Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around January 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of August 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, Llc during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A cognitively impaired resident with known mental and behavioral disorders repeatedly engaged in sexually inappropriate and aggressive behavior toward three male residents who were able to communicate their experiences. In the activity room and common areas, this resident rubbed another resident’s thighs, grabbed his scrotum, and made explicit sexual comments without consent; attempted to grab a second resident’s genitals and later hit an activity assistant, pulled her hair, and threw hot coffee at both the assistant and that resident; and grabbed a third resident’s buttocks from behind, startling him. Staff, including the AD, RN, and DON, were aware that this resident had a hot temper, became easily angry, yelled threats at other residents, and exhibited hyper-sexualized behaviors toward male staff and residents, including grabbing the DON’s buttocks. Despite reports to management, the response described by staff was limited to separating the aggressive resident from others when behaviors were observed, and the facility did not effectively prevent repeated sexual and physical abuse, resulting in emotional distress, embarrassment, anger, and loss of personal security for the affected residents.
The facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation into an allegation of resident-to-resident sexual abuse after a male resident reported that a cognitively impaired female resident with mental and behavioral disorders inappropriately touched his genitals and made sexual comments in the activity room, leaving him feeling unsafe. The facility only interviewed the Activity Director, who denied seeing such behavior, and concluded the allegation could not be substantiated, without interviewing other residents or witnesses. During the survey, other male residents reported similar inappropriate sexual touching by the same female resident, and the DON acknowledged awareness of her hyper-sexualized behaviors toward male staff and residents, including personally being grabbed. These actions and omissions did not follow the facility’s abuse policy, which requires immediate reporting, prompt initiation of an investigation, and interviews with all individuals who may have relevant information.
A resident’s clothing and personal items were missing during the stay, with the RP reporting that other residents were seen wearing the resident’s clothes and that staff were notified. The RP was not given the discharge inventory, and the facility could not produce a discharge property form or confirm the items were returned. The SSD did not enter the missing items into the theft and loss log, and no grievance entry was found.
A resident with anxiety, depression, and insomnia received lorazepam PRN daily for anxiety, but the MAR showed the medication was ordered PRN every 8 hours and behavior monitoring was documented for intense anger rather than restlessness, the stated indication for use. The consultant pharmacist noted the behavior charting did not match the PRN use and recommended changing the order to a scheduled noon dose, but the recommendation was not implemented; the facility policy also stated PRN psychoactive meds must not exceed 14 days without physician documentation to continue.
A resident with schizoaffective disorder and active delusional behaviors had a positive PASARR I screen, but the PASARR II evaluation was not found in the clinical record. The DSD confirmed the missing PASARR II, and the MDSC stated the facility did not verify whether it had been completed before admission.
A resident with moderately impaired cognition had a groin rash with redness extending to both inner thighs and buttocks, with itching and burning reported after urination. CNAs gave inconsistent reports about whether the rash had been communicated to nursing staff and whether barrier cream was applied. An NP later evaluated the rash and ordered topical medication, while an LVN and the treatment nurse stated they were not aware of the condition until it was observed. A weekly skin check was also missed, despite the facility policy for weekly licensed nurse skin evaluations.
Failure to provide ordered BiPAP therapy for a resident with acute/chronic respiratory failure, COPD, and OSA. The resident stated the oxygen tank and BiPAP machine had been missing after a room move, and no equipment was observed in the room. The OSR showed an order for BiPAP with a full face mask when sleeping and O2 at 2 L/min PRN, but the MAR documented missed BiPAP treatments on multiple days, while an LVN admitted to mistakenly signing off treatments despite no BiPAP machine being present.
RN Staffing Shortfall: The facility failed to schedule an RN for 8 consecutive hours a day on three days in January. During record review, the PAPC confirmed the staffing reports showed no RN on duty for 8 hours on those days, and the SS acknowledged the facility was short-staffed and confirmed the RN coverage gaps.
A resident missed a scheduled Xarelto dose because the medication was not available when due and had not yet been delivered by pharmacy. In addition, two emergency medication kits were found opened and not replaced within the required 72 hours, and staff could not show evidence that replacement requests had been sent to pharmacy.
Failure to act on CP MRR recommendations for a resident with anxiety, depression, and insomnia. The resident received lorazepam PRN daily around noon for anxiety, but the CP noted the documented behavior did not match the PRN use and recommended changing the order to a scheduled noon dose. The CP made the same concern in multiple monthly reviews, but the recommendations were not implemented, and the DON stated there was no clear process for MRR follow-through.
