Beacon Healthcare Center
919 N Sunset Ave, West Covina, CA 91790 · For profit - Corporation · 54 certified beds · (626) 962-4489 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (31% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 2.8% | 10.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.1% | 4.0% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.3% | 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 | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.0% | 9.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 4.9% | 13.7% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.0% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 1.3% | 10.2% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 0.0% | 12.0% | 17.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.7% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.9% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.0% | 23.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.9% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.76 | 2.25 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.36 | 1.57 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
52.2% 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 216 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 77.5% 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 89 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 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 69% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 51% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through 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 | 52.2%CMS range 44.3–60.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 8.4–14.4 | 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 | 77.5% | 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 | 80.9% | 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 | 76.4% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 95.7% | 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 | 97.8% | 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 | 0.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 10.6%CMS range 7.6–13.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.47 | 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 54 beds and averages 39.9 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.35 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.64 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 3.91 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.88 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.39 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
32 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-14 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — patternImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to promptly notify one of five sampled residents' (Resident 1's) doctor of a change in condition in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Acute Condition Changes - Clinical Protocol, when:a. Resident 1's doctor (DR 2) was not promptly informed of Resident 1's signs and symptoms (S&S) of a urinary tract infection (UTI- an infection in the bladder/urinary tract) which started on [DATE] at 12:00 PM.b. DR 2 was not promptly informed of an increase in size of Resident 1's right and left leg edema (swelling caused by too much fluid trapped in the body's tissues) which started on [DATE].These failures had the potential for Resident 1 not to receive timely treatment for Resident 1's changes in condition.(Cross reference F641, F658, F686, and F842)During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the facility admitted Resident 1 on [DATE] with diagnoses that included multiple fractures of the vertebrae (broken…
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 before2026-05-14 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate medical record for three of five sampled residents (Resident 1, Resident 2, and Resident 3) when:1. On [DATE], Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 4 inaccurately documented that Resident 1 did not have any edema (swelling caused by too much fluid trapped in the body's tissues).2. Resident 1's History and Physical (H&P, physician's clinical evaluation and examination of the resident), dated [DATE], inaccurately indicated Resident 1 did not have edema.3. Resident 1's, Resident 2's, and Resident 3's medical record did not contain documentation that the residents were turned and repositioned every two hours in accordance with the residents' care plans.These failures resulted in Resident 1's, Resident 2's, and Resident 3's medical records containing inaccurate information and had the potential for Resident 1, Resident 2, and Resident 3 to receive inappropriate care and treatment.(Cross reference F580, F641, F658, and F686)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 · Dcited before2026-05-14 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool) was accurate for one of five sampled residents (Resident 1) when Resident 1's MDS, dated [DATE], incorrectly indicated Resident 1 did not have any pressure ulcer/injury pressure ulcer/injury (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence) upon discharge from the facility on 2/3/2026.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 1 not receiving appropriate treatment and/or services.(Cross reference F580, F658, F686, and F842)During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the facility admitted Resident 1 on 1/8/2026 with diagnoses that included multiple fractures of the vertebrae (broken backbones), type 2 diabetes mellitus (a disorder characterized by difficulty in blood sugar control and poor wound healing) without complications (has DM but it has not resulted in further health problems), and dementia (a progressive state…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-14 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the Wound Care Specialist (WCS) inaccurately diagnosed on e of five sampled resident's (Resident 1's) pressure injury (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence) on the left fifth toe as a diabetic wound (diabetic ulcer, an open sore or wound on a person with diabetes, most commonly on the foot, caused by nerve damage [neuropathy] and poor circulation).This failure had the potential for Resident 1 to receive inappropriate care and treatment for Resident 1's pressure injury on the left fifth toe.