North Park Post-Acute
2586 Buthmann Ave, Tracy, CA 95376 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 99 certified beds · (209) 832-2273 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (44) — 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
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.0% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.1% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 0.8% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.8% | 7.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.4% | 1.6% | 3.3% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.1% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.2% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.5% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.3% | 10.2% | 21.2% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.6% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.1% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.6% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.1% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.7% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.24 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.24 | 1.57 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ 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.
66.8% 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 171 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 53.1% 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 98 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 0.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 73% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 66.8%CMS range 59.5–73.7 | 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 | 11.9%CMS range 9.5–14.6 | 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 | 53.1% | 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 | 46.9% | 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 | 64.3% | 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 | 97.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 1.5% | 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 | 7.2%CMS range 4.7–10.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.99 | 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 93.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.16 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.70 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 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 3.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.26 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.76 to 0.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
44 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-10-04 · 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 one of twenty-three sampled residents (Resident 596) received quality care when, Resident 596, who was diabetic (inability for the body to regulate blood sugar/glucose levels) and received insulin (injectable medication used to control/regulate blood sugar/glucose levels) and oral anti-diabetic medications; 1. Experienced injuries from an unwitnessed fall resulting from low blood sugar levels on 9/20/24, 2. Exhibited signs of confusion and altered level of consciousness (a change in a person's state of awareness) and a licensed nurse did not implement emergent nursing interventions to assess Resident 596's blood glucose (BG) level on 9/20/24, 3. A licensed nurse did not inform Emergency Medical Services (EMS, ambulance/fire/police) of Resident 596's diabetic diagnosis or when she had her last dose of Lantus (Insulin) on 9/20/24; and, 4. Resident 596's Attending Physician (AP) did not ensure she had orders for BG monitoring and testing. These…
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 · E2026-01-30 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Resident or Responsible Party (RP, someone who can help the resident and, as necessary, make decisions for the resident) was informed and consented to the use of psychotropic (drugs that affect a person's mind, emotions, and behavior) medications for five of 46 sampled residents (Resident 2, Resident 112, Resident 8, Resident 3, and Resident 19).Resident 2,Resident 112,Resident 8,Resident 3,Resident 19,These failures had the potential for not honoring the resident's right to be informed about his or her medical treatment, including medication side effects or other alternative options.Findings: 1.A review of Resident 2's admission Record, indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included cognitive communication deficit (difficulty understanding or expressing thoughts), need for assistance with personal care, and unspecified dementia (memory loss and confusion affecting daily functioning). A review of Resident 2's Order Audit Report, dated 1/6/26, indicated the 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 · Ecited before2026-01-30 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accommodate the needs of six of 46 sampled residents (Resident 28, Resident 112, Resident 72, Resident 114, Resident 115, and Resident 117) when the following residents did not have access to their call lights (devices used to contact staff for assistance):1.Resident 28,2. Resident 112,3.Resident 72,4.Resident 114,5.Resident 115,6.Resident 117,These failures placed Resident 28, Resident 112, Resident 72, Resident 114, Resident 115, and Resident 117 at increased risk for unmet care needs, delayed staff response, falls, and potential for injury. Findings: 1.A review of Resident 28's admission RECORD, indicated Resident 28 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis of, but not limited to dementia (a condition that affects the brain and causes problems with memory, thinking, and daily activities), seizure (a sudden change in the brain's activity that causes unusual movements, behavior, or awareness), and anxiety disorder (a mental condition where a person can experience excessive, persistent worry, fear or…
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 before2026-01-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 a homelike environment for three of 46 sampled residents (Resident 18, Resident 82, Resident 95) when,A bowel movement (BM) was found in the facility's South Hall, In room [ROOM NUMBER], the window blinds were broken and there were floor tiles missing next to Resident 82's bed, In room [ROOM NUMBER], a tall dresser used by Resident 18 was missing knobs on one of the drawers and the bottom drawer had the front panel broken and laying on the bottom of the dresser, andStaff personal belongings were stored in Resident 95's room.These failures could have resulted in the residents not experiencing a clean and well-maintained homelike environment. Findgings: 1.During an observation at 1/26/26 at 9:20 a.m., the facility staff was observed walking around a brown BM on the floor in the South Hall with a noticeable odor. During a concurrent observation and interview on 1/26/26 at 9:26 a.m. with the Social Services Assistant (SSA), the SSA…
