Riverview Care Center

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.

36.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 55 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 31.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 64 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 135 beds and averages 100.9 residents a day — about 75% occupied, or roughly 34 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 3.98 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.44 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.26 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-18 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  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 record review and interviews the facility failed to provide services that met professional standards for 1 (#1) of 3 (#1, #2 and #3) sample residents reviewed for impaired cognition and at risk of elopement. S3LPN (licensed practical nurse) failed to implement elopement precautions for Resident #1 when the admission elopement screening completed by S3LPN indicated Resident #1 was at high risk of elopement. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy on 06/06/2025 at approximately 5:55 p.m. when Resident #1, a severely cognitively impaired resident who was ambulatory, was unsupervised and eloped from the facility. Resident #1 was found to be an elopement risk upon admission to the facility on [DATE] when S3LPN (licensed practical nurse) completed an elopement risk assessment. S3LPN failed to implement elopement precautions for Resident #1 including notifying the physician and responsible party, placement of a wander guard, and updating the care plan to reflect Resident #1 was an elopement…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-06-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 record review and interviews the facility administration failed to have an adequate system in place to ensure adequate supervision for 1 (#1) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) sampled residents reviewed for impaired cognition and at risk of elopement. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy on 06/06/2025 at approximately 5:55 p.m. when Resident #1, a severely cognitively impaired resident who was ambulatory, was unsupervised and eloped from the facility. Resident #1 was found to be an elopement risk upon admission to the facility on [DATE] when S3LPN (licensed practical nurse) completed an elopement risk assessment. S3LPN failed to implement elopement precautions for Resident #1 including notifying the physician and responsible party, placement of a wander guard, and updating the care plan to reflect Resident #1 was an elopement risk. Resident #1 exited through the front door of the facility after following visitors out the door. At 8:09 p.m. police found Resident #1 approximately 2 miles from 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · Gcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received adequate assistance to prevent accidents for 1 (#1) of 3 residents reviewed for transfers by failing to follow Resident #1's plan of care. The deficient practice resulted in actual harm for Resident #1 on 04/08/2026 when Resident #1 was transferred from a wheelchair to a bed without utilization of a mechanical lift. Resident #1's care plan indicated she was totally dependent in transferring with the use of a mechanical lift and two person assist. S4CNA reported Resident #1, sitting in her wheelchair, wrapped her arms around CNA's waist area, S4CNA put her arms under Resident #1's arms, lifted Resident #1 and transferred Resident #1 to her bed. S4CNA and S3LPN reported during the transfer, Resident #1's arms popped and Resident #1 complained of pain. Resident #1 was transferred to a local hospital related to bilateral arm pain. Review of Resident #1's hospital record revealed in part, Resident #1 was admitted with acute left…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · Gcited before2023-09-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 observations, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure 1 (#28) of 5 (#21, #28, #43, #44, #103) residents reviewed for accidents received necessary care to prevent accidents/falls. The deficient practice resulted in actual harm for Resident #28 on 06/12/2023 at 10:30 a.m. when Resident #28 suffered a major injury during a transfer from the bed to the shower chair. S6 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) and S7 CNA transferred Resident #28 without using a lift. S6 CNA and S7 CNA lowered Resident #28 to the floor when the shower chair slid out from under Resident #28. S6 CNA noticed Resident #28 was sitting on the floor with her legs folded under her. Resident #28 was transported to the emergency room (ER) on 06/12/2023 at 10:58 p.m. and was diagnosed with a right distal femur fracture. The facility implemented corrective actions which were completed prior to the State Agency's investigation, thus it was determined to be a Past Noncompliance citation. Findings: Review of Resident #28'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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · E2025-12-10 · tag F0644 — pattern
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to refer a resident with newly evident or possible severe mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition to the appropriate state agency for a Level II PASARR evaluation for 1 (#10) of 1 resident reviewed for PASARR. Findings: Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed a readmission date of 11/15/2023 with a diagnosis of dementia without behavioral disturbance. Further review of Resident #10's diagnoses revealed in part, a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder with a diagnosis date of 02/04/2025. Review of Resident #10's Level I PASARR screen and determination record dated 03/27/2023 revealed Resident #10 was not suspected to have or had ever been diagnosed with a mental illness. Further review of Resident #10's medical record failed to reveal documented evidence a Level II PASARR was completed after Resident #10 was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder. During an interview on 12/09/2025 at 12:30 p.m., S3DON confirmed the facility did not have a Level II PASARR for Resident #10. During an interview on 12/09/2025…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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

  Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop an individualized comprehensive care plan for 1 (#59) out of 41 total sampled residents reviewed. The facility failed to develop a problem and approach for Resident #59's limited range of motion, restorative care and application of splint/brace.Findings:Review of Resident #59's medical record revealed an admit date of 05/28/2025 with the following diagnoses, in part: injury of radial nerve at wrist and hand level of right and lesion of radial nerve right upper limb. Review of Resident #59's comprehensive care plan failed to reveal problems and approaches for limited range of motion, restorative care and application of splint/brace. Review of Resident #59's hospital records revealed, in part: general medicine progress note with a date of service of 11/23/2025. Further review revealed evaluated by physician and recommend arm splinting to avoid contracture. During an interview on 12/09/2025 at 12:35 p.m. S10 Restorative Aide reported she placed Resident #59's right hand splint/brace on every day for 1 hour as…

  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 before2025-12-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  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

  Based on observation, record review and interviews the facility failed to maintain, store, prepare, distribute, and serve food under sanitary conditions. The facility failed to ensure all staff entering the kitchen wore a hair restraint that covered all hair including hair nets and beard covers. Findings:Review of facility policy Employee Work Practices revised 05/18 revealed in part:Food service employees shall follow sanitary practices to prevent the spread of food borne illness.2. Proper work attire:ii. Wears a clean hat or other hair restraint (e.g. hair net, hat, surgical cap and /or beard restraint) in the food production area. The restraint must cover all hair and prevent the hair from contacting exposed food. Observation on 12/08/2025 at 8:00 a.m. revealed S16 Dietary staff in the kitchen area without a beard or mustache cover in place. Observation on 12/08/2025 at 11:30 a.m. revealed S15 Dietary staff in the kitchen area without a mustache cover in place. During an interview on 12/08/2025 at 11:35 a.m. S14 Dietary Manager confirmed kitchen staff should have facial hair…

  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 · D2025-12-10 · tag F0627 — isolated
  Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to develop a post-discharge plan of care for 1 (#116) of 4 resident reviewed for closed records.Review of the facility's Discharge, Transfer and Planning Policy (Latest revision date 08/25, Latest Review Date 09/25) revealed in part: Discharge PlanningDischarge planning shall be initiated by the Social Service Director/Designee with anticipated discharges and on all skilled level care admissions documented in the resident's clinical record. Anticipated means the discharge was not due to an emergency (hospitalization for acute condition) or death.The community shall develop and implement an effective discharge planning process. The discharge plan shall focus on the residents' discharge goals and the preparation of residents to be active partners for post discharge care. The discharge plan shall include an effective transition to post-discharge care, and the reduction of factors leading to preventable readmissions. The interdisciplinary team shall- Ensure the discharge needs of each resident are identified and result in 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the plan of care had been revised for 1(#7) resident out of a total of 41 residents reviewed for plan of care. The facility failed to revise a resident's plan of care for code status change.Findings:Review of Resident #7's physician orders revealed in part an order dated 10/30/2025 DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) Do Not call 911. Call Hospice with any questions or concerns. Review of Resident #7's comprehensive care plan revealed Resident #7's code status as Full Code initiated 06/26/2025.During an interview on 12/09/2025 at 2:00 p.m. S1 Corporate Nurse reviewed Resident #7's physician orders and comprehensive care plan and confirmed Resident #7's code status had not been updated from Full code to DNR status and should have been.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing for 1 (#59) of 1 resident investigated for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to follow the recommendations of the consulting Wound Care Nurse Practitioner. Findings:Review of Resident #59's medical records revealed an admit date of 05/28/2025, and diagnoses including: lack of coordination, unspecified severe protein-calorie malnutrition, vascular dementia, stage 4 pressure ulcer of sacral region, and enterocolitis due to clostridium difficile.Review of Resident #59's active physician's orders revealed orders including:12/04/2025 - Isolation for Clostridium Difficile12/02/2025 - Clean pressure injury of the sacrum with wound cleaner and apply Urgoclean Ag along with dry dressing daily one time a day for wound care.Review of Resident #59's Wound Care NP progress note dated 12/01/2025 revealed treatment recommendations including: clean Resident #59's Stage 4…