(Cross reference F580, F641, F686, and F842)During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the facility admitted Resident 1 on [DATE] with diagnoses that included multiple fractures of the vertebrae (broken backbones), type 2 diabetes mellitus (a disorder characterized by difficulty in blood sugar control and poor wound healing) without complications (has DM but it has not resulted in further health problems), and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-14 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent one of five sampled residents (Resident 1) from developing a pressure ulcer/injury (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence) when:a. Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 4 failed to document a skin assessment on Resident 1 upon Resident 1's admission to the facility on 1/8/2026.b. Resident 1's bed was too short for Resident 1.These failures resulted in Resident 1 developing pressure injury to Resident 1's left fifth toe on 1/13/2026.(Cross reference F580, F641, F658, and F842)During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the facility admitted Resident 1 on 1/8/2026 with diagnoses that included multiple fractures of the vertebrae (broken backbones), type 2 diabetes mellitus (a disorder characterized by difficulty in blood sugar control and poor wound healing) without complications (has DM but it has not resulted in further health problems), and dementia (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 · Dcited before2026-01-15 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to notify, one of one sampled resident's (Resident 8), physician (Physician 1) of Resident 8's weight changes on 9/1/2025 and 10/7/2025.This deficient practice had the potential to result in serious health complications to Resident 8 due to the lack of notification to Physician 1 and delayed implementation of interventions.Findings:During a review of Resident 8's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the resident was admitted to the facility 7/16/2025 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM - a disorder characterized by difficulty in blood sugar control and poor wound healing), End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD - irreversible kidney failure), and Hypersensitive chronic kidney disease (progressive kidney damage and loss of function caused by long-term uncontrolled high blood pressure that stiffens kidney arteries, reduce blood flow, and impair filtration creating a dangerous cycle where failing kidneys worsen blood pressure, leading to further damage and potential kidney failure or heart…
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 before2026-01-15 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to effectively assess one of one sampled resident's (Resident 29) characteristics of pain as indicated in the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Pain Assessment.This deficient practice had the potential to result in ineffective pain management, unnecessary discomfort and pain to Resident 29, and had the potential to affect Resident 29's physical and psychosocial well-being.Findings:During a review of Resident 29's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including stage 3 chronic kidney disease (the kidneys have moderate damage and are not filtering waste as well, with function between 30-59%, leading to potential symptoms like fatigue, swelling, and higher risk for complications like high blood pressure, requiring careful management with diet and medication), and a urinary tract infection (UTI - an infection in the bladder/urinary tract).During a review of 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 before2026-01-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a thermometer was easily visible inside one of two refrigerators (Reach-in Refrigerator 2) in the facility's kitchen on 1/14/2026 as indicated in the facility's Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled, Procedure for Refrigerated Storage.This failure had the potential to result in the food stored inside Reach-in Refrigerator 2 not being maintained at proper temperatures and the potential to result in foodborne illness (an illness caused by eating contaminated food) to the residents consuming the food.Findings:During a concurrent observation and interview on 1/12/2026 at 8:45 AM with [NAME] (CK) 1 in the kitchen, Reach-in Refrigerator 2 was observed without a thermometer visible on the inside of the refrigerator. CK 1 stated CK 1 could not find the thermometer and the thermometer should be located inside Reach-in Refrigerator 2. CK 1 stated the thermometer was used to verify the temperature on the thermometer located on the outside of Reach-in Refrigerator 2. CK 1 stated it was important to have a second…
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 · E2024-11-17 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — patternKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of two sampled residents (Residents 7 and 15), were provided privacy curtains for the residents during incontinence care. These failures prevented Residents 7 and 15 from having privacy during care and had the potential to affect Residents 7 and 15's dignity and self-worth. Findings: a. During a review of Resident 7's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including encephalopathy (a disease in which the functioning of the brain is affected by some agent or condition [such as viral infection or toxins in the blood]), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), and contracture (a stiffening/shortening at any joint that reduces the joint's range of motion) of the right and left hips, right knee and right and left ankles. During a review of Resident 7's Care Plan (CP) titled Activities of Daily Living (ADLs, activities related to personal care, initiated 6/24/2024, the CP…
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 before2024-11-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary food handling service. During initial tour of the kitchen on 11/15/24, one open bag of frozen patties and one open frozen bag of eggrolls were unlabeled and undated in the facility freezer for one of one facility kitchen. This deficient practice had the potential to result in foodborne illnesses (illness caused by consuming contaminated food or beverages) to the residents. Findings: During an initial tour of the kitchen on 11/15/24 at 5:24 pm, with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), one open bag of four hamburger patties and one opened bag of eggrolls were observed inside the facility freezer. The DS stated open food items should be labeled and dated to determine the food item in the bags and to determine the good by date of the food to prevent possible food borne illness to the residents. During a review of the facility's Policy and Procedure (P&P) titled, Procedure for Frozen Storage: Freezer Storage, dated 2023, the P&P indicated all frozen food should be labeled and dated. During 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.