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 · E2026-01-30 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Findings: Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that three of 46 sampled residents (Resident 7, Resident 39, and Resident 89) had an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) completed when: 1. Resident 7's MDS was coded as not receiving dialysis (a treatment to cleanse the blood of wastes and extra fluids artificially through a machine when the kidney[s] have failed) services while receiving dialysis three times per week, 2. Resident 39's decreased range of motion (ROM) from contractures (a stiffening/shortening at any joint, that reduces the joint's range of motion) in his right shoulder, right arm, and right hand were coded as having no impairment,3. Resident 89's use of oxygen was coded as not in use.These failures had the potential for Resident 7, Resident 36, and Resident 89 to not have received appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain their health and highest practicable physical needs met.Findings: 1. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-30 · tag F0645 — patternPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 two of 46 sampled residents (Resident 1 and Resident 8) had properly completed Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR: required screening done before admission to identify mental illness, intellectual disability, or related conditions and ensure proper placement and services) and received required PASRR Level II (a more detailed evaluation completed when a resident is suspected of having mental illness or intellectual disability to determine needed specialized services) evaluation when;1.Resident 1's diagnosis of developmental disorder of scholastic skills (difficulty learning skills such as reading, writing, or understanding information) was not marked on Resident 1's PASRR screening, 2.Resident 8, who had a diagnosis of schizophrenia, had a PASRR Level II evaluation that was closed because the evaluating agency was unable to contact or obtain required information from the facility.These failures had the potential for Resident 1 and Resident 8 not to be properly evaluated, receive…
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 before2026-01-30 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that oxygen and nebulizer breathing treatment tubing were changed, stored and kept off the floor for 4 of 31 residents (Resident 54, Resident 89, Resident 97, and Resident 115) whom received oxygen therapy when:1.Resident 54's oxygen tubing was not stored in a protective bag and was not labeled with the date of first use;2. Resident 89's oxygen tubing was not stored in a protective bag and had a date of first use of 1/19/26;3. Resident 97's oxygen tubing was not stored in a protective bag, was undated, and was lying on the floor; and4. Resident 115's breathing treatment tubing was not stored in a protective bag and was not labeled with the date of first use.These failures placed Resident 54, Resident 89, Resident 97, and Resident 115 at risk for pulmonary (lung) infections.Findings:1. During a review of Resident 54's clinical record, titled admission RECORD, the record indicated that Resident 54 was admitted to the facility in 2025 with diagnoses that included but not limited to heart failure (a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-30 · 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 store, prepare, and serve food per safety standards when:Two pans that were worn were not replaced; andA rusted scraper was stored with clean utensils in a drawerThese failures had the potential to lead to cross contamination and food borne illness (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea) for a facility census of 94 residents eating facility prepared meals.Findings:1.During the initial kitchen tour on 1/27/26 at 9:15 a.m., with the certified dietary manager (CDM), the CDM verified two pans that were worn in appearance were stored in the food prep area.During an interview on 1/28/26 at 3:10 p.m., with the registered dietitian (RD), the RD stated worn pans should not have been kept in the kitchen. The RD further stated the use of worn pans when cooking food could have caused cross contamination (accidental transfer of harmful germs, bacteria, or allergens from one surface, food, or person to another) in the food that was prepared by kitchen staff.During an interview on 1/29/26 at 9:21 a.m. with the CDM, the CDM stated worn…
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 before2026-01-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to practice appropriate infection prevention and control measures for 3 of 46 sampled residents (Resident 103 and Resident 127, and Resident 128) when1.Resident 103 had unlabeled perishable food (food that can spoil or go bad if not stored properly) on the bedside table; and2. Residents 128 and Resident 127 was observed without the required Enhanced Barrier Precaution signage posted at the door.These failures could result in food borne illnesses for Resident 103 and increased risk of transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (germs that are very hard to kill because many antibiotics don't work on them) or other infectious pathogens (germs that can cause disease) to Residents 128 and 127, other residents, staff, and visitors. Findings: 1.A review of Resident 103's admission RECORD, indicated Resident 103 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included sepsis (a serious body infection), diabetes mellitus type II (a condition that causes high blood sugar), muscle weakness, hypo-osmolality, 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 · D2026-01-30 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to treat a resident with dignity and respect by not honoring her preferred form of address for 1 of 46 sampled residents (Resident 95), when CNA 1 addressed Resident 95 as Honey.This deficient practice had the potential to negatively affect Resident 95's dignity and emotional well-being.Findings:During a review of Resident 95's clinical record titled, admission RECORD, the record indicated Resident 95 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis of, but not limited to muscle weakness, reduced mobility, and dementia (a condition that causes problems with memory, thinking, and daily activities).During an observation on 1/27/26 at 10:56 AM in Resident 95's room, Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) 1 addressed Resident 95 as Honey three times while providing bedside care.During an interview on 1/27/26 at 10:58 AM with Resident 95 in Resident 95's room, Resident 95 was asked if she was okay being called Honey. Resident 95 stated no and added that she preferred to be called by her name. Resident 95 stated further that…
