Sherwood Oaks Post Acute
250 Fairview Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91361 · For profit - Corporation · 99 certified beds · (805) 494-1233 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Jun 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- 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 | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 5 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 | 7.3% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.5% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 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 | 9.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| 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 | 0.8% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.8% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.6% | 13.7% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.8% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 2.3% | 10.2% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 13.0% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.2% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.6% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.81 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.59 | 1.57 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
59.0% 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 580 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 93.1% 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 247 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.80 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 94% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 29% 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 | 59.0%CMS range 55.5–62.6 | 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 8.9–13.3 | 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 | 93.1% | 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 | 91.5% | 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 | 83.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 99.1% | 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 | 0.8% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.5% | 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 | 8.7%CMS range 6.3–10.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.26 | 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 99 beds and averages 94.8 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 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 4.27 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.57 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.80 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.47 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.58 to 0.46 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
35 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-09 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free and protected from abuse on one of one resident (Resident 6) per facility's policy and procedure, when an allegation of abuse was reported against a Certified Nurse Aid (CNA4). CNA 4 was not sent home but instead transferred to another area of the facility to continue working with care of other residents. This failure placed residents at risk for potential acts of abuse from the CNA. During an interview, on 6/9/26, at 2 p.m., with the Director of Staff Development (DSD), in the Director of Nursing (DON) office, the DSD stated that an allegation of abuse was reported CNA 2 on 6/8/26, at 12 p.m., involving CNA 4. The allegation was CNA 4 was brushing the hair of Resident 6 aggressively, roughly and hurriedly during care, at the same uttering profanities in Spanish in front of the resident and a fellow CNA. The DSD further stated, after the report from CNA 2 on 6/8/26, CNA4 was moved to another area of the facility away from Resident 6 and took care of other residents, until the end of the shift (7…
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 · D2026-06-09 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 allegations of abuse was reported and investigated by staff on three of three residents (Residents 2,3, and1).This failure placed residents in harm's way, unmonitored abusive action by staff and non-implementation of abuse policy by facility. During a telephone interview conducted on 6/9/26, at 11:15 a.m., with Certified Nurse Aid (CNA 2), CNA 2 stated, while assisting CNA3, who had provided care to Residents 2,3,1, on three occasions, CNA3 was rough.For Resident 2 (CNA 2 could not remember the date of the incident) while CNA 3 was changing the shirt of Resident 2, the resident who was nonverbal cried out in pain. CNA 2 stated, witnessing CNA3 grabbing Resident 2's nape (back of neck) roughly and forcibly thrusted the neck and head forward, while changing the resident's shirt. CNA 2 reprimanded CNA 3 of the resident's rough handling but did not report the incident witnessed.For Resident 3 who is non-verbal and is cognitively impaired (CNA 2 does not remember the time of the incident), CNA 3 roughly turned Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of 23 sampled resident's (Resident 100) medications were secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff and residents.This failure had the potential to cause medication errors, including residents ingesting incorrect medications.Findings:During an initial tour observation on 5/18/26, at 6 a.m., in room [ROOM NUMBER] A, a 3-ounce Antifungal Powder, a 59 ml. (milliliter) Body Lotion, and an unlabeled plastic cup in a kidney basin with an unidentified substance was observed on Resident 100's bedside table.During a concurrent interview and record review on 5/18/26, at 11 a.m., with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), ADON reviewed Resident 100's electronic Medical Record (eMR) for Resident 100's Self-Administration Assessment (an evaluation by an interdisciplinary care team to determine if a resident can safely and accurately manage and take or apply their own medications). The ADON confirmed Resident 100 did not have a Self…