A resident had three vitamin supplement bottles kept at the bedside for months despite no medication self-administration order, and staff were unaware the medications were there. In addition, an OTC artificial tears eye drop on a med cart was opened but not labeled with a resident’s name, and the LPN did not know who it was for. The DON stated bedside medication storage was unsafe and that the eye drops should have been identified for one patient.
The facility failed to store food safely, with fresh lettuce found uncovered in a refrigerator and graham crackers in a storage bin without labels or dates. The Dietary Supervisor acknowledged these oversights, which did not comply with the facility's food storage policies, potentially affecting the safety of food service for 76 residents.
The facility failed to maintain RN coverage for eight hours daily, as required, on several specific dates in 2023. Payroll and scheduling records confirmed the absence of RNs on these days. The DON acknowledged the risk to resident safety due to the lack of RN availability.
Two residents did not receive the ordered Restorative Nursing Assistant (RNA) services, potentially leading to a decline in their range of motion and mobility. One resident, with a history of Brain Stem Stroke Syndrome, was not provided with RNA services as per their care plan, which included participation in a Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) twice a week. Similarly, another resident with hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke did not receive the prescribed passive range of motion (PROM) exercises three times a week. The Director of Nursing and the Director of Rehabilitation confirmed the lack of service provision, which was against the facility's policy.
The facility failed to ensure that call lights were within reach for three residents, placing them at risk of not being able to ask for assistance. The Medical Records Director and Administrator confirmed the deficiency, and the facility could not provide a policy for answering call lights.
A resident was administered Ativan for anxiety without written informed consent, contrary to the facility's policy. Staff confirmed the absence of required documentation, and records showed multiple administrations of the medication without the resident being informed of its risks, benefits, and alternatives.
Failure to Protect Residents From Ongoing Sexual and Physical Aggression by a Cognitively Impaired Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect three cognitively intact or communicative residents from ongoing aggressive and inappropriate sexual behaviors by another resident with known mental and behavioral disorders and cognitive impairment. Resident 4, a female resident admitted in 2020 with a BIMS score of 7/15, was known by staff, including the DON and RN 1, to have a hot temper, become easily angry, and exhibit hyper-sexualized behaviors toward male staff and residents. Despite this knowledge, Resident 4 continued to have access to other residents in common areas and hallways, where she engaged in sexually inappropriate and aggressive conduct. Resident 1, a male resident admitted in 2019 with a disability-related diagnosis and able to make himself understood, reported that while in the activity room a few weeks prior, Resident 4 wheeled herself to him, licked her lips, stuck out her tongue, rubbed his thighs, grabbed his scrotum, and made explicit sexual comments without his consent. He reported feeling embarrassed, angry, and unsafe. The Activity Director confirmed awareness that interactions between Resident 1 and Resident 4 had become more explicit over time, with Resident 4 physically touching Resident 1, and stated he had to keep them separated in the activity room, but he did not recall specific dates. Resident 2, who was usually able to understand others and make himself understood, stated that Resident 4 frequently caused problems with staff and residents, tried to touch and grab his genitals, and became violent when she did not get what she wanted. He described an incident in the activity room where Resident 4 became angry, hit an activity assistant, pulled her hair, and threw hot coffee at both the assistant and him. Resident 3, cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 14/15, reported that Resident 4 grabbed his buttocks from behind, startling him, and that he had seen her yelling angrily at others in hallways and activities areas, making him feel uncomfortable when she was near. The DON acknowledged that Resident 4 had grabbed him on the buttocks and made explicit sexual comments, and that she often tried to touch residents inappropriately and became mad if they tried to stop her. Although the Activity Director reported Resident 4’s inappropriate and aggressive behavior to facility management, he stated he was told only to separate her from other residents when such behaviors were observed, indicating the facility did not effectively implement its abuse prevention policy to provide a safe environment and prevent further abuse.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Resident-to-Resident Sexual Abuse Allegations
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to conduct a thorough investigation into an allegation of resident-to-resident sexual abuse involving two sampled residents. A male resident with a disability, cognitively able to make himself understood, reported that a female resident with a history of mental and behavioral disorders approached him in the activity room, licked her lips, stuck out her tongue, rubbed his thighs without consent, grabbed his genitals, and made sexual comments, leaving him feeling embarrassed, angry, and unsafe. The facility did not become aware of this allegation until notified by the Ombudsman, and the subsequent investigation, documented as a five-day report, concluded the allegations could not be proven factual after only interviewing the Activity Director, who reported never having seen such behavior. The Administrator later acknowledged he did not conduct that investigation and that it was not done thoroughly, including that additional resident interviews were not completed and the investigation was not re-done once this was realized. Additional interviews and observations during the survey revealed that the alleged perpetrating resident had a BIMS score of 7/15, indicating cognitive impairment, and refused to participate in the investigation. Another male resident reported that this same female resident had tried to touch and grab his genitals, making him upset and angry, and a third male resident recalled her grabbing his buttocks and described feeling startled and uncomfortable around her. The DON stated he was aware that this resident exhibited hyper-sexualized behaviors toward male staff and residents, including grabbing his buttocks and making explicit sexual comments, and that he had witnessed her touching residents inappropriately but could not identify which residents. Despite the facility’s written abuse prevention and management policy requiring immediate reporting, initiation of an investigation, and interviews with all individuals who may have relevant information, including residents and witnesses, the investigation into the allegation between the two sampled residents did not include these required steps and was not comprehensive.