Show the remaining 22 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-17 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS, a standardized assessment and care-screening tool) was accurately completed for one of one sampled resident (Residents 99). Resident 99's MDS did not accurately reflect the resident's hearing abilities and limitations. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 99 not to receive necessary treatment and/or services. Cross Referenced with F676 Findings: During a review of Resident 99's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 99's was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included intestinal obstruction (blockage in the intestine), hydronephrosis (swelling of the kidneys), atelectasis (complete or partial collapse of the lungs) and lack of coordination. During a review of Resident 99's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) dated 10/4/2024, the MDS indicated Resident 99 was cognitively intact (able to make decisions) and had adequate (no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-17 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of one sampled resident (Resident 99) received necessary treatment to prevent a decline, maintain or improve Resident 99's hearing abilities and quality of life. This deficient practice had the potential to result in Resident 99's decline in hearing, social interaction, and overall quality of life. Findings: During a review of Resident 99's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 99's was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included intestinal obstruction (blockage in the intestine), hydronephrosis (swelling of the kidneys), atelectasis (complete or partial collapse of the lungs) and lack of coordination. During a review of Resident 99's Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated resident assessment tool) dated 10/4/2024, the MDS indicated Resident 99 was cognitively intact (able to make decisions) and had adequate (no difficulty in normal conversation, social interaction) with hearing. The MDS…
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 before2024-11-17 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly apply a pressure relief boot (PRB) for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2) who had a pressure ulcer (localized injury to the skin and or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence because of pressure or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction) on Resident 2's right heel. This failure had the potential to worsen Resident 2's pressure ulcer. Findings: During a review of Resident 2's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the facility admitted Resident 2 on 10/1/2024 with diagnoses including pressure-induced deep tissue damage (a pressure injury, occurs when the tissue between the heel bone and the skin is compressed and deformed by pressure, shear, or strain) of right heel, type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), and cognitive communication deficit (reduced awareness and ability to initiate and effectively communicate needs). During a review of Resident 2's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool), dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of one sampled resident (Resident 100) who received oxygen therapy, was provided safety in accordance with the facility's Policy and Procedure (P&P) on oxygen administration and professional standards of practice by ensuring a cautionary sign was posted on the resident's door indicating oxygen was in use. This deficient practice placed Resident 100's safety at risk regarding oxygen use. Findings: During a review of Resident 100's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 100 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included compression fracture of the vertebra (a break in a bone in the spine), hypertension (elevated blood pressure) and hyperlipidemia (abnormally high concentration of fats in the blood). During a review of Resident 100's Physician Orders (PO) dated 11/12/2024, the PO indicated for Resident 100 to receive oxygen at two (2) liters per minute (L/min) via nasal cannula (NC- tube which on one…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-17 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly assess resident's pain for one of one sampled resident (Resident 23) during a medication pass observation. This deficient practice had the potential to negatively affect Resident 23's physical comfort and psychosocial well-being. Findings: During a review of the admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including Dementia (a progressive state of decline in mental abilities) and anxiety (a feeling of fear, dread, and uneasiness that can be a normal reaction to stress). During a review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS - a resident assessment tool) dated 10/28/2024, indicated Resident 23's cognitive (mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding) skills for daily decisions was moderately impaired. The MDS indicated Resident 1 required moderate to maximal assistance from staffs for toileting/personal hygiene, upper and lower body dressing. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-17 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to post actual worked nursing hours at the start of each shift for one of three dates (11/14/2024) according to the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Consumer Information, revised 1/18/2023. This failure had the potential to result inaccurately reflecting the actual nurses providing direct care to the residents. