isolatedHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to effectively utilize its Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program to address an ongoing issue involving missing covers on all three dumpsters. This failure resulted in the facility to not implement timely preventative measures and increased potential risk of cross-contamination. Findings: A review of facility document titled Food & Nutrition Services: Daily Supervisor Rounds Checklist, dated March 2, 2025, to April 17, 2025, indicated that the task Trash Lids closed and clean . was not checked off on any day. On April 17, 2025, at 8:37 a.m., during a concurrent interview and record review with the Administrator (ADM), the ADM stated, one of the current QAPI projects was replacing the covers for the three dumpster bins. The ADM stated, they have not been able to check off the task because the dumpster bins remained uncovered. The ADM stated, the facility made multiple attempts to contact the waste management company to replace or repair the bins, but appointments were repeatedly canceled. The ADM stated,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-17 · 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 ensure infection control practices were implemented when a licensed nurse did not clean and disinfect a shared blood pressure (BP-pressure of blood in blood vessels) cuff according to the manufacturer's recommended contact time (the required duration the equipment must remain wet with the disinfectant to effectively kill microorganisms [germs]). This failure had the potential to expose vulnerable residents to cross-contamination and increase the risk of infections. Findings: On April 15, 2025 at 9:30 a.m., during a medication pass observation, LVN 3 was observed wiping a shared manual blood pressure cuff with a (brand name) disposable wipe after removing it from Resident 223's right upper arm. LVN 3 was not observed leaving the blood pressure cuff surface visibly wet for at least one minute. LVN 3 stated, she should have allowed the cuff to air dry for three minutes. LVN 3 reviewed the manufacturer's instructions and stated the required contact time was one minute. On April 15, 2025 at 10:31 a.m., during an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-03 · tag F0573 — isolatedLet each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide access to personal and medical records within two working days upon request by the resident's legal representative, for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure has the potential to delay care and treatment, affecting the resident's physical well-being. Findings: On March 3, 2025, at 9:05 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility was conducted to investigate a resident's rights issue. A review of Resident 1's admission Record, indicated, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and was discharged from the facility on January 29, 2025. A review of Resident 1's Release of Medical Information, request, dated February 11, 2025, indicated, .(name) requester .Please consider this as (Resident 1 name) request, by and through this office as legal representative, that all writings related to her within your care, custody and control .that be made available within two working days from the receipt of this correspondence . 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 before2025-03-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2) had a physician order prior to hospital transfer. This failure had the potential to affect Resident 2's overall health and wellbeing. Findings: On March 3, 2025, at 9:05 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility was conducted to investigate a complaint incident. A review of Resident 2's admission Record, indicated, Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included atrial flutter (an abnormal heart rhythm that can cause an individual to faint). A review of Resident 2's Health Status Note, dated February 19, 2025, indicated, .Was helping patient to use the bathroom, while sitting on toilet patient was straining and eyes rolled back and proceeded to pass out .AMR (American Medical Response) was called and arrived on scene where he (Resident 2) was then transported to (name of hospital) for further assessments . A review of Resident 2's SNF/NF to Hospital Transfer Form,…
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 before2025-03-03 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurate for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2) when the time of the alleged abused was not consistent with the time of reporting. This failure resulted in inconsistencies in the reporting timeline for Resident 2. Findings: On March 3, 2025, at 9:05 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility was conducted to investigate an allegation of financial abuse. A review of Resident 2's admission Record, indicated, Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident 2's Minimum Data set (MDS - an assessment tool), dated August 12, 2024, indicated Resident 2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (tool used to assess a resident's cognitive function) score of 11 (moderate cognitive impairment). A review of Resident 2's eINTERACT SBAR Summary for Providers, dated February 18, 2025, at 7:49 a.m., indicated, .Alleged financial abuse against pt's (patient's) wife . A review of Resident 2's IDT…
