Springs Road Healthcare

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

59.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 114 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 49 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 65 beds and averages 60.1 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 5 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 3.97 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 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 3.65 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.10 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 to 0.46 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 20% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

24 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 14 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-06-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for a census of 58 when:1. Dietary Supervisor (DS) and Dietary Aide (DA) 1 were not wearing a beard net while inside the kitchen.2. [NAME] residue was present on the floor surface of the food warmer.3. The top surface of the knife holder had accumulated dust and residue.4. Black residue was present on the floor beneath the dishwasher area.5. Three quarter size hotel pans were stacked wet while stored away.6. Flies were present in the kitchen area and dry storage area.7. Four lunch trays containing uncovered desserts were transported through the hallway.These failures had potential to cause food-borne illnesses in a highly susceptible population who received food from the kitchen.Findings:1. During an observation on 6/9/26 at 8:04 a.m. at the kitchen's initial tour, DS had a beard but was not wearing a beard net while in the kitchen during…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-06-12 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — pattern
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  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 secure resident medical records containing Protected Health Information (PHI, any individually identifiable health information held, transmitted, or maintained by the health facility), for four Residents (Resident 11, Resident 39, Resident 59, and Resident 69) out of census of 58 residents, when the Treatment Nurse (TN) left printed wound treatment records on top of an unattended cart.This failure had the potential for unauthorized access by visitors, families, and other residents to Resident 11's, Resident 39's, Resident 59's, and Resident 69's medical records containing PHI.Findings: During an observation on 6/9/26 at 9:49 a.m. in the hallway outside of rooms 25 through 28 the TN left a paper stack of resident medical records unsecured on top of the treatment cart. Visitors, family members, and residents were observed walking past by the treatment cart within a viewing distance of the open, unsecured, and unprotected resident medical records. During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/9/26 at 9:53…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-12 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure services meet professional standards of quality for four residents (Resident 16, Resident 39, Resident 74, and Resident 6) for a census of 18, when:Medications were given without meals, as prescribed for Resident 16, Resident 39, and Resident 74;Medication with a box warning ((also known as black box warning- the strictest, most serious safety alert mandated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA [a federal agency of the United States government responsible for protecting public health]) was being administered for Resident 6 without monitoring for side effects to highlight severe, life-threatening, or permanently disabling risks)).These failures had the potential to cause:Residents 16, Resident 39, and Resident 74 to have adverse side effects related to medications being administered without meals;Staff not monitoring Resident 6 for side effects related to taking medications with a box warning; Findings:1. A review of Resident 16's Face…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure 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 properly labeled and stored in accordance with the accepted professional principles and current standard of practice for Resident 33 and Resident 22 and for census of 58 when:1. Resident 33 was found to have medications at the bedside.2. An opened, unlabeled box of Lidocaine Patches 5% was found in the medication cart, containing one unopened packet and 2 opened packets; and3. Resident 22's white envelope containing twenty-five dollars in cash were found inside the narcotic box in medication cart.These failures had the potential for diversion of unlabeled medications and risk resident's safety. Stored personal valuables in the narcotic cabinet compromise the security of the controlled medications.1.Review of Resident 33's Face Sheet (a summary page in a resident's medical record that contains key identifying information about the resident) indicated that Resident 33 was admitted May of 2026 with several diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease (a condition where arteries…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper infection control practices were implemented when: 1.Licensed Nurse (LN) 1 did not wear gown and gloves as indicated in Enhanced Barrier Precaution (EBP, an infection control intervention to reduce transmission of multi-drug-resistant organisms) guidance before entering the room and helped reposition Resident 9; 2. LN 3 took Resident 75's blood sugar and used disinfectant to clean the glucometers (hand-held devices that measure a person's blood glucose/sugar levels) that were not recommended by the manufacturer; Infection Preventionist (IP) B sanitized the glucometer using alcohol wipes before and after resident use; LN 3 stated she/he sanitized glucometer before and after resident use, using the alcohol wipes