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 before2026-05-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe food handling practices by not labeling resident food items stored in the resident refrigerator with the resident's name and the date of opening.This deficient practice created a potential risk for foodborne illness due to the inability to determine food ownership and product freshness.Findings:During an observation conducted on 5/19/26 at 10:30 a.m. of the resident refrigerator located in the clean linen room, three food items were found without resident identification or labeling. The unlabeled items included:One 64 oz bottle of [NAME] French Vanilla Coffee CreamerOne 32 oz bottle of International Delight Coffee CreamerOne 52 oz carton of Plant Oat OatmilkDuring an interview on 5/19/26 at 10:35 a.m., with Infection Preventionist (IP), IP confirmed resident information was not placed on the 3 items and verbalized, the items were brought in by residents' families and should have been labeled with the resident's name.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 · D2026-04-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care services consistent with professional standards of practice when:Facility staff were unaware a Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP or BPAP - a non-invasive ventilator used to assist breathing by delivering pressurized air through a mask using a higher pressure level for inhalation and a lower pressure level for exhalation, to improve oxygen levels and reduce carbon dioxide) was beeping/alarming (alarm was not audible) and not delivering the prescribed therapeutic effect in one of two residents (Resident 1).Facility did not have an operator manual onsite or readily accessible to refer for troubleshooting guidance for an alarming BiPAP.Oxygen flow rate was not accurately set to administer oxygen as ordered by the physician (MD) in two of three residents (Resident 2 and Resident 3).MD orders for oxygen administration were unclear and inaccurate in one of three residents (Resident 1).Facility failed to follow its…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-07 · 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 nebulizer mask (a medical device worn over the nose and mouth to deliver liquid medication directly into the airways as a fine mist) used for breathing treatments was not stored in a manner to maintain hygiene and prevent contamination in one of three residents (Resident 1). This facility failure had the potential to result in cross-contamination (the transfer of harmful bacteria) that could impact a resident's health and safety and cause preventable HAIs (Healthcare Associated Infections) for a resident in an already compromised condition During review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), dated 4/2/26, the AR indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute exacerbation (worsening of respiratory symptoms such as difficulty breathing, chronic cough, and/or an increase in the volume and/or thickness of milky or foul-smelling sputum that results in needing additional…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a shower room was sanitary and in good repair.This failure had the potential to violate Residents rights to receive care in a safe, clean and homelike environment. During a concurrent observation and interview, on 7/31/25, beginning at 12:55 p.m., with the Maintenance Director (MTD 1), a shower room located in hallway four was inspected. In the shower room, the shower doorframe was in a state of disrepair, the wall had broken tiles, the call light cord was broken and had been replaced with plastic bags in lieu of replacing the cord, a bottle of lotion was stored atop a dirty sharps container and a used razer was stored in a plastic cup atop a box of clean gloves. The MTD 1 confirmed and verbalized the doorframe was in a state of disrepair, there were broken tiles, the call light cord needed to be replaced, staff had stored a lotion bottle atop a dirty sharps container and a dirty razer was stored atop a box of clean gloves. During a review of the facility's policy and procedures titled Homelike…
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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to adhere to its policy and procedure for foods brought in by family and visitors. This failure had the potential for Residents to consume spoiled food and to experience negative outcomes.During a concurrent observation and interview, on 7/31/25, at 1:21 p.m., with the Infection Preventionist (IP 1), the resident refrigerator was inspected. Inside the resident refrigerator was a unlabeled and undated plastic bag containing a head of lettuce which had partially turned brown and two unlabeled and undated half eaten sandwiches in plastic containers. The IP 1 confirmed the observations and verbalized the resident food items should have been labeled with a resident's name and date. When asked how long these items had been in the resident refrigerator the IP 1 could not give a definitive answer but did verbalize facility practice was to clean out the refrigerator once a week on Friday's.During a review of the facility's policy and procedure titled Foods Brought by Family/Visitors dated 3/22, indicated in part Perishable…
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 · F2025-02-06 · tag F0575 — widespreadPost a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to post the State Survey Agency contact information and a statement regarding a resident's right to file a complaint with the State Survey Agency. This failure had the potential to affect all 94 residents who resided at the facility. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Federal Posting Policy, version 05/2024, revealed, This policy ensures compliance with federal posting requirements for skilled nursing facilities. The facility will prominently display all federally mandated notices to inform employees, residents, and visitors of their rights and protections under federal law. This policy applies to all required postings in publicly accessible areas of the facility. The policy revealed that 1. Required Postings: included, A statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State survey and certification agency concerning resident abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of resident property in the facility, and non-compliance with advance directive requirements. An observation on 02/05/2025…