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 · D2026-01-30 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 that a federally required comprehensive assessment (an in-depth, interdisciplinary evaluation of a resident's physical, functional, psychosocial, and cognitive status, typically conducted upon admission and after significant changes in condition) was completed within the required timeframe for two (2) of 46 sampled residents (Resident 18 and Resident 54) when:1. Resident 18's required Minimum Data Set (MDS -a federally mandated, standardized, and comprehensive assessment tool used in long term care facilities to evaluate a resident's functional, medical, and psychosocial status) annual assessment was not completed within the required 14 days of the assessment reference date (ARD - the specific endpoint of the observation or look back period, serving as the common reference point for assessing a resident's status ).2. Resident 54's required MDS admission comprehensive assessment was not completed within the required 14 days from Resident 54's…
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 33 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-30 · 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 three (3) of 46 sampled residents (Resident 2, Resident 7, and Resident 54) were kept free from the potential for injury when,1.A regular bed mattress was stored upright against the wall in Resident 2's room,2. Resident 54's order for floor pads next to both sides of the bed was not followed,3. room [ROOM NUMBER] had a metal strip, 6 inches in length and 1/4 inch in width, noted to be protruding at knee height out of the wall in a loop type fashion (coming out of the wall at top and back into the wall at the bottom) next to the bathroom door near Resident 7's bed.These failures placed Resident 2, Resident 7 and Resident 54 at increased risk for sustaining an injury.Findings: 1.A review of Resident 2's admission Record, indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the circulatory system, other abnormalities of gait and mobility, cognitive…
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 · D2026-01-30 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess and obtain a physician's order for the safe use of bed rails (side rails, metal or plastic rails that can attached to the side of a bed) for 1 of 46 sampled residents (Resident 1) when, Resident 1's side rail screening tool (an assessment used to decide if bed rails are safe and needed for a resident) was completed incorrectly and Resident 1 did not have a physician's order to ensure side rails were clinically appropriate and safe.This failure placed Resident 1 at risk for entrapment (an event in which an individual is caught, trapped or entangled in the space) and could have led to serious injury.Findings:A review of Resident 1's admission RECORD, indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage affecting left non-dominant side (weakness or paralysis on the left side of the body caused by bleeding in the brain not related to injury), unsteadiness on feet, cognitive communication deficit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-30 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of 46 sampled residents (Resident 3) prescribed psychotropic drugs (drugs that affect a person's mind, emotions, and behavior) was free from unnecessary medications when Resident 3's as needed (PRN) order for alprazolam (used for short term relief of anxiety, by calming the nervous system) did not have a stop date.This failure had the potential to negatively affect Resident 3's health and well-being.Findings:A review of Resident 1's admission RECORD, indicated Resident 3 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included an anxiety disorder (persistent, excessive, and irrational fear or worry that interferes with daily life) and post-traumatic stress disorder (a mental health condition that's caused by an extremely stressful or terrifying event).During a concurrent interview and record review on 1/29/26 at 11:33 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON), Resident 3's Order Summary, dated 11/29/26, was reviewed. The DON confirmed Resident 3's order for alprazolam (a medication to reduce anxiety) was given 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 before2026-01-30 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored and labeled to meet professional standards of practice for one of four medication carts when:1. One of four medication carts, Cart 4, contained three insulin pens (a medication dispensing device that help deliver medicine to lower blood sugar) and one insulin vial (a small container of medication) without open dates; and2. One of four medication carts, Cart 4, contained loose pills in the medication drawers.These failures had the potential to reduce the efficacy (effective of the medication) of the insulins and for bubble packs (single dose medication packets) to be short of resident needed medications, negatively impacting residents' health related to ineffective insulin from reduced potency and delayed medication administration related to undiscovered loss of medication from bubble packs.Findings:1.During a concurrent interview and observation of medication cart 4 on 1/27/26 at 2:20 PM, with licensed nurse licensed nurse (LN 10), the top left drawer of the medication cart…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag 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 adequate supervision and a safe environment was provided to prevent an elopement (a resident leaves the facility or a secured area without staff permission or knowledge, putting them at severe risk of injury, getting lost, or death from exposure, traffic, or missed medical care) from occurring for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1) when, Resident 1, with severe cognitive impairment (a condition that affects a person's ability to think clearly, remember information, and make safe decisions) and known wandering risk, eloped from the facility during the night on 12/16/25 through an unlocked and unalarmed door located in the facilities laundry room.This failure resulted in Resident 1 leaving the facility without immediate staff knowledge of Resident 1's departure, Resident 1 remained missing for several hours during the night/early morning hours, Resident 1 entered a private residence approximately 0.4 miles from the facility,…
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 before2025-03-13 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 the transfer or discharge requirements were met for one sampled resident (Resident 1) when, the facility issued a 30-Day Notice of Discharge/Eviction to Resident 1 and Resident 1's Responsible Party (RP) for a denial of payment for services while an application for Medi-Cal (a public health insurance program which provides needed health care services for low-income people) was pending. This failure had the potential to negatively impact Resident 1's psychosocial well-being due to being given the 30-Day Notice of Discharge/Eviction. Findings: A review of Resident 1's social services note, dated 1/8/25, at 3:15 PM, indicated the facility was aware Resident 1's Medi-Cal application was in review. Review of Resident 1's social services note, dated 1/11/25, at 3:31 PM, indicated, Resident 1's RP acknowledged that Resident 1's Medi-Cal application was still under review and was not currently active. During an interview on 3/27/25, at 2:05 PM, with the Social Service Director (SSD), the SSD stated if a Medi-Cal application…
