Home / California / Carmichael
3939 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, CA 95608 · Sacramento County · (916) 974-2060
35 certified beds, about 35 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1993
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 555555 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 20, 2026, inspectors cited 8 health deficiencies (the California average is 15.6, the national average 9.2).
None of its 38 health citations since February 2024 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 38 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse was reported within the required timeframe for one of four sampled residents (Resident 1), when the alleged abuse incident was reported to the Department of Public Health (CDPH) the following day. This failure of timely reporting had the potential to cause a delayed response by enforcement agencies to ensure resident safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure care plans (CP, a detailed document outlining a person's healthcare needs, goals, and the specific care and support they will receive) were reviewed and revised in a timely manner, for two of 12 sampled residents (Resident 5 and Resident 2), when:Resident 5's urinary catheter (a flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine into a drainage bag) care plan was not updated or revised after removal;Resident 2's urinary catheter care plan was not revised after removal; andResident 2's trazodone care plan had not been reviewed or revised after 21 days, as indicated. These failures had the potential for Resident 5 and Resident 2 to receive inaccurate care and interventions.3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with the professional standards of nursing practice for two out of 12 sampled residents (Resident 5 and Resident 2), when the physician's orders (PO) were not updated and the care plans (CP, a personalized document outlining a person's health conditions, care goals, and necessary services to maintain quality of life) were not revised after urinary catheters (a flexible tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine into a drainage bag) had been discontinued. This failure had the potential for Resident 5 and Resident 2 to receive inadequate and unnecessary care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications with discontinued orders were removed from facility drug supply and destroyed in a timely manner. This failure had the potential to result in medication errors and adverse events from residents receiving discontinued medications and the potential for diversion (the illegal transfer, theft, or misuse of medications) from medications not being disposed of.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food textures and preferences were accommodated for four of 12 sampled residents (Resident 2, Resident 50, Resident 51, Resident 38) when:1. Resident 2's food texture was not accommodated; 2. Resident 50 did not receive food items indicated on the daily menu;3. Resident 51's food preferences were not followed when she received food items that were identified as disliked; and,4. Resident 38's did not receive her preference of biscuit listed on the meal ticket. This failure had the potential to negatively impact Resident 2's, Resident 38's, Resident 50's, and Resident 51's nutritional status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in a census of 33 residents, when: The interior dispenser of ice machine had black, brown, and white substances on its surfaces in the facility kitchen; One kitchen staff touched the prepped food area with solid gloves after touching multiple surfaces in the kitchen;Ice buildup was found on the edge and frame of the doors of freezer in the main kitchen; andWet, dirty pans were found stored on the ready-to-use rack next to cooking area in the main kitchen. These failures had the potential risk for the spread of food-borne illnesses in a vulnerable population.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, the facility failed to ensure one out of 12 sampled residents (Resident 2) was free from unnecessary psychotropic medication (drugs that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behaviors) when Resident 2 received trazodone (an antidepressant) for insomnia without adequate indication for use and without adequate monitoring for efficacy. This failure had the potential to result in the unnecessary use of psychotropic medication and increased risk of exposure to side effects such as drowsiness, dizziness, headache, dry mouth, nausea, and lightheadedness upon standing. A review of Resident 2's medical record indicated he was admitted to the facility in February 2026 with diagnoses which included multiple lumbar fractures (a break or crack in bones of the lower back), lower back pain, lack of coordination and weakness. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered care plan (CP, a personalized document outlining a person's health conditions, care goals, and necessary services to maintain quality of life) for one of 12 sampled residents (Resident 7), when Resident 7's nutritional status CP was not individualized to meet Resident 7's specific medical needs. This failure had the potential for Resident 7 to receive inappropriate and inaccurate nutritional and dietary interventions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Consultant Pharmacist (CP) identified and reported to the facility irregularities related to the medication regimen for one of 12 sampled residents (Resident 2) during the medication regimen review (MRR). This failure resulted in inadequate monitoring and indication for use of psychotropic medication (drugs that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behaviors) for Resident 2.