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 before2025-01-28 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an environment free of accident hazards was provided, when the bed alarm was not implemented for one of five residents reviewed for falls (Resident 1). In addition, Resident 1's fall risk assessment was not updated to reflect newly identified fall risks discussed during the interdisciplinary team (IDT - a group of healthcare professionals who work together for the common goal of the resident) meeting. These failures had the potential to result in further falls and injuries for Resident 1. Findings: On January 28, 2025, at 12:58 p.m. Resident 1 was observed to be sitting in a chair at the bedside. No bed alarm was observed on the bed or chair. A review of Resident 1's record indicated, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included repeated falls, unspecified dementia (memory loss). A review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set, dated December 30, 2024, indicated Resident 1's Brief Interview for Mental…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-24 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of physical abuse within two hours to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) after the facility was made aware of the allegation, for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential to result in further abuse of Resident 1, affecting the resident's emotional and psychosocial well-being. Findings: On December 22, 2024 at 2:07 p.m., CDPH received a fax (facsimile - telephonic transmission of scanned-in printed material) report involving a complaint allegation of physical abuse for Resident 1. On December 2, 2024, at 9:31 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility was conducted to investigate an allegation of abuse. A review of Resident 1's admission Record, indicated, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Bipolar Disorder (a mental illness affecting mood and concentration). A review of Resident 1's Minimum data Set (an assessment tool) dated October 10,…
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 · D2024-10-10 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of three residents, (Residents 4 and 5), had a discharge notice sent to the Ombudsman, (advocate for residents of nursing homes), prior to their discharges. This failure had the potential for Residents 4 and 5 to not have an advocate prior to their discharges. Findings: On October 10, 2024, at 11:10 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility on two complaints and one Facility Reported Incident was initiated. 1. A review of Resident 4's medical record indicated he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of hemiplegia, (paralysis of one side of the body), and hemiparesis, (weakness of one side of the body), following cerebral infarction, (stroke), affecting left non-dominant side. Resident 4 was discharged on October 9, 2024. A review of Resident 4's History and Physical, dated September 23, 2024, indicated he was forgetful. A review of Resident 4's Order Summary Report, for the month of October 2024, indicated, .LCD (last…
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 before2024-10-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three residents, (Resident 1), had bilateral floor mats in place as ordered. This failure had the potential for Resident 1 to have an injury due to a fall. Findings: On October 10, 2024, at 11:10 a.m., an unannounced visit to the facility on two complaints and one Facility Reported Incident was initiated. A review of Resident 1 ' s medical records indicated she was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of hypothyroidism, (a condition resulting from decreased production of thyroid hormones), rheumatoid arthritis, (a chronic progressive disease-causing inflammation in the joints and resulting in painful deformity and immobility), dementia, (a chronic or persistent disorder of the mental processes caused by brain disease or injury and marked by memory disorders, personality changes, and impaired reasoning), hemiplegia, (paralysis of one side of the body), and hemiparesis, (weakness of one side of the body), following cerebral…
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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0573 — isolatedLet each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide copies of medical records upon request and within two business days after receiving the request from an attorney on behalf of the resident, for one of four residents reviewed, Resident 3. This failure is a violation of Resident 3 and the resident's representatives ' rights. Findings: On August 29, 2024, at 9:50 a.m., an unannounced visit was conducted at the facility to investigate a complaint allegation. On August 29, 2024, at 10:39 a.m., during an interview with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1, LVN 1 stated residents, their responsible parties and durable power of attorney (DPOA - a legal document that allows someone to appoint another person to make medical decisions on their behalf if they are unable to do so) can request for medical records. LVN 1 stated if a resident or the family member requested for medical records, they are directed to the Medical Records (MR). LVN 1 stated the timeframe to fulfill a medical record request was 24 to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-15 · 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 provide adequate supervision for two residents reviewed for elopement (Resident 1 and Resident 2) when Resident 1 and Resident 2 had separate elopement (incident when a resident leaves the facility without authorization or supervision necessary for safety) episodes. This failure resulted in Resident 1 and Resident 2 being able to leave the facility undetected, which could have subsequently result in accidents, injuries, or even death to the residents. Findings: On March 28, 2024, at 9 a.m., an