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 before2024-10-04 · 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 store and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service and safety when: 1. Dietary Aide (DA) 1 was not wearing a hair net while in the kitchen, 2. Drinking glasses and food containers were wet nested (stacked wet promoting growth of bacteria), 3. Clean fruit cups, stored under the dishwasher, had water dripping onto them, 4. Expired yogurt was available for resident consumption, 5. Dishwasher water temperature was not in range, 6. Parts per million (PPM - amount of solution in water) of the dishwashing solution was below the accepted standard, 7. Two of three utensil drawers contained a moderate amount of dust and debris, 8. Two dented cans of corn were found in food storage; available for resident consumption, 9. Three fans in the kitchen, including the food prep area, contained a moderate amount of dust and debris; and, 10. There was a moderate amount of dust and debris on the counter above the stove top and on the oven. These failures had the potential of leading to food borne…
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 before2024-10-04 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the safe use of insulin (a high-risk injectable medication used to treat diabetes, a blood sugar disease) for two residents with diabetes (Resident 1 and Resident 596) out of a sample of 23 residents, when: 1. Resident 1's order for insulin did not include parameters with instruction when blood sugar was high, and ongoing high blood sugar levels were not treated or reported to the medical doctor; and, 2. Resident 596's diabetic medication and insulin use was not monitored by blood sugar measurement. These failures may have contributed to unsafe insulin and antidiabetic drug use and subsequent adverse events. Findings: 1. During a review of Resident 1's electronic medical record (EMR) titled, Diagnosis, the record indicated diagnoses of diabetes, heart, and kidney disease while under hospice care (comfort care) via primary care Medical Doctor (MD). During a review of Resident 1's EMR titled, Medication Administration Record, (or MAR, a document which lists medications and treatments administered based on doctor's…
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 · E2024-10-04 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 an anti-anxiety medication was administered correctly for 1 of 23 sampled residents (Resident 61) when Resident 61 received a lower dose of anxiety medication 18 times in May of 2024 and once in September of 2024. This failure had the potential for Resident 61 to experience increased anxiety and emotional distress. Findings: Review of Resident 61's physician orders indicated, Lorazepam [or Ativan-an anxiety medication] oral tablet 1 mg [mg-milligram is a unit of measure]; Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours for agitation with behaviors; Start Date: 4/29/24. During a comparative review of Resident 61's Controlled Drug Record (CDR, a paper record that keeps track of controlled medications and is used for accountability) and the MAR (a record of medications ordered and administered) for May 2024 and September 2024, the MAR documentation did not match the removal from the CDR when Ativan 0.5 mg was removed by nursing staff as follows: 5/3/24- two times Ativan 0.5mg given and documented as Ativan 1 mg given, 5/4/24-…
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 · E2024-10-04 · tag F0887 — patternEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 documented evidence of education for immunizations when four of four sampled residents' (Resident 14, Resident 17, Resident 20, and Resident 42) and one unsampled resident's (Resident 23) clinical records did not contain documented evidence of education for the COVID-19 vaccination. This failure had the potential for Resident 14, Resident 17, Resident 20, Resident 42, and Resident 23 to not be aware or informed of the benefits, risks, and potential side-effects of the COVID-19 vaccination prior to receiving or declining the vaccination. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on 10/4/24, at 8:40 AM, with the Infection Preventionist (IP), the IP acknowledged the box titled, Education Provided to Resident/Family, was not checked, and the IP confirmed the medical records for Resident 14, Resident 17, Resident 20, Resident 42, and Resident 23 did not contain documented evidence of education for the COVID-19 vaccinations risk and benefits to the above residents was provided. During an interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-04 · 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 homelike environment was provided for 2 of 23 sampled residents (Resident 382 and Resident 3) when: 1. Resident 382's floor tiles were replaced with a rubber strip; and, 2. Resident 3 had broken blinds in her room. This failure had the potential to negatively impact Resident 382 and Resident 3's feelings of well-being in the facility. Findings: 1. During an interview on 10/2/24, at 3:59 PM, with Resident 382's Responsible Party (RP) 1, RP 1 stated she was afraid of tripping over the black part on the floor. RP 1 further stated that she had tripped over the black rubber strip a couple times in the past. RP 1 explained Resident 382's room was the only room on the unit that had the black rubber strip located right at the doorway entrance. RP 1 stated that she did not like the way the rubber strip looked and considered it to be a hazard. During concurrent observation and interview at 10/2/24, at 4:10 PM, with the Maintenance Director (DOM), the DOM confirmed no other doorways in the North Station had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-04 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop baseline care plans (captures key resident needs and must be developed within 48 hours of admission) for 2 of 23 sampled residents (Resident 545 and Resident 596) when: 1. A baseline care plan was not developed for Resident 545's right groin redness, left groin redness and perirectal (affecting the skin around the rectum) area redness within 48 hours of Resident 545's admission; and, 2. A diabetic (blood sugar disease) baseline care plan was not developed for Resident 596's plan of care to address management, treatment, and monitoring of her diagnosis of diabetes and multiple diabetic medications including insulin (a drug given as shot to treat blood sugar) and oral antidiabetic medications. These failures had the potential to result in Resident 545's identified skin issues to worsen and care needs not being met and resulted in a lack of healthcare information necessary to provide effective and person-centered care for Resident 596 which…
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 · D2024-10-04 · tag F0710 — isolatedObtain a doctor's order to admit a resident and ensure the resident is under a doctor's care.