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly store medications for three residents (Resident 14, Resident 148, and Resident 149) of a census of 33, when three opened inhalers were not dated with open and discard dates. This failure decreased the facility's potential to properly store residents' medications and ensure medication potency.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the nutritive values of food were conserved during preparation for a census of 33 residents, when [NAME] 1 prepared quiche (an entrée for lunch) without measuring the ingredients and following the recipe. This failure decreased the facility's potential to meet the residents' nutritional needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared in accordance with professional standards for a census of 33 residents, when; 1. Unlabeled, expired, incorrectly dated, and soiled food items were found stored in the ready-to-cook area in the main kitchen; 2. Wet, dirty, and damaged cooking pans were found stored on the ready-to-use rack next to cooking area in the main kitchen; 3. A can-opener was found dirty, ready-to-use, and attached to the kitchen counter in the main kitchen; 4. The interior dispenser of ice machine had black, brown, and white substances on its surfaces in Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) kitchen; 5. One kitchen staff touched the clean cutting board and knife with soiled gloved hands after touching multiple surfaces in the main kitchen; and 6. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to safely operate the dryer for a census of 33 residents, when the dryer's lint compartment was not cleaned accordingly. This failure decreased the facility's potential to prevent a fire hazard.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a homelike environment for one of 22 sampled residents (Resident 248), when the light switch behind Resident 248's bed was broken and kept in a non-operational drawer. This failure had the potential to negatively impact Resident 248's psychosocial well-being, ability to read, and access to personal belongings.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for one of 22 sampled residents (Resident 148), when Resident 148's care plan did not indicate he was receiving oxygen therapy. This failure decreased the facility's potential to meet Resident 148's care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide services according to professional standards of quality for one of 22 sampled residents (Resident 198), when Licensed Nurse 1 (LN 1) prepared a medication for Resident 198 taken from another resident's medication supply. This failure decreased the facility's potential to safely administer medications to residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs- activities such as bathing, dressing and toileting a person performs daily) for one of 22 sampled residents (Resident 248), when Resident 248 was not offered or given showers as scheduled. This failure had the potential to negatively impact Resident 248's cleanliness, discomfort, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure safety measures were in place for one of 22 sampled residents (Resident 15), when Resident 15 fell to the floor during transfer and sustained a blunt head injury (when the head hit a hard object or surface without breaking the skull) and a scalp abrasion (cut of the scalp). This failure decreased the facility's potential to prevent Resident 15's fall and injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food preferences were accommodated to one of 22 sampled residents (Resident 15), when Resident 15's meal ticket did not match with lunch's meal tray. This failure had the potential to negatively impact the resident's nutritional status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain infection control practices for a census of 33 residents, when Certified Nursing Assistant 3 (CNA 3) did not use gown and gloves in an isolation (separation of residents with an infection from residents without an infection) room. This failure had the potential to increase the spread of infection among residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the rights of one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) when a medication was discontinued without informing the resident. This failure resulted in Resident 1 not being able to have input into decisions regarding her plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to manage one of three sampled residents (Resident 1's) pain timely when Licensed Nurse (LN) delayed administration of the breakthrough pain medication for the resident. This failure resulted in Resident 1 being in pain, feeling ignored and mistreated.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain a complete record of controlled drugs' receipt and disposition for a census of 21, when the Director of Nursing (DON) did not sign the facility's Discontinued Narcotic Drug and Disposition Log upon receiving controlled drugs. This failure decreased the facility's potential to safely destroy the residents'-controlled drugs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility failed to ensure that recipes were used and followed during meal preparation. This failure had the potential to alter the nutrient content of the meals and to affect the health status of the 3 residents (Resident 13, 14 and 185) out of 21 receiving the Consistent Carbohydrate diet to control blood sugar.
Inspectors wroteThe facility failed to serve food at a safe and appetizing temperature for five out of 21 residents (Residents 8, 9, 84, 186, and 236). This failure had the potential of leading to poor food intake, nutrient deficits, and undesirable weight loss for residents eating facility prepared meals.