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on 11/17/2024 at 9:19 a.m. with the Director of Staff Development (DSD), the facility's Census and Direct Care Service Hours Per Patient Day (DHPPD), dated 11/14/2024 and Projection of Nursing Hours, dated 11/14/2024 were reviewed. The DHPPD indicated the actual total Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) direct care service hours for 11/14/2024 was 92.34 hours. The Projection of Nursing Hours indicated there was supposed to be 97.5 hours of CNA direct care service hours scheduled for 11/14/2024. The DSD stated a Daily Direct Care Staffing was posted at Nurses Station 1. The Projection of Nursing Hours indicated there were supposed to be 4 CNA's working…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-17 · 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 five sampled residents (Resident 149) was reviewed for the McGeer's criteria (criteria used for retrospectively counting true infections. To meet the criteria for definitive infection, more diagnostic information [e.g., positive laboratory tests] is often necessary) when Resident 149 was receiving antibiotics (medications that fight bacterial infections). This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 149 from receiving unnecessary antibiotic. Findings: During a review of Resident 149's admission Record, the admission Record indicated Resident 149 was admitted to the facility 11/14/2024 with diagnoses including spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy (a severe form of cerebral palsy where all four limbs [arms and legs] are affected by increased muscle stiffness, resulting in significant limitations in movement and often causing difficulties with walking, speaking, and other daily activities) and contracture (a stiffening/shortening at any joint that reduces the joint's range of motion) of the right 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 · D2024-11-17 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to prepare food by method that conserved flavor, texture, and appearance by servicing at a safe temperature. During a tray-line observation, soup temperature from the requested test tray measured at 120 degrees Fahrenheit (F, a scale of temperature) for one of one facility kitchen. This deficient practice had the potential to result in meal dissatisfaction, decreased intake, and placed the residents at risk for unplanned weight loss. Findings: During an initial facility tour on 11/15/2024 at 8:38 p.m., complaints about the texture and flavor and temperature of the food were identified. During a review of the facility's menu, black bean soup was to be served on 11/16/2024 with the evening's dinner. During an observation and interview in the facility's kitchen [NAME] 1 (C1) on 11/16/2024 at 4:42 p.m., black bean soup was observed in the tray line. C1 stated black bean soup will be served with dinner. During the test tray tasting and observation on 11/16/2024 at 5:45 p.m. with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), the black…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-17 · tag F0847 — isolatedInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled residents (Resident 2), who signed an Arbitration Agreement (Binding Arbitration Agreement), had the capacity to understand and make an informed decision. This failure had the potential to result in Resident 2 to not be able to make an informed decision and/or Resident 2's rights to be denied. Findings: During a review of Resident 2's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the facility admitted Resident 2 on 10/1/2024 with diagnoses including pressure-induced deep tissue damage (occurs when the tissue between the heel bone and the skin is compressed and deformed by pressure, shear, or strain) of right heel, type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), and cognitive communication deficit (reduced awareness and ability to initiate and effectively communicate needs). During a review of Resident 2's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment tool) dated 10/4/2024, the MDS indicated Resident 2 was moderately impaired in cognitive skills…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure complete documentation regarding discharge planning was done for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). This deficient practice had the potential to not provide full information regarding the discharge plans that were discussed for Resident 1. Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated the facility admitted Resident 1 on 1/22/2024, with diagnoses of non-pressure chronic ulcer (non-healing open sore caused by poor circulation) of the left heel and midfoot (middle of the foot) with unspecified severity (unknown how severe), local infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue (deepest layer of the skin), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (characterized by high levels of blood sugar in the blood). During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a standardized assessment and care screening tool), dated 1/25/2024, the MDS indicated Resident 1 had the ability to understand others and was understood by others. The MDS indicated Resident 1 was dependent (helper does all of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-08 · tag F0573 — isolatedLet each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Resident Access to Records, by not providing a copy of medical records within the policy ' s time frame for one of three sampled residents' (Resident 1) responsible party (RP, a person responsible for paying resident's bills or making healthcare decisions). This failure resulted in Resident 1 ' s RP ' s rights being violated when the facility did not provide access to Resident 1 ' s medical records within 48 hours. from 10/30/23 to 12/8/23 (total of 39 days). Findings: During a review of Resident 1 ' s admission Record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 1 ' s diagnoses included urinary tract infection (an infection when bacteria gets into the urinary system [system that removes waste from the blood, in the form of urine]) and acute pancreatitis (a condition where the pancreas [organ that regulates digestion and blood sugar] becomes inflamed [swollen] over a short period…
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 · E2023-11-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 and implement care plans (CP) that met the needs of two of two sampled residents (Residents 17 and 32) as indicated in the facility's policy and procedure, titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered. a. The facility did not follow interventions inidicated in Resident 17's Pressure Injury CP. Resident 17 was not repositioned every two hours as indicated in Resident 17's CP. b. b. Resident 32's CP for communication skills did not include appropriate interventions that addressed Resident 32's problem areas. Resident 32 did not speak English only spoke Thai and Resident 32 could not see the communication board indicated in the CP due to glaucoma (a group of eye conditions that can cause blindness). These failures had the potential to result in a psychosocial and physical decline to Residents 17 and Resident 32. Cross Reference F676 Findings: a. During a review of Resident 32's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 17…