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 · D2025-02-06 · 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
Based on interview, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to report a resident-to-resident abuse allegation to the State Agency within two hours of an incident for 2 (Resident #7 and Resident #39) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 01/27/2025, the police responded to the facility after Resident #39 reported that Resident #7 bumped into their wheelchair, then bumped the resident's knee. The facility Social Services Director (SSD) documented that she and the Administrator had a conversation with Resident #7 on 01/30/2025 about harassment of Resident #39; however, there was no documented evidence the facility notified the State Agency of a resident-to-resident abuse allegation until 02/05/2025. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Abuse Prevention, dated 12/31/2015, indicated, 1. All health practitioners and all employees in a long-term healthcare facility are mandated reports [sic] (Welfare and Institutions Code, Section 15630, Appendix IV). 2. Any mandated reporter who, in his or her professional capacity, or within 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.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · 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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to refer 1 (Resident #49) of 2 residents reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) for a Level II screening when Resident #49 was admitted with a diagnosis of psychosis and depression. Findings included: A facility policy titled, PASARR [Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review, PASRR], dated 03/2024, indicated, a. The facility verifies with [sic] acute hospital if a Level I PASARR screen for potential admissions and readmissions, regardless of payer source, to determine if the individual meets the criteria for a MD [mental disorder], ID [intellectual disability] or RD [related disorders]. b. Before a patient can be transferred from a hospital, they must undergo a PASARR Level I screening. This initial screening is designed to identify individuals who may have mental illness (MI), intellectual disability (ID) or related conditions. The goal is to determine whether they require further evaluation (Level II) to assess the need for specialized services. c. If the level I screen…
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 · D2025-01-28 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to promote dignity and respect when Resident 1's custom-built hearing aids was lost and was not replaced timely. This failure increased the potential for Resident 1 to not effectively communicate his needs and overall well-being. Findings: During the review of medical records, Face Sheet indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Disease (a progressive disease affecting memory and other mental functions). A record titled Inventory of Personal Effects dated 6/24/24 indicated, Resident 1 had hearing aids. During an interview on 1/28/24 at 11:36 a.m., with Resident 1's responsible party (RP), RP stated when Resident 1's custom-built hearing aids got lost sometime in July last year, the facility did not replace them and provided generic type hearing aids that kept on falling off from his ears and getting lost again. During a concurrent observation and interview on 1/28/25 at 2:15 p.m.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-30 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two sampled residents (Resident 1), was free from misappropriation of resident property. This failure had the potential for Resident 1 to be subject to financial abuse. Findings: During an interview on 12/30/24, at 5:09 p.m., with Resident 1, the Resident 1 verbalized a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA 1) told Resident 1 that the CNA 1 was having car troubles and bill troubles and needed $1,000. Resident 1 verbalized upon hearing about CNA 1's financial hardship, provided the CNA 1 with a total of $740 dollars to help CNA 1 with the cost of the car repairs and bills. Resident 1 verbalized the two made an agreement that Resident 1 would be paid back by CNA 1 sometime during 1/25. During a review of Resident 1's Progress Notes dated 12/23/24, indicated in part Resident 1 stopped by the activities office and informed the activities staff that [Resident 1] had let a staff member (CNA 1) borrow some money. During a review of Resident 1's Progress Notes dated 12/27/24, indicated in part C.N.A. (CNA 1) came to 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 before2024-12-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan and follow physician orders, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). These failures had the potential to negatively impact Resident 1. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's Care Plan, dated 11/4/24, indicated in part, Resident 1 Requires Antidepressant medication related to diagnosis of depression. Resident 1's care plan further indicated in part, an intervention to Administer antidepressant medication as ordered by the physician. During a concurrent record review and interview, on 12/17/24, starting at 10:34 a.