Failure to Safeguard and Account for Resident Personal Property
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect the personal belongings of one resident, who was admitted with chronic kidney disease and later discharged from the facility. The resident’s responsible party reported that clothing and personal items were missing during the resident’s stay, that other residents were seen wearing the resident’s clothes, and that staff had been notified. The responsible party also stated she was not given the resident’s inventory of personal items at discharge and that no one reviewed the inventory list with her. Record review and staff interviews showed the missing items were not documented in the facility’s August and September 2025 theft and loss log, and there was no grievance entry for the missing property. The social services director stated she had a list from the responsible party but did not enter the items into the log because the items were not on the inventory list. The facility could not produce a discharge inventory form for the resident, and staff were unable to confirm whether the resident’s clothing and personal items were returned at discharge. The facility policy required inventoried personal items to be returned upon discharge and required a theft and loss report when personal property was reported missing.
Unnecessary PRN Lorazepam Use and Inconsistent Behavior Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
Resident 2 was admitted in December 2023 with diagnoses that included anxiety disorder, depression, and insomnia. During review of the resident’s order summary report and September 2025 medication administration record, lorazepam was ordered every 8 hours as needed for anxiety manifested by restlessness, and staff reported that the resident received lorazepam daily around 12 noon to 1 p.m. for verbalization of anxiety. The medication record showed the PRN lorazepam was administered once daily between 12 noon to 1 p.m. for anxiety manifested by restlessness. The medication record also showed staff monitored for episodes of intense anger as the behavioral indication for lorazepam PRN use, but the record did not indicate behavior monitoring for restlessness. The consultant pharmacist’s medication regimen reviews dated 7/1/25, 8/1/25, and 9/5/25 stated that episodes of intense anger did not coincide with lorazepam PRN usage and that behavior charting should coincide with PRN medication usage. The 8/1/25 review also recommended changing lorazepam from every 8 hours PRN to one tablet daily at 12 noon for anxiety, and the facility policy stated that any psychoactive medication ordered PRN must not exceed 14 days unless the physician documents the need to continue it.
Failure to Coordinate PASARR II Evaluation After Positive PASARR I
Penalty
Summary
PASARR screening for mental disorders or intellectual disabilities was not coordinated for one sampled resident after a positive PASARR I result. The resident was admitted in July 2025 with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type. During observation and interview, the resident made delusional and disorganized statements, including claiming to be the second Son of God, discussing devils, demons, seeing angels, and wanting to go home. A review of the resident’s PASARR I screening dated 7/24/25 showed positive results for a PASARR II evaluation, but the PASARR II evaluation was not present in the clinical record. The DSD confirmed there was no PASARR II evaluation in the record, and the MDS Coordinator stated the facility did not verify whether a PASARR II evaluation had been completed before admission. The resident’s MAR for September 2025 documented behaviors including paranoid delusional thinking and claims that staff were working with the CIA and that the resident was Jesus. The resident’s AFS also indicated hospitalization for disorganized behavior and emotional lability.
Failure to Identify and Treat Resident Skin Rash
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to treat a resident’s skin rash when nursing staff were not aware of the rash. Resident 42 was admitted with a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderately impaired cognitive status. During an interview, the resident reported having rashes in the groin area that were itchy and burning. On observation, the resident had bright red rashes on both inner thighs extending to the bilateral buttocks, and stated the area itched and burned after urination. The resident said the rash had been present for approximately two months and that CNAs had only changed diapers without applying barrier cream. Staff interviews showed inconsistent awareness and response to the skin condition. One CNA stated she had applied A and D ointment and should have informed the nurse, while another CNA said she had reported the rash to a nurse and was told to apply barrier cream, though she was unsure which nurse was notified or what cream was used. The NP evaluated the rash and prescribed topical medication after it was brought to attention. An LVN stated she was not aware of the rash and that it should have been identified and treated. The designated treatment nurse also stated the facility was not aware of the rash until it was observed. A weekly skin check was documented as not performed on one date, and the facility policy stated the licensed nurse would complete the skin evaluation weekly.