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 before2023-11-19 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — patternEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two sampled residents (Resident 32), who had limited English proficiency (LEP), received translation support and services by the facility according to the facility's policy and procedure (PP) titled, Translation and/or interpretation of Facility Services, by failing to when Resident 32's primary language was Thai (language of Thailand) and the facility spoke English to Resident 32. This failure had the potential in Resident 32 not to be able to communicate basic needs and had the potential to result in Resident 32 to suffer a physcial and psychosocial decline. Cross Reference F656 Findings: a. During a review of Resident 32's AR, the AR indicated Resident 32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included glaucoma (group of eye diseases that can vision and blindness by damaging the optic nerve) and type II diabetes mellitus (DM2- A condition that happens because of a problem in the way the body regulates…
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 · E2023-11-19 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
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 in-service training was completed for one of one Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA 2). This failure had the potential to result in the residents with diagnoses of Dementia (a decline in mental ability) to not receive proper care and services and result in a decline in physical health. Findings: During a review of the facility's 2023 Annual In-Service Calendar for C.N.A, the calendar indicated, Dementia training or definition was scheduled in January 2023. During a review of the facility's In-Service Meeting Minutes (the Minutes), dated 1/6/23, the minutes indicated the topic for the training was Dementia. The Minutes indicated CNA 2 did not attend the training. During an interview on 11/18/23, at 2:55 pm., Director of Staff Development (DSD) stated the DSD was the person that provided Dementia in-service on 1/6/23. The DSD stated all staff should attend regular scheduled in-service training including Dementia. The DSD stated the DSD did not know CNA 2 did not attend the training. DSD stated he did not have a system…
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 before2023-11-19 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment and screening tool) was coded correctly for two of two sampled residents (Resident 36 and Resident 32). a.Resident 36 was discharged to home and the Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment and screening tool) dated 10/11/23 was coded as Resident 36 being discharged to the hospital. b. Resident 32's primary language was Thai and was documented as English in the MDS dated [DATE]. This failure resulted in inaccuracy of Resident 36 and 32's MDS clinical status and had the potential to result in both residents to not receive the necessary care and services. Findings: a.During a review of Resident 36's admission Record, the AR indicated Resident 36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hypertension (increased blood pressure) and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). During a review of Resident 36's Transfer/Discharge Report, signed 10/11/23, the Transfer/Discharge Report indicated Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-19 · 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 safety measures were implemented, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 26) and as indicated in the facility's policy and procedure (P&P), when Resident 26's bed pad alarm (device that alerts staff when a resident gets out of bed) was turned off. Resident 26 was at high risk for falls and had a history of multiple falls. This failure had the potential to result in injury and a physical decline to Resident 26. Findings: During a review of Resident 26's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included urinary tract infection (UTI, an infection in any part of the urinary system, including the kidneys, bladder, or urethra), type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), and dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning). During a review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-19 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure nutritional care and services were provided to one of two sampled Residents (Resident 29). Resident 29, who had experienced weight loss, did not receive his supplement of ice cream with his lunch tray as ordered by the physician. This failure had the potential to result in further weight loss to Resident 29. Findings: During a review of Resident 29's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis (muscle weakness or partial paralysis on one side of the body) following cerebral infarction (also called ischemic stroke, occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain), hypertension (high blood pressure), and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing foods or liquids). During a review of Resident 29's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a standardized assessment and care screening tool), dated 9/19/23, the MDS indicated Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-19 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to act upon the pharmacist medication regimen review (MRR, a thorough evaluation of the medication regimen of a resident, with the goal of promoting positive outcomes and minimizing adverse consequences associated with medication.) recommendation to not use insulin sliding scale (a sliding scale varies the dose of insulin based on blood glucose level. The higher the blood glucose the more insulin to take) for one of five