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON 1) and Medical Records Director (MRD 1), Resident 1's medication administration record (MAR) was reviewed. Resident 1's MAR indicated in part, two physician orders pertaining to the monitoring of Resident 1, due to Resident 1 taking the medication Trazadone (an antidepressant). One physician order was to monitor Resident 1 for episodes of depression manifested by difficulty in falling asleep every shift and a separate 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 · D2024-11-06 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide requested medical records in a timely manner, to a resident representative, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had violated Resident 1's rights. Findings: During an interview on 11/4/24, at 3:17 p.m., with the Social Services Director (SSD 1), the SSD 1 was asked to confirm when Resident 1's representative first made the request to obtain Resident 1's medical records. The SSD 1 stated Resident 1's representative verbally and in writing, requested Resident 1's medical records on 10/3/24. During an interview and concurrent record review, on 11/4/24, stating at 2:48 p.m., with the Director Of Nursing (DON 1) and Medical Records Director (MRD 1), the MRD 1 and DON 1 stated the facility required residents and/or their representatives to sign a facility authorization form titled Authorization Form For The Release of Health Information in order to obtain medical records. Both the DON 1 and the MRD 1 stated if a resident or resident representative made a verbal or written request for medical…
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 before2024-10-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow a care planned intervention to monitor the intake and output of one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential for Resident 1 to experince negative outcomes. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's Care Plan undated, indicated in part, Resident 1 had a urinary tract infection on 6/22/24, with an intervention for staff to Monitor intake and output. During a concurrent record review and interview, on 10/9/24, at 4:21 p.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON 1) and Medical Records Director (MRD 1), Resident 1's Care Plan was reviewed. The DON 1 and the MRD 1 verbalized they were unable to provide documentation indicating Resident 1's care planned intervention to monitor intake and output was carried out by staff. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered dated 2001, indicated in part A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet resident's physical, psychosocial and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders for catheter care, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential for Resident 1 to experience negative outcomes including an increased risk for developing urinary tract infection(s). Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review, on 10/9/24, starting at 4:30 p.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON 1) and the Medical Records Director (MRD 1), Resident 1's Treatment Administration Record (TAR), was reviewed. Resident 1's TAR indicated in part Resident 1 had a physician order of Indwelling catheter: Monitor for change in urine character .every shift for f/c (foley catheter) management. The physician order was active from 5/30/24 to 8/23/24. Resident 1's TAR indicated missing/blank entries on 6/8/24, 6/17/24, 7/2/24, 7/5/24, 7/7/24, 7/19/24, 7/21/24, 7/28/24, 7/29/24, 7/30/24, 7/31/24, 8/8/24, 8/12/24, 8/13/24. The DON 1 and MRD 1 confirmed the missing entries. During a concurrent interview and record review, on 10/9/24, starting at 4:30 p.m., with the DON 1…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to administer Metoprolol (a medication used to treat high blood pressure) per physician orders, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential to result in a medication being withheld, when it should have been administered. Findings: During a concurrent record review and interview, on 8/8/24, starting at 11:28 a.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON 1) and Medical Records Director (MRD 1), Resident 1's medical record was reviewed. Resident 1's Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated in part, Resident 1 had a physician order of Metoprolol .Give 12.5mg (milligrams) by mouth two times a day for HTN (hypertension [high blood pressure]) hold for SBP (systolic Blood Pressure) < (less than) 110 or HR (heart rate) < 60 (60 beats per minute). Resident 1's MAR indicated on 8/1/24, at 9:00 p.m., Resident 1 did not receive the scheduled dose of the medication due to Resident 1's vital signs being outside the parameters of the order. Review of Resident 1's Weights and Vitals Summary indicated in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide documentation indicating a care planned intervention for falls was carried out for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential to lead to negative outcomes for Resident 1. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's Progress Notes dated 7/8/24, indicated in part on 7/6/24, at 3:20 a.m., CNA (certified nursing assistant) (CNA1) was walking by resident's room and observed the resident (Resident 1) sitting on the landing mat .Resident (Resident 1) was alert and stated that (Resident 1) got up to use the commode and lost (Resident 1) balance and fell, hitting the back of (Resident 1) head on the armrest of the commode .small laceration on the back of the head with bleeding .Resident (Resident 1) c/o (complaints of) pain on the back of the head 4/10 and right rib area 7/10. The progress note entry further indicated in part Resident (Resident 1) is at risk for further falls and injury due to non-compliance with safety precautions, transferring and ambulating without assistance. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was timely monitoring and skin evaluation on a resident's skin in one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). This failure had the potential for miscommunication in skin care that may result in further decline in Resident 1's skin condition after cast removal on the right lower limb . Findings: During a review of the undated admission record, Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] following a right knee surgery and had conditions listed as encounter for orthopedic (the treatment of bones that have been damaged) aftercare. A review of the history and physical dated 3/23/24, Resident 1 has the capacity to understand and make decisions. During a review of Resident 1 s Physician's orders dated 3/22/24, it indicated right knee immobilizer on at all times, check for circulation, skin integrity, and signs and symptoms of infection and skin breakdown. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/1/24 at 3:15 p.m.,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to revise the care plan (a document which provides direction for and communicates to staff the individualized care of the resident) for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) after a fall incident. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 1's repeat occurrence of falling. Findings: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that include Dementia, Anxiety, Unsteadiness on Feet. History and Physical (H&P) indicated that Resident 1 has fluctuating capacity to understand and make decisions and was assessed of having a high risk of falling. Facility reported that Resident 1 had an unwitnessed fall on 3/8/24 and was not complaining of any pain or discomfort until when Resident 1 complained of hip pain on 3/16/24. An X-ray (a procedure using a machine to capture an image in any solid internal part of the body like bones) indicated right hip fracture (break in the continuity of a bone). During an observation on 4/3/24 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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, and interview, the facility failed to label and discard perishable food items, from the resident refrigerator, per policy and procedure. This facility failure had the potential for residents to experience negative outcomes, including foodborne illness. Findings: During a review of the facility ' s policy and procedure titled Foods Brought by Family/Visitors dated 3/22, indicated in part Containers are labeled with the resident ' s name, the item and the use by date .The nursing staff will discard perishable foods on or before the use by date. During a concurrent observation, and interview, on 3/4/24, starting at 2:15 p.m., with licensed nurse (LN 1), the facility ' s resident refrigerator was inspected. One container of Kimchi, one container of cream cheese, one container of chicken, one container of fruit salad, and one container of prunes, were not labeled with a use by date. The LN 1 acknowledged these food items, in the resident refrigerator, lacked use by dates. Also found in the resident refrigerator was one box of key lime pie, dated 2/28/24, one…
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 before2024-02-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication ordered by the physician and care planned as an intervention was implemented for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1). This facility failure had the potential for medications to be missed /administration with no follow up, placing Resident 1 at risk for non medication effectiveness or benefit in addressing the health issue the medication was prescribed for. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record undated, indicated in part, Resident 1 had diagnoses including Dementia (a general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life), and Alzheimer's disease (a brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills, and eventually, the ability to carry out the simplest tasks). During a concurrent record review and interview, on 1/10/24, starting at 1:36 p.m., with the Medical Records Director (MRD 1), Resident 1's physician orders and Medication Administration Record (MAR) from 12/23 to 1/24 were…
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 before2023-09-01 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to identify and fix a broken window frame and blind curtain handle, in one of three sampled residents (Resident 3) rooms. This facility failure had the potential for residents not to be provided with a homelike and comfortable environment. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview, on 8/24/23, at 11:11 a.m., with the Housekeeping Supervisor (HS 1), Resident 3 ' s room was inspected. A window frame was found in a state of disrepair, off its track, and the window ' s blind tilt wand was not connected to the blinds. The HS 1 agreed both the window frame and blind tilt wand were in a state of disrepair and needed to be fixed. During a concurrent observation and interview, on 8/24/23, at 11:50 a.m., with the Maintenance Director (MTD 1), Resident 3 ' s window was inspected. The MTD 1 acknowledged staff had not previously reported the broken window frame or detached window blind tilt to the maintenance department and that the maintenance department had been unaware of the issue. During an interview on 8/31/23, at 3:54…
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 · E2022-11-17 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 meals were served at a palatable temperature to ensure residents' satisfaction as stated by 9 of 9 residents during the confidential resident council meeting. There were eight-seven residents receiving food from the facility's kitchen. Failure to serve food at an appetizing temperature to ensure resident's satisfaction could result in poor food intake and unplanned weight loss. Findings: During a confidential resident council meeting on 11/15/22, at 2:32 p.m., nine of nine residents present stated they were not satisfied with the temperature of the food when served, specifying the food was not hot enough. During an observation on 11/17/22, at 12:35 p.m., in the kitchen, the Dietary Manager (DM) was observed calibrating a digital thermometer in ice, and DM stated, It's 32 degrees F [Fahrenheit]. During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/17/22, at 01:13 p.m., with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 4, in the hallway of Wing 5, CNA 4 was observed to be the only staff delivering meal trays 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 · Ecited before2022-11-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe food handling and sanitation when: 1. Staff were not following the facility's dating system for food products to ensure used within the shelf- life guidance for safety and quality. 