unannounced visit was conducted at the facility to investigate two incidents of elopement. On March 28, 2024, at 10:10 a.m., an observation and interview with Resident 1 was conducted. Resident 1 was alert and confused. Resident 1 was observed ambulating independently and stated she wanted to go home. Resident 1 did not remember the elopement incident. On March 28, 2024, at 12:26 p.m., an interview with Registered Nurse (RN) 1 was conducted. RN 1 stated Resident 1 eloped on March 26, 2024, around 8 pm. Resident 1 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 · Fcited before2024-02-25 · 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, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to chicken was thawed in a safe manner for 106 of 113 sampled residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled General HACCP [Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point] Guidelines for Food Safety, with a copyright date of 2017 revealed, 6. Safe Thawing Practices a. Thaw meat, fish and or poultry in a refrigerator in a drip proof container and in a way that prevents cross contamination. b. Completely submerge the item in clean running water that is running fast enough to agitate and float off loose ice particles. c. Thaw the item in a microwave oven using the defrost mode if it is to be cooked immediately after thawing. d. Thaw as part of the cooking process. During a concurrent observation and interview on 02/20/2024 at 8:44 AM, four bags of chicken were observed in water in a sink in the facility's kitchen. There was not a continuous flow of cold water on the four bags of chicken. Dietary Aide/Assistant Supervisor (DA/AS) #35 stated the bags 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 · D2024-02-25 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow-up with the local authority for the completion of a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for 1 (Resident #93) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for PASARRs. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, California Preadmission Screening and Resident Review, effective 07/01/2020, revealed It is the policy of this facility that a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review Level I is completed to identify individuals who have a mental illness (MI) or intellectual disabilities (ID) and ensure that these residents receive the services and setting determined by the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS). Level II Full Evaluation should be conducted by a DHCS Contractor for determination when the Level I Screen identifies the resident have Mental Illness (MI) or Intellectual Disability (ID). The policy specified, 6. A positive Level I screen necessitates an in-depth evaluation of the individual by the state-designated authority, known as PASARR Level…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-25 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to submit a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for 1 (Resident #63) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for PASARRs. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, California Preadmission Screening and Resident Review, effective 07/01/2020, revealed It is the policy of this facility that a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review Level I is completed to identify individuals who have a mental illness (MI) or intellectual disabilities (ID) and ensure that these residents receive the services and setting determined by the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS). The policy revealed 3. The 'Resident Review (RR) (Status Change)' is selected if the resident has already been admitted to the facility and the facility is updating the existing PASRR [PASARR] on file for either of the following reasons: a. The resident stay has exceeded the 30-day exempted hospital discharge. The Resident Level I 6170 should be submitted by the 40th calendar day after admission for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-25 · 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 record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to schedule physician ordered follow-up appointments for 2 (Resident #111 and Resident #188) of 25 sampled residents. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Resident Appointments, dated March 2023, revealed Our facility has set the process on how appointments are made from the initial consult [consultation]/order to actual transport. Procedure: 1. Entering the initial order for consult in [the electronic medical record] to see a specialist falls on the RN [registered nurse] responsibility. 2. RN prints the order and place in the Case Manager's slot located in the station labeled Case Manager. 3. Case Manager collects the consult order and refer to the designated business office clerk to call the health plan/medical group for authorization as needed. 4. Business Office Clerk should note the order with the authorization number or simply write no auth [authorization] required with the case manager's name. 5. Once the schedule for the appointment is set, business office clerk enters 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 · D2024-02-25 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to have evidence to indicate a pharmacy recommendation was reviewed by the physician for 1 (Resident #10) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for medication regimen review (MRR). Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Medication Regimen Reviews, revised in May 2019, revealed, The Consultant Pharmacist reviews the medication regimen of each resident at least monthly. The policy indicated, 8. Within 24 hours of the MRR, the Consultant Pharmacist provides a written report to the attending physicians for each resident identified as having a non-life threatening medication irregularity. The report contains: 1. The resident's name; b. The name of the medication; c. The identified irregularity; and d. The pharmacist's recommendation. Per the policy, 12. The attending physician documents in the medical record that the irregularity has been reviewed and what (if any) action was taken to address it. The policy specified, 15. Copies of medication regimen reports, including physician responses, are…