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 attending physician (AP) failed to provide orders for routine blood glucose (sugar) monitoring and provide adequate physician oversight and management for diabetic (blood sugar disease) care for one of twenty-three sampled residents (Resident 596) when, Resident 596 who was diabetic and received multiple medications to treat her diabetes did not have orders for routine blood sugar monitoring and did not have orders to manage complications associated with her anti-diabetic medication administration and diabetic diagnosis and care. This failure contributed to Resident 596 experiencing a fall related to low blood sugar, resulting in hospitalization and transfer to the intensive care unit (a department within a hospital for the critically ill), and subsequent adverse events including new onset seizures (unusual brain activity and involuntary movement). Findings: Review of Resident 596's admission RECORD, indicated Resident 596 was initially admitted to the facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe medication storage practices in medication carts (a mobile cart storing medications to be administered to residents) for a census of 93 when: 1. Medication Cart #4 at the facility's South station stored an outdated Lantus insulin Pen (blood sugar drug in a pen form) with an open date (the date the insulin was out of refrigerator and was started to be used) of [DATE] and the pharmacy label indicated discard 28 days after opening; and, 2. The treatment cart at the facility's North station stored an opened bottle of Sterile Sodium Chloride [a mixture of salt and water that is free from bacteria which is used to rinse sinuses, clean wounds, flush eyes and more] in the cart. These failed practices may result in residents receiving expired or unusable medications. Findings: 1. During a concurrent interview and inspection of medication cart #4 at facility's North Station, on [DATE], at 11:27 AM, accompanied by Licensed Nurse 5 (LN)…
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 · D2024-10-04 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 documented evidence of education for immunizations (a process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination) when: 1. One of four sampled residents' (Resident 14) and one unsampled resident (Resident 23) records did not indicate education was provided for the Influenza (a common, sometimes deadly viral infection of the nose, throat and lungs, also called flu) vaccine; and, 2. One unsampled resident's (Resident 23) record did not indicate education was provided for the Pneumococcal Polysaccharide (PPSV 23 - for prevention of pneumonia; an infection that affects one or both lungs) vaccine. This failure had the potential for Resident 14 and Resident 23 to not be aware or informed of the benefits, risks, and potential side-effects of the vaccinations prior to receiving or declining the vaccination. Findings: 1. During a concurrent record review and interview on 10/4/24, at 8:40 AM, with the Infection Preventionist (IP), Resident 14's Influenza record, dated 9/29/23, was reviewed. The IP…
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 before2024-04-23 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 facility policy and standards of practice for medication administration for three of four sampled residents, (Resident 1, Resident 2, and Resident 3) when: 1. Licensed Nurse (LN) 2, failed to sign off medications at the time of administration for Resident 1, Resident 2, and Resident 3; 2. LN 6 administered morning medications late to Resident 1 on 3/7/24; and, 3. LN 4 left the medication cart unattended with medications on top. These failures had the potential for Resident 1, Resident 2, and Resident 3 to receive a duplication of their medications, for Resident 1 to experience health effects from late medications, and for a resident to inadvertently take medications left out on the cart. Findings: 1a. A review of the Medication Administration Audit Report (MAAR), dated 3/5/24 to 3/7/24, indicated medications due for Resident 1 on 3/6/24 at 7 AM, 8 AM, and 11 AM were signed off by LN 2 as follows: Prednisone (a steroid medication) and Rivaroxaban (a blood thinner medication) due at 7 AM were signed off…
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 before2024-01-05 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 readmit Resident 1 after he transferred to an acute care hospital and was ready to return to the facility. This failure resulted in a violation of Resident 1's right to return to the facility and had the potential to cause psychosocial harm due to not being able to return to the facility. Findings: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in July of 2023 with diagnoses which included unspecified cirrhosis of the liver (a disorder in which the liver is scarred or permanently damaged) and chronic pain syndrome. During a telephone interview on 1/5/24, at 8:03 AM, the Ombudsman (OMB) stated there had been a conflict between Resident 1 and the facility. The OMB further stated the facility contacted law enforcement, and Resident 1 was sent to an acute care hospital. The OMB stated hospital staff talked to the Administrator (ADM) and the social services department and they refused to accept Resident 1 back. During a telephone interview on 1/5/24, at 11:10 AM,…
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 · D2023-12-26 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to consistently schedule and document quarterly Interdisciplinary Team (IDT, care team consisting of different disciplines who assess and coordinate care), care plan conferences (a meeting which provides opportunities for the resident's and/or their representative, and each discipline to revise the residents plan of care) for three of three sampled residents (Resident 1, Resident 2, and Resident 3). These failures had the potential for unmet care needs for Resident 1, Resident 2, and Resident 3. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 1's admission RECORD, indicated she was admitted to the facility in September of 2021, with diagnoses which included unspecified dementia (condition characterized by memory disorders, personality changes and impaired reasoning), and psychotic disorder with delusions (a mental disorder characterized by disconnection from reality). A review of Resident 1's clinical document titled, Multidisciplinary Care Conference v.3, dated 9/29/22, indicated there was no entry in the following sections: .Meeting Date…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-19 · 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 resident needs were met when: 1. Staff did not respond in a timely manner to calls for help for 5 of 13 sampled residents (Resident 2, Resident 3, Resident 5, Resident 7, and Resident 13); and, 2. The nursing call light system was not fully functional for rooms 28-53 (South Hall) and 45 of 47 residents were not provided an alternate audible method to call staff for help. These failures resulted in Resident 7 not receiving the assistance needed after she fell on 9/2/23 and 9/5/23, and Resident 2, Resident 3, Resident 5, and Resident 13 waiting up to three hours for assistance, with a potential to experience anxiety and feelings of neglect. Findings: 1a. A review of Resident 7's admission Record indicated Resident 7 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included a fracture of her right lower leg and unsteadiness on her feet. During an interview with Family Member (FM) 2, on 9/26/23, at 8:28 AM, FM 2 stated Resident 13…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 a safe and hazard free environment when safe water temperatures were not maintained in five of five sampled resident restrooms, and two out of four resident shower rooms. This failure had the potential to cause physical harm to the residents in the facility. Findings: During a record review of the facility document titled, Water Temperature Checks: Test and log the hot water temperatures, dated February through July of 2023, indicated the following out of range water temperatures: 2/13/2023 RM (room) 1 126 F (Fahrenheit - a unit of measure), RM [ROOM NUMBER] 122 F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 128 F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 130 F; 3/31/2023 Front Bathroom [ROOM NUMBER] F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 122 F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 118 F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 124 F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 124 F; 4/7/2023 RM [ROOM NUMBER] 118 F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 119 F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 122 F, Front Bathroom [ROOM NUMBER] F; 4/10/2023 Front Bathroom [ROOM NUMBER] F, RM [ROOM NUMBER] 122 F;…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-01 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory care provided was consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 of 12 residents receiving respiratory treatment (Resident 22 and Resident 65) when: 1. Oxygen therapy was provided without a physician order for Resident 22; and, 2. Resident 65's oxygen order was not followed. These failures placed Resident 22 and Resident 65 at risk for respiratory distress and inadequate treatment. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 22's admission Record indicated Resident 22 was admitted to the facility in 2021 with diagnoses which included chronic respiratory failure (when the lungs cannot get enough oxygen into the blood or eliminate enough carbon dioxide from the body). During a review of Resident 22's oxygen care plan, dated 8/15/23, the care plan indicated, Interventions .Administered [sic] oxygen as ordered . During a concurrent observation and interview on 8/30/23, at 2:31 p.m., with licensed nurse (LN) 6 in Resident 22's room, Resident 22 was observed lying in bed and receiving oxygen via…
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 · E2023-09-01 · tag F0711 — patternEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
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 doctor's progress notes (doctor's note about resident progress, care, and medical issues) and/or History and Physical (or H&P - the most formal and complete assessment of the resident's medical problems) were documented and available in the medical records for 3 of 25 sampled residents (Resident 23, Resident 27, and Resident 45). These failed practices may contribute to unsafe care and poor communication, or coordination of care among staff members caring for the residents. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 23's electronic medical record indicated Resident 23 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple medical diagnoses and medications to treat them. During a concurrent interview and review of Resident 23's medical record, both electronic and paper version, on 8/30/23, at 8:48 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) 6 acknowledged the physician's progress notes were not available in the medical record both electronically and in the paper chart. LN 6…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-01 · 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 production when: 1. Open food packages (1 bag of bread rolls, and a box of fried chicken breast patties) were not labeled with an open date; and, 2. An expired food product (an open bag of carrot cake mix) was not removed. These failures had the potential to expose 96 residents of a census of 97 to food borne illnesses (refers to illness caused by the ingestion of contaminated food or beverages). Findings: On 8/29/23, at 8:47 a.m., during an initial tour of the kitchen accompanied by the [NAME] (CK), the following findings were observed: 1. a. An opened clear plastic bag containing approximately 20 bread rolls was not labeled with an open date. The CK stated the bag should have been labeled with an open date. 1b. An opened box containing approximately 20 fried chicken breast patties was not labeled with an open date. The CK further stated it should have been labeled with an open date once the box was opened by kitchen staff. The CK explained the risk was not knowing how old the food was. 2.…
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 · E2023-09-01 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain its Antibiotic Stewardship Program (ASP- efforts to measure and improve how antibiotics prescribed by doctors and used by patients with goal of reducing inappropriate antibiotic use) when the facility did not ensure appropriate monitoring and use of antibiotics for 3 of 17 residents who were on antibiotics (Resident 27, Resident 40, and Resident 69) when: 1. Resident 27 was prescribed two antimicrobials (drugs that treat infections caused by microbes like bacteria, yeast, or mold) for ongoing use without any documentation of continued use and re-assessment. 2. Resident 40 was prescribed an antibiotic for ongoing use without any documentation of continued use or re-assessment. 3. Resident 69 was prescribed an antibiotic for ongoing use to which the bacteria was resistant. These failed practices could pose unsafe antimicrobial drug use and contribute to resistance patterns (resistance happens when germs like bacteria or yeast develop the ability…