or the purple-top wipes (germicidal wipes); and, 3. Resident 48's nasal cannula was not stored in a bag. These failures had the potential to compromise resident's health and safety and potentially lead to the spread of…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop a communication/language barrier (an obstacle that prevents two or more people from understanding each other, that can lead to miscommunication) comprehensive care plan (CP- a personalized, written document that outlines how staff will manage a resident's medical, physical, and personal care needs daily) for one resident (Resident 6) out of 18 sampled residents, when there was no documented evidence of Resident 6's care plan addressing his preference to communicate in Spanish.This failure had the potential for miscommunication and misunderstanding when discussing medications, treatments, and care needs.Findings:A review of Resident 6's Face Sheet, indicated he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and his preadmission document titled, [Resident initials] referral, uploaded to his chart on 5/6/26, indicated Resident 6 was Spanish speaking.During a concurrent observation and interview on 6/9/26 at 10:36 a.m., in the hallway outside…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ddisputed · IDR2026-06-12 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure its medication error rate remained below five percent (5%) for two residents (Resident 25 and Resident 3) out of 18 sampled residents, when:Licensed Nurse (LN) 3 did not wear gloves when administering prescribed hazardous medication; and,LN 1 did not follow the physician's order when administering Resident 33's prescribed medications.These failures resulted in the facility's medication error rate of 6.45%, which had the potential for harm, worsening of existing conditions, or the development of new illnesses for Resident 25 and Resident 33.Findings:1. During a medication administration observation on 6/9/26 at 8:45 a.m., in Resident 25's room LN 3 did not wear gloves when dispensing the medication into a cup, and administering Topiramate (primarily used to treat and prevent seizures [epilepsy] and to prevent migraine headaches) tablet 100 mg (milligram, unit of measure) to Resident 25.A review of Resident 25's Order Summary Report (OSR) dated 2/21/25, indicated, Topiramate Tablet 100 MG Give 1.5 tablet…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled residents' (Resident 1) Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST- a medical order that tells healthcare providers what treatments a patient wants or does not want, especially in serious illness or end-of-life care) was not implemented following the resident's return from the emergency room.This failure has resulted in Resident 1's POLST not implemented and reduced the facility's potential to provide necessary care and services to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable wellbeing. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission record (AR- Front page of the chart that contains a summary of basic information about the resident), the AR indicated, Resident 1 was initially admitted to the facility 10/2018 with diagnoses including Acute Respiratory failure (a life threatening emergency where the lungs suddenly cannot get enough oxygen into the blood or remove carbon dioxide, often causing severe…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide professional standards of care for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when the x-ray (used to detect broken bones) order for Resident 1 was not carried out correctly.This failure resulted to an x-ray performed on Resident 1's right knee instead of the left knee. Resident 1's x-ray on the left knee indicated a fracture of the distal femur (a break in the thigh bone just above the knee joint) which required further evaluation and treatment in the acute care hospital.A review of the admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted April of 2023 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic polyneuropathy (long -term high blood sugar damages multiple nerves which leads to pain, tingling, burning, or numbness in the feet or hands) and weakness.A review of Resident 1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- an assessment tool to screen and identify memory, orientation, and judgement status) dated 2/17/26 indicated Resident 1 was cognitively intact with a score of 14.A review of Resident 1'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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse was reported timely within the required timeframe for two of four sampled residents (Resident 1 and Resident 2) when an allegation of abuse was not reported to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH).This failure of timely reporting had the potential to cause a delayed response by enforcement agencies to ensure resident safety.During a review of Resident 1's admission record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in June 2025 with multiple diagnoses including gastroenteritis (an inflammation of the stomach and intestines, causing symptoms like nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramps). During a review of Resident 2's AR, the AR indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in December 2018 with multiple diagnosis including congestive heart failure (CHF-a heart disorder which causes the heart to not pump the blood efficiently, sometimes resulting in leg swelling). During an interview on 7/11/25 at 11:59 a.m. with Resident 1, Resident 1 stated Resident 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · No revisit needed

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to BVHC, LLC — 12 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 8 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.

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 $491K 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