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 before2024-02-22 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the call lights (device used by residents to communicate/indicate the need for assistance) were answered in a timely manner for five of seven residents (Residents 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7). This failure had the potential for delayed medical management and unmet care needs. Findings: On February 5 and 6, 2024, an unannounced visit was conducted at the facility for a complaint investigation. During an observation on February 5, 2024, the following were observed: - at 2:58 p.m., Resident 2 ' s call light was on; - at 3:01 p.m., Resident 3 ' s call light was on; and - at 3:02 p.m., Resident 4 ' s call light was on. During a concurrent observation and interview on February 5, 2024, at 3:10 p.m., with Resident 2, Resident 2 was lying in bed in an upright position. Resident 2 stated most of the time, it took longer for the call light to get answered. Resident 2 stated at times, she had to wait for an hour for her call light to be answered by…
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 · E2024-01-18 · tag F0552 — patternEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 13 residents consented to COVID, Influenza (flu), and/or RSV (respiratory syncytial virus - a viral infection) vaccination prior to administering the vaccine (Residents 1 through Resident 13). This failure in not ensuring residents ' rights could potentially result in negative side effects and psychosocial outcomes. Findings: On January 3, 2024, at 10:45 a.m., an interview with the Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) was conducted. The LVN stated Resident 4 received the COVID and flu vaccine without prior consent. The LVN stated all residents should sign informed consent prior to getting any vaccine. The LVN stated Resident 4 did not have capacity to consent, and in that case the resident's representative should be given the option to consent for the vaccines. On January 3, 2024, at 10:53 a.m., an observation was conducted with Resident 4. Resident 4 was observed confused and was unable to be interviewed. Resident 4's record 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 · Dcited before2023-12-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three residents, (Resident 3)'s call light was within reach. This failure had the potential for Resident 3 to have unmet needs, and unable to call for assistance. Findings: On November 27, 2023, at 1:10 p.m., an unannounced visit to the facility on a complaint investigation was initiated. On November 27, 2023, at 3:19 p.m., a concurrent observation and interview was conducted with Resident 3. Resident 3 was lying on his back in bed. His call light was on the left side of the bed on the floor, outside of Resident 3's reach. Resident 3 stated he did not know where his call light was or how he would call for help. On November 27, 2023, at 3:31 p.m., an interview was conducted with the Certified Nursing Assistant, (CNA). The CNA stated Resident 3's call light was not within reach and should have been within reach. A record review of Resident 3's medical records indicated he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure reasonable care for the protection of personal property for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure resulted in the temporary loss of Resident 1's personal property. Findings: A review of Resident 1's medical record was conducted on October 5, 2023. The record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis of compression fracture (a type of break in the bones in your back that stack up to form the spine) of the first and second lumbar vertebra, type 2 diabetes (occurs when the blood glucose, also called blood sugar, is too high) and history of falls with syncope (a loss of consciousness for a short period of time) and collapse. During a telephone interview with Resident 1 on October 5, 2023, at 11:32 a.m., Resident 1 stated he was admitted to the facility with a walker as well as other personal items. Resident 1 stated the walker was missing upon his discharge on [DATE]. 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$17,765 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $17,765 — penalty dated 2024-02-22
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to GENERATIONS HEALTHCARE — 27 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 4.1 | -2.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
The other 26 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.1★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BMO BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 09/20/2023 |
| MASTROCOLA, LOIS | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/16/2021 |
| OLDS, THOMAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/16/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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 $2.0M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 555923. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-17, 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.