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 F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a call light was within reach for 1 of 25 sampled residents (Resident 64). This failure had the potential to result in Resident 64 being unable to ask for needed assistance and to negatively impact his physical and psychosocial well-being. Findings: A review of Resident 64's admission Record indicated Resident 64 was admitted to the facility with multiple diagnoses which included Alzheimer's Disease (a brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills, and to carry out the simplest tasks), acute respiratory failure, anxiety, major depressive disorder, heart failure and presence of cardiac pacemaker (a medical device to stimulate heart muscles to ensure the heart is beating). During a concurrent observation and interview on 8/29/23, at 12:06 p.m., with Licensed Nurse (LN) 1, Resident 64's's door was closed. Upon entry into the room, Resident 64 was sleeping in bed with no call light in reach. LN 1 looked for the call light and found it inside Resident 64's dresser drawer, and stated the call…
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 · D2023-09-01 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 25 sampled resident's (Resident 396) right to self-determination was respected when, Resident 396 and Family Member (FM) 1 requested a female Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) as a care giver and staff did not honor Resident 396's wishes. This failure had the potential to negatively impact Resident 396's psychosocial well-being. Findings: Review of Resident 396's admission Record indicated Resident 396 was admitted to the facility in 2023. Review of Resident 396's Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool used to guide resident care) section G, dated 8/25/23, indicated, Resident 396 needed, . physical assist in dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene, including total dependence for bathing. During an interview on 8/29/23, at 3:07 p.m., Family Member (FM) 1 indicated Resident 396 preferred a female CNA as her care giver. FM 1 stated he had communicated Resident 396's preference to the Case Manager (CM). FM 1 further stated Resident 396's assigned CNA was a male on 8/29/23. During a concurrent…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-01 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 25 sampled residents (Resident 16), had a care plan (a formal process that correctly identifies existing needs and recognizes potential needs or risks) developed to address Resident 16's arteriovenous fistula (AV- connection between an artery and a vein used as an access site for dialysis, a procedure to remove wastes and excess fluids from the body when the kidneys stop working properly.) This failure had the potential for Resident 16's fistula to be unattended and could possibly lead to complications and risk for infection. Findings: A review of Resident 16's admission Record indicated Resident 16 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease (a medical condition when the kidneys are unable to filter waste products from the blood) and dependence on dialysis. According to Resident 16's Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool), dated 8/7/23, indicated, Resident 16 required dialysis. During a concurrent interview and record review on 9/1/23, at 12:41 p.m., with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-01 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe monitoring practices for high-risk medication (drugs with potential to cause harm without monitoring) use in 2 out of 25 sampled residents (Resident 60 and Resident 390) when: 1. Resident 60 was prescribed a high-risk blood thinner medication called apixaban (or Eliquis, a blood thinner medication that could cause bleeding) without side effect monitoring and assessment; and, 2. Resident 390 was prescribed a high-risk medication called digoxin (used to control heart rate and rhythm) without any monitoring parameter or care planning. These failures had the potential to result in unsafe medication use and adverse consequences. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 60's electronic medical record, Progress Notes: Nursing, dated 8/1/23, indicated, [Resident 60] was admitted [to the facility] on 7/31/23 for .Therapy .and nursing services for medication management. The note further indicated Resident 60 was receiving an injectable (shot into the skin) form of blood thinner called Enoxaparin (a blood thinner…
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 · D2023-09-01 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents receiving dialysis (procedure done by a trained professional to remove wastes and excess fluids from the body when the kidneys stop working properly) received quality care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for one of three residents (Resident 16), when Resident 16's arteriovenous fistula (AV- connection between an artery and a vein used as an access site for dialysis) was not assessed and monitored regularly for bruit (a sound heard through a stethoscope) and/or thrill (vibrations felt by touch). This failure increased the potential risk for delayed detection, reporting, and/or management of complications from the dialysis access site for Resident 16. Findings: A review of Resident 16's admission Record indicated Resident 16 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease (a medical condition when the kidneys are unable to filter waste products from the blood) and dependence on dialysis. According to the Minimum Data Set…