2. Dishes and foodservice equipment stored as clean had dried debris and a build up of grease and grime. 3. Meatballs were not cooled down safely in accordance with directions located on the Cool Down Log. 4. The food processor was not washed and sanitized between food items during puree food preparation which increased the risk of cross-contact of a potential food allergen. As a result, residents were placed at risk for developing a food borne illness. There were eighty-seven residents receiving food from the facility's kitchen. There were nine residents on a puree diet of which one of those residents had a food allergy and was at an increased risk for cross contact food allergen due to lack of washing and sanitizing the food processing equipment after each food item. According to foodallergy.org, Cross-contact happens…
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 before2022-11-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an individualized care plan, for communication, was developed when the resident was not able to avail fully and effectively the use of a communication board for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 47). This failure had the potential for Resident 47's communication needs not being met with effects on the overall physical and mental well-being. Findings: During a review of Resident 47's, admission Record (AR), the AR indicated, Resident 47 was admitted on [DATE], with the diagnoses including: hemiplegia and hemiparesis (paralysis of one side of the body), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by significant impairments in which reality is perceived), and depression (a mood disorder that causes feelings of sadness). During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/14/22, at 10:30 a.m., with Resident 47, inside the resident's room, the resident was in bed, awake, alert, with difficulty…
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 before2022-11-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the fall care plan for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 35), was re-evaluated and revised. This failure had the potential of placing Resident 35 at risk for future falls. Findings: During a review of Incidents by Incident Type,date range from 10/1/22 to 10/21/22, the Incidents by Incident Types indicated, in part .Un-witnessed Fall Incidents .Resident 35 on 10/01/22 1:45 AM. During an interview on 11/15/22, at 4:15 p.m., with Medical Records Director (MRD), MRD stated, The long term care plan wasn't updated or revised. During a review of Resident 35's Care Plan for FALLS, dated 09/21/22, the care plan indicated, no revised interventions for Residnet 35's fall which occurred on 10/01/22. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Goals and Objectives, Care Plans, [untitled], indicated, in part, .Care plans shall incorporate goals and objectives that lead to the resident's highest obtainable level of independence. Goals and objectives are reviewed and/or revised: a. when there…
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 · D2022-11-17 · 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 care rendered were according to professional standards when physician orders (PO) were not implemented : 1. Resident 74's gastro enteral feeding tube (GT - tube in stomach for liquid formula to go thru -for nourishment) water flush as ordered was documented done prior to administration. This failure has the potential for the resident not to received the water flush as ordered . 2. Oxygen administration order was not followed for Resident 74. This failure has the potential for the resident to have episodes of respiratory distress. 3. Topical medications for skin problem was not administered to Resident 60. This failure [NAME] the potential for the resident's skin to be more irritated leading to skin openings or infection. ` 4. Anticoagulant (blood thinner) medication side effects were not monitored for two residents (Resident 47 and 10). This failure has the risk and potential for signs and symptoms of the resident bleeding…
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 before2022-11-17 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure policy and procedure (P&P) in documenting all the services was followed when the turning task or schedule as part of the intervention and measures to heal off existing pressure areas (skin opening) was not documented, as completed in one resident (Resident 1). This failure placed the resident at further risk for a non healing skin wound /pressure areas detrimental to the resident's overall well being . Findings: During a review of Resident 1's clinical record, indicated, Resident 1 was admitted from the hospital with multiple pressure injuries on the sacrum area, left and right heel with the admission date of 6/25/22 and hospitalized (transferred back to the hospital) on 8/10/22 to 8/26/22, 8/28/22 to 9/15/22 and 10/28/22 (did not return back to the facility). Further review of the clinical record , the wound physician's (WP) treatment plan, dated 8/8/22, indicated, to turn patient every two hours, keep skin and dry, avoid massaging bony prominences, provide adequate intake of protein and calories, maintain current…