sampled residents (Resident 14). This deficient practice had the potential for the resident receiving unnecessary mediations and not maintaining the resident's highest practicable level of physical, mental and psychosocial well-being and prevents or minimizes adverse consequences related to medication therapy to the extent possible. Findings: During a review of Resident 14's admission Record indicated Resident 14 was readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes mellitus (high levels of sugar in the blood) 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 · D2023-11-19 · 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 discard a Lantus insulin (long-acting medication used to regulate blood sugar levels) vial, for one of four sampled residents (Resident 18), during medication administration observation and according to the facility's policies and procedures (P&P). This failure had the potential to result in Resident 18 to experience adverse reactions (any unexpected or dangerous reaction to a medication) due to the administration of the expired medication. Findings: During a review of Resident 18's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM, a chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar) and dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning). During a review of Resident 18's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a standardized assessment and care screening tool), dated [DATE], the MDS indicated…
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 · D2023-11-19 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and, record review, the facility failed to prepare meals that met resident preferences and allergy status for one of four sampled residents (Resident 2)as inicated in the facility's policy and procedure (P&P), titled, Nutrition Care. This failure had the potential to affect Resident 2's dietary intake and result in Resident 2 to experience an allergic response and cause a physical decline to Resident 2. Findings: During a review of Resident 2's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 2 was readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included fracture of superior rim of left pubis (edge of hip bones) and hypertension (increased blood pressure). During a review of Resident 2's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment and care screening tool) dated 11/3/23, indicated Resident 2 had clear speech, ability to understand others and make self-understood. Resident 2 had intact cognition (ability to think, remember and reasoning). During an interview on 11/17/23, at 2:27 pm.,…
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 before2023-11-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure sanitary practices were followed by one of three sampled staff (Dietary Aid, DA 1). On 11/17/23, DA 1 did not wear a hairnet (netting over the hair to keep hair from contacting exposed food, clean equipment and utensils) during the handling and preparation of food. This failure had the potential to result in foodborne illnesses (illness caused by food contaminated with bacteria) from pathogens (organism that cause disease) that could have been on the hair and land on exposed food fed to residents who ate food orally (by mouth). Findings: During an observation on 11/17/2023 at 1:13 pm., DA 1 was observed handing food in the kitchen and at the table located next to the stove. DA 1 was wrapping tortillas in plastic wrap (thin, transparent film that adheres to surfaces and itself used for the storage of food) and was not wearing a hairnet as indicated in the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Sanitation and Infection Control. During an interview on 11/17/2023 at 11:17 am, DA 1 stated DA 1 was not wearing 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 · D2023-11-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control practices for one of four sample residents (Resident 19) when Resident 19's urine drainage bag (urinary bag, attaches to a catheter [tube] that is inside your bladder to collect urine.) was observed touching the floor on 11/17/23, as indicated by the facility's policy and procedure P&P titled, Catheter Care, Urinary. This failure had the potential to result in a urinary tract infection (UTI, an infection in any part of the urinary system.) to Resident 19. Findings: During a review of Resident 19's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 19 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included pneumonia (lung inflammation caused by bacterial or viral infection), sepsis (life-threatening complication of an infection) and immunodeficiency (failure of the immune system to protect the body adequately from infection, due to the absence or insufficiency of some component process or substance).…
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 NAHS — 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 5 of 5 | 4.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, 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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NAHS SOUTHEAST, INC. | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/30/2018 |
| NAHS HOLDING INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/01/2019 |
| NAHS EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/30/2018 |
| DAHL, BRENDEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| LEWIS, LARRY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| BAJA, RALPH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 07/01/2023 |
| BARLOW, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| MOORE, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/01/2022 |
| PAULSEN, TIMOTHY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 06/29/2018 |
| WALTON, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| JOHNSON, MARC | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/20/2022 |
| LUNDQUIST, VICTOR | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| GUPTA, ANIL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 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 $431K 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 056331. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-15, 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.