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 F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 safe disposal and destruction of the non-narcotic (not an opioid drug) prescription medications for a census of 97. This failed practice could result in drug diversion or unsafe and unlawful use of prescription medications. Findings: During an inspection of the facility's medication room in the South station on 8/29/23, at 9:50 a.m., accompanied by the Case Manager (CM), the logbook titled, Medication Disposition Record/Pass Log, with date range of 3/25/23 and 8/27/23, indicated disposition of the medications was not witnessed by a second licensed staff. The column on the log sheet, titled as Witnessed by ., was not marked by a second signature. CM confirmed the markings on the logbook. In an interview with Director of Nursing (DON) on 8/31/23, at 9: 39 a.m., the DON stated the nursing staff were assigned to destroy unused or discontinued prescription medications on a regular basis. The DON stated the destructions were performed by one licensed nurse. The DON further stated the facility's policy allowed one nurse 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 · D2023-09-01 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 resident's in a sample of 25 (Resident 140) nutritional needs were met when the facility did not provide a mechanically soft diet (food chopped for easier chewing and swallowing). This failure had the potential for Resident 140 to aspirate (choke on food) her food. Findings: A review of Resident 140's admission Record, indicated Resident 140 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included, pneumonia (respiratory infection) and chronic kidney disease (a gradual loss of kidney function over time). During a concurrent observation and interview with Resident 140 on 8/31/23, at 8:03 AM, Resident 140's meal tray arrived. The tray consisted of two sausages with gravy, french toast with no syrup on it, an over easy egg, and hot cereal. Resident 140 stated she did not like the breakfast. The tray card indicated the meal should be of mechanical soft consistency. The food was not of a mechanical soft consistency. During an interview with certified nursing assistant (CNA) 1, on 8/31/23, at 8:40 AM,…
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 · D2023-09-01 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 resident in a sample of 25 (Resident 140) food preferences were honored when Resident 140's food preferences were not listed on her tray card (a card that displays the resident's name, food preferences, likes and dislikes, and meal type and consistency). This failure had the potential for Resident 140 to eat less of her meals and result in weight loss. Findings: A review of Resident 140's admission Record, indicated Resident 140 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included, pneumonia (respiratory infection) and chronic kidney disease (a gradual loss of kidney function over time). During an interview on 8/29/23, at 2:52 PM, Resident 140 stated her food preferences were not being honored. Resident 140 further stated she received food she doesn't like, such as gravy and hot cereals. Resident 140 stated she had put her food likes and dislikes on the tray card but was still receiving food she did not like. During a follow up observation and interview with Resident 140 on 8/31/23, at 8:03 AM,…
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 F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain its infection control program when licensed nurse (LN) 1 did not don(put on) personal protective equipment (PPE - worn to protect against bacteria and viruses) correctly prior to entering the room of a COVID-19 positive resident. This failure had the potential for LN 1 to become infected with COVID 19 and transmitting COVID 19 to other residents in her care. Findings: During an observation on 9/1/23, at 9:46 AM, a staff member donned PPE to enter a resident room, including an N95 respirator (a respiratory protective device designed to achieve a very close facial fit and efficient filtration of airborne particles). Signage on the door indicated, RED ZONE [a room designated to isolate a resident with COVID-19]. During a concurrent observation and interview with licensed nurse (LN) 1, on 9/1/23, at 9:48 AM, LN 1 exited the room. LN 1 had a regular face mask under the N95. LN 1 confirmed she was wearing the N95 respirator over a regular face mask. LN 1 stated she should not be wearing an N95 respirator…
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 ASPEN SKILLED HEALTHCARE — 35 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 | 4 of 5 | 3.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 34 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.7★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ATBA, LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/03/2021 |
| SEQUOIA HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
| BRADSHAW, JEFFREY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
| BRADSHAW, PETER | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 07/07/2023 |
| BRADY, VERN | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
| CASE, RYAN | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
| ELSNER, ERIC | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/03/2021 |
| KIRKWOOD, JARED | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/03/2021 |
| ORGILL, CRAIG | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/03/2021 |
| PARTI, RAJESH | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/03/2021 |
| PARTI, SHRUTY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/03/2021 |
| PAXMAN, MARCUS | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
| RAWE, COLTON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
| CONCHA, DESIREE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/23/2021 |
| HOWARD, TANNER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/03/2022 |
| PATEL, PRANJALKUMAR | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2021 |
| ASPEN HEALTHCARE SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
| EAST WEST BANK | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/03/2021 |
| MOSS ADAMS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/03/2021 |
| WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/03/2021 |
| JURADO, FRANK | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 21 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.
6 organizational owners 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 $924K 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 555245. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-30, 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.