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 · D2022-11-17 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of 23 sampled residents, (Resident 67), received a dental consult, within the first 90 days of admission. This failure had the potential for possible dental issues to not be assessed and addressed. Findings: During an interview on 10/21/22, at 3:10 p.m., with Resident 67, Resident 67 stated, I need to see the dentist. I never have. During a concurrent interview and record review, on 10/21/2022, at 3:45 p.m., with Social Services Assistant (SSA), SSA checked Resident 67's medical records for a dental consultation. There was nodental consulatation in the chart. SSA stated, Residents usually let someone know, and then we schedule it. SSA further stated, Resident 67 has never mentioned it. During an interview on 10/21/2022, at 4:10 p.m., with SSA, SSA explained, Resident 67 has a HMO and the consulting dentist doesn't take that insurance. When asked about the process when this occurs, SSA stated, Nothing, unless the resident complains. I don't have an answer why I didn't call the sons. During a review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-11-17 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — isolatedProvide 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 one cook (Cook 2) was competent on internal cooking temperatures for fish and poultry to ensure food safety. This failure placed the residents at risk for a foodborne illness. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/15/22, at 10:41 a.m., with cook (Cook 2), in the presence of Dietary Manager (DM), in the kitchen, [NAME] 2 was asked how she determined fish was cooked thoroughly. [NAME] 2 stated, she would check the temperature with a thermometer and look for 40 degrees [F-Fahrenheit]. DM clarified the question with [NAME] 2 in Spanish, and [NAME] 2 repeated she would expect to see 40 degrees F to know that fish was cooked thoroughly. During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/15/22, at 10:45 a.m., with [NAME] 2, in the presence of DM, in the kitchen, [NAME] 2 was asked to check the internal temperature of the fish that was sitting on the stove range, after she took it out of the oven. [NAME] 2 inserted the bayonet thermometer, and [NAME] 2 stated, It's 31 degrees [F]. DM…
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 · D2022-11-17 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow the menu as planned when: 1. The incorrect food item (rice) and portion size was served to one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 24) when finger foods when possible was listed on her meal tray card. 2. Too large of chicken piece sizes were served to one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 68) who was on a Soft & Bite-Sized diet order. 3. The menu for puree diet was not followed for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 80) when the cook did not prepare puree tartar sauce as directed on the planned menu. This facility failure had the potential to cause frustration in a resident by not providing finger foods to promote independence, placed a resident at an increased risk for choking, and had the potential to cause decreased food intake, and impede dignity, when puree tartar sauce was not served for the resident to enjoy with puree fish, as residents on a regular diet received. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/15/22, at 12:05 p.m., with [NAME] 2, in the kitchen, [NAME] 2 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 · D2022-11-17 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the therapeutic diet, as ordered by the physician, for one of 23 sampled residents (Resident 23), when Resident 23 was fed a whole banana while on a pureed diet. This failure had the potential for Resident 23 to choke on the solid food. Findings: During a review of Resident 23's admission Record, dated 3/8/22, the admission Record indicated, in part, Diagnosis Information, and Dysphagia, Oral Phase (difficulty swallowing foods). During a review of Resident 23's Medication Review Report (MRR), dated 11/14/22, the MMR indicated, in part, Diet, Pureed Texture, and Order status, Active. During a review of Resident 23's Rehab - Dysphagia Screening Form, dated 11/7/22, the from indicated, in part, Resident is unable to swallow on demand, and Diagnosis and clinical symptoms indicate presence of dysphagia. During a review of Resident 23's Care Plan, initiated 2/11/22, the Care Plan indicated, in part, Focus, Dysphagia/Swallowing impairment, and Interventions/Tasks, Diet as ordered, Diet texture modification…
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 before2022-11-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow and implement safe infection control practices when: 1. No visible signage of transmission-based precautions (alert of precautions to prevent spread of infection) was posted at the door for one resident (Resident 76) on contact isolation. 2. Staff failed to donn (put on) personal protective equipments (PPE- disposable gloves and gown to prevent spread of infection) prior to entering contact isolation room for one resident (Resident 13). 3. Two certified nurse assistants failed to sanitize hands before entering patient rooms. 4. Staff failed to appropriately handle and dispose of soiled bandage. These failures had the potential to cause the spread of infection to a vulnerable elderly and immune compromised population. Findings: 1. During an concurrent observation and interview on 11/14/22, with the infection preventionist (IP) during initial pool, Resident 76's room was observed. There was an isolation cart by the door. There was no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 273; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PROVIDENCE GROUP INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 08/01/2021 |
| TAVARI, DANIEL | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 08/01/2023 |
| VANDERFORD, TEI | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 12/05/2023 |
| APT, FREDERICK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| JERGENSEN, JOSHUA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| MITCHELL, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties (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 555794. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-21, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.