Inspectors wroteThe facility failed to provide food storage and preparation in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when: 1) Hair and beard nets not used as required; 2) Kitchen surfaces found discolored or rusted; 3) Food products not labeled and/or dated; 4) Fans found with whitish/gray build-up; 5) Food packages left open and/or uncovered; 6) Floor in dry storage found with missing linoleum; 7) Worn equipment not discarded and replaced such as can opener, cutting boards, and fry pan; 8) Moldy bread was not discarded; 9) Kitchen floors, oven, heating element of large kettle, and wire rack found with dark build-up and/or debris; and, 10) Reach-in ice cream dipping cabinet found with ice build-up and discoloration on sides of cabinet. These concerns had the potential to lead to food borne illness for the 21 residents eating facility provided foods.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control practices for four out of 14 sampled residents (Resident 14, Resident 234, Resident 235 and Resident 237) when: 1. Staff did not disinfect vital sign equipment before and after use; 2. A Housekeeper (HK) did not apply the proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE, gloves, gown, and/or goggles/face shield if risk of splash or spray) while cleaning Resident 234's room; and, 3. Resident 14, Resident 235 and Resident 237 were not assisted or offered to wash their hands before meals. These failures had the potential to spread infection in the facility.
Inspectors wroteThe facility failed to maintain equipment in safe operating condition when: 1) ALU (assisted living unit) walk-in freezer found with ice build-up on ceiling and racks indicating potential temperature changes; 2) Ice machine filter found leaking clear fluid on to the main kitchen floor in cook's work area; and, 3) Sandwich bar not holding food temperature in safe food zone (below 41 degrees Fahrenheit-a unit of measurement). These issues had the potential of leading to food borne illness for the 21 residents eating facility prepared meals, as well as staff injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident of a bed hold upon transfer to the hospital for one of 14 sampled resident (Resident 85). This failure had the potential for Resident 85 not knowing the duration of the bed hold period and not able to exercise the resident's right of returning to the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess four of 14 sampled residents (Resident 4, Resident 234, Resident 235, and Resident 25), when the Minimum Data Set (MDS; an assessment tool) inaccurately indicated: 1. The change in Resident 4's skin condition; 2. Resident 234's Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP, a machine that uses mild air pressure to keep breathing airways open while sleeping); 3. Resident 235's urinary catheter; and, 4. Resident 25's MDS discharge assessment date. These failures decreased the facility's potential to identify residents' care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow its own policy and procedure for Baseline Care Plan (BCP, a care plan that identifies resident's care needs upon admission) for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 14) when Resident 14 was not provided a written summary of her BCP within 48 hours of admission. This failure had the potential to increase Resident 14's risk of not being aware of her plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and/or implement a person-centered care plan for three of 14 sampled residents (Resident 84, Resident 14, and Resident 234) when: 1. There was no care plan for a coccyx (tail bone) wound for Resident 84; 2. There was no care plan for a wedge pillow for Resident 14; and, 3. There was no care plan for a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP, a machine that uses mild air pressure to keep breathing airways open while sleeping) machine for Resident 234. These failures had the potential for Resident 84, Resident 14, and Resident 234 to not receive the appropriate care, services, and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to revise in a timely manner the care plan interventions following a significant change assessment for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 4), when Resident 4 developed a facility-acquired sacral pressure injury. This failure decreased the facility's potential to provide Resident 4 with a person-centered care plan and evaluate its effectiveness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide services according to professional standards of quality for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 235), when Resident 235's omeprazole (medication used to treat excess stomach acid) was not administered as indicated in physician's order. This failure decreased the facility's potential to safely follow the physician's orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow and implement a physician's order for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 14) when a prescribed hip-ankle wedge pillow was not provided as ordered for Resident 14. This failure had the potential to delay the healing of Resident 14's ankle related to improper positioning and alignment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pressure injury preventative care plan interventions for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 4), when: 1. The certified nursing assistants (CNAs) did not consistently check Resident 4's skin during routine care for impairments; 2. Resident 4 was not frequently repositioned until 12/1/23; and, 3. A pressure reducing mattress was not applied until 11/27/23. These failures increased Resident 4's potential to develop a facility-acquired pressure injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to remove from use one expired medication for a census of 21, when miconazole nitrate cream (used to treat skin infections) was stored in the residents' treatment cart after its expiration date. This failure increased the facility's potential to administer expired medications to residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete its abuse and neglect training and dementia in-services (a professional training or staff development effort) for two out of five staff members. This failure had the potential to place the residents at risk for elder abuse.