  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 before2025-12-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to provide an environment that is free from accident hazards with assistive devices to prevent avoidable accidents for 1 (#59) of 2 (#54, #59) residents reviewed for accident hazards. Findings: Review of Resident #59's medical records revealed an admit date of 05/28/2025 with the following diagnoses, in part: cognitive communication deficit, vascular dementia moderate with agitation, restlessness and agitation. Review of Resident #59's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 03 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #59's comprehensive care plan revealed problems and approaches for altered thought processes related to dementia, current safety devices and special equipment date initiated 05/28/2025 for assist rail. Observation on 12/09/2025 at 8:00 a.m. revealed Resident #59 had bilateral quarter metal side rails attached to the upper half of the bed. The rail on the left side of the bed was in the lowered…

  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 · E2024-10-09 · tag F0577 — pattern
  Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observations and interview the facility failed to ensure the most recent survey results were posted in a place readily accessible to the residents, family or visitors to review. Findings: Review of Resident #22's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Sets) dated 10/02/2024 had a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) of 15 indicating intact cognition. An observation on 10/06/2024 at 10:00 a.m. failed to reveal the most recent survey results were posted in a place that was readily accessible for review. During an interview on 10/08/2024 at 12:30 p.m. Resident Council President, Resident #22 reported she did not see the survey results. Resident #22 further reported she did not know where the survey results were posted and was not aware she could read the past survey results. During an interview on 10/08/2024 at 2:15 p.m. S2 Corporate Nurse confirmed the survey results were not posted in a conspicuous place for residents, visitors and family to find.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-10-09 · tag F0700 — pattern
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure correct use and maintenance of bed rails by ensuring residents were accurately assessed for the risk of entrapment from bed rails and an informed consent was obtained from resident or resident representative prior to installation for 15 (#10, #18, #20, #24, #30, #36, #51, #53, #57, #66, #75, #96, #101, #104, #106) out of 17 (#10, #18, #20, #24, #30, #36, #51, #53, #57, #66, #75, #96, #101, #104, #106, #167, #367) residents reviewed for bed rails. Findings: Resident #10 Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed a re-admitted date of 03/21/2024 with diagnoses including the following, but not limited to, cerebral ischemia, long term use of insulin, presence of right artificial shoulder joint, long term use of aspirin, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hemiplegia. Review of Resident #10's medical record failed to reveal an informed consent was obtained from the resident or the resident's representative prior to installation 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  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

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety by 1) having dirty equipment, and food preparation items used to prepare and/or distribute resident meals in the kitchen, 2) Resident meal plates and saucers stored in an upright position, and 3) the flour scoop was left inside the flour storage container. Findings: Observation of the kitchen on 10/06/2024 at 8:00 a.m. with S4 Morning Cook, revealed the following: 1) The large upright mixer was covered with crumbs and white powder. 2) The oven/warmer had dried food spills and streaks running down the front. 3) Resident meal plates and saucers were stored in an upright position. 4) Plate lids on the meal serving line had food crumbs inside the covers/lids and dried food particles on the serving plates. 5) The flour scoop left inside the flour storage container. During an interview on 10/06/2024 at 10:30 a.m. S5 Dietary Manager acknowledged the dirty kitchen equipment, incorrect plate storage, and storage of the flour…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$24,251 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $16,350 — penalty dated 2026-04-23
• $7,901 — penalty dated 2023-09-13

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE BEEBE FAMILY — 48 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 32 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

19 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 $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 28% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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 LA