26 fire safety citations on file: 4 on March 20, 2026, 8 on January 9, 2025, 14 on February 29, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | California | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | not reported | 4.52 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | not reported | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | not reported | 4.09 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | not reported | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | not reported | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 36.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 38.1% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS note on this home's staffing data: This facility did not submit staffing data.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In October to December 2025, nursing staff hours per resident were 6.11 on weekdays and 5.25 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 6.81 in April to June 2025 to 5.86 in October to December 2025.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 5.86 | 1.84 | 6.11 | 5.25 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 35 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 5.94 | 1.91 | 6.17 | 5.33 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 34 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 6.81 | 2.13 | 7.34 | 5.48 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 31 |
| United States, Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.76 | 0.62 | 3.93 | 3.34 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| California, Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.36 | 0.59 | 4.52 | 3.97 | 2.3% | 0.6% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| California, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.90 | $22.04 to $26.35 | 110,060 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $38.34 | $35.98 to $45.06 | 82,850 |
| Registered nurses | $67.44 | $58.87 to $83.25 | 338,940 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | California | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.3 | 10.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.3 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.3 | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 12.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.9 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 11.2 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Eskaton Village Care Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (74.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
74.5% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · California: 301 better, 190 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 176 eligible stays.
11.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · California: 10 better, 22 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 183 eligible stays.
5.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · California: 8 better, 48 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 96 eligible stays.
56.5% this home
Median of homes: California59.2% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 62 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: California0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 74 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: California0.6% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 74 residents counted.
98.4% this home
Median of homes: California96.2% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 63 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: ESKATON PROPERTIES INCORPORATED.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eskaton Properties Incorporated | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/19/1993 |
| Baik, Ginna | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Heffernan, Nancy | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/15/2021 | |
| Hewitt, Maureen | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/15/2021 | |
| Lindeman, David | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/15/2019 | |
| Munoz, Mary | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Peifer, Sheri | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Rose, Jordan | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/15/2020 | |
| Sheldon, Mariann | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/15/2021 | |
| Unnava, Hanumantha | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Yotopoulos, Amy | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Baik, Ginna | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Heffernan, Nancy | Corporate director | Individual | 08/15/2021 | |
| Hewitt, Maureen | Corporate director | Individual | 08/15/2021 | |
| Lindeman, David | Corporate director | Individual | 05/15/2019 | |
| Munoz, Mary | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Peifer, Sheri | Corporate director | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Rose, Jordan | Corporate director | Individual | 05/15/2020 | |
| Sheldon, Mariann | Corporate director | Individual | 05/15/2021 | |
| Unnava, Hanumantha | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Yotopoulos, Amy | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2017 | |
| Garberson, Thomas | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/01/2023 | |
| Jenkins, Mark | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/22/2019 | |
| Peifer, Sheri | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Eskaton Properties Incorporated | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/19/1993 | |
| Beloud, Sean | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/20/2024 | |
| Dela Cruz, Melody | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/27/2024 | |
| Garberson, Thomas | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2023 | |
| Javaheri, Ashkan | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Jenkins, Mark | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/22/2019 | |
| Peifer, Sheri | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/01/2019 | |
| Jenkins, Mark | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 04/24/2026 | |
| Eskaton Properties Incorporated | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/19/1993 | |
| Hansen Hunter LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/25/2021 | |
| Moss Adams LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2011 | |
| Beloud, Sean | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/20/2024 | |
| Dela Cruz, Melody | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/27/2024 | |
| Garberson, Thomas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2023 | |
| Javaheri, Ashkan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Jenkins, Mark | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/22/2019 | |
| Peifer, Sheri | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2023 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in California. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.