Failure to Provide Ordered BiPAP Therapy
Penalty
Summary
Facility failed to provide prescribed BiPAP therapy for one resident with acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, COPD, and OSA. The resident’s admission record and MDS showed intact cognition with a BIMS score of 14. During an observation and interview, the resident stated that the oxygen tank and BiPAP machine had been missing since the move to the current room at the end of July 2025, and the resident reported needing oxygen and BiPAP at times because of shortness of breath. No oxygen tank or BiPAP machine was observed in the room at that time. Record review and staff interviews confirmed that the resident had an order for BiPAP with a full face mask when sleeping and oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula as needed for COPD. The September MAR showed BiPAP treatments were not administered on multiple dates, and one LVN stated she had mistakenly signed the BiPAP treatments on the MAR for numerous days even though there was no BiPAP machine in the room. The MDS Coordinator confirmed the resident used BiPAP and had diagnoses of COPD, respiratory failure, and OSA. The resident’s H&P also noted OSA causing AV block, and the active care plan included BiPAP use when sleeping, encouragement of BiPAP use, and education on the importance of BiPAP therapy.
RN Staffing Shortfall
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to schedule a registered nurse (RN) for eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for three days in January 2025. During a concurrent interview and record review on 10/3/25, the Payroll Account Payable Coordinator reviewed the PBJ Staffing Data Report for January 1 through March 31, 2025 and stated she was not aware there were days in January with no RN on duty for 8 hours a day. A later review of the DHPPH Worksheet - Totals confirmed that on 1/19/25, 1/25/25, and 1/30/25, the facility did not have an RN on duty for 8 hours a day. The Staff Scheduler acknowledged the facility was short-staffed in January 2025 and stated it was important to have an RN on duty 8 hours a day so RNs can assess patients, give IVs, and manage the care of patients with IVs. The Staff Scheduler also confirmed there were three days with no RN on duty on 1/19/25, 1/25/25, and 1/30/25.
Medication Availability and Emergency Kit Replacement Failures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure medications were available and provided to residents when ordered. During a medication pass observation, an LVN prepared five oral medications for a resident who had diagnoses including pain in the lower leg and current use of anticoagulants, but Xarelto 10 mg was not available to give at the scheduled time. The LVN stated the medication had been requested from pharmacy, and later confirmed the resident did not receive the dose because it had not yet been delivered. The MAR documented the dose as not given, and the physician order indicated Xarelto was to be administered once daily for DVT prevention. The consultant pharmacist stated it was not okay for the resident to miss a dose. The facility also had two emergency medication kits that had been opened and were not replaced within 72 hours. During observation in the medication room, one oral emergency kit and one narcotic emergency kit were found opened with yellow ties and logs showing prior removal of medications, including cephalexin and oxycodone. The LVN could not show evidence that staff requested replacement for either opened kit. The DON stated the facility needed to complete and fax the form to pharmacy to renew the E-kits, and acknowledged opened E-kit requests were not being faxed to the pharmacy. The facility policy stated used sealed kits are to be replaced with new sealed kits within 72 hours of opening.
Failure to Act on Consultant Pharmacist Medication Review Recommendations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to act on the Consultant Pharmacist’s monthly Medication Regimen Review recommendations for Resident 2 over three consecutive months. Resident 2 was admitted in December 2023 with diagnoses including anxiety disorder, depression, and insomnia. During record review, the resident’s OSR showed lorazepam 0.5 mg by mouth every 8 hours as needed for anxiety manifested by restlessness, and staff stated the resident was receiving lorazepam daily around noon to 1 p.m. for verbalized anxiety. The MAR for September 2025 showed lorazepam PRN was administered once daily between noon and 1 p.m. for anxiety manifested by restlessness, while staff also monitored for episodes of intense anger as the behavioral indication for use. The Consultant Pharmacist’s MRRs dated 7/1/25, 8/1/25, and 9/5/25 stated that episodes of intense anger did not coincide with lorazepam PRN usage and that behavior charting should coincide with PRN medication use. The 8/1/25 MRR also recommended changing lorazepam from every 8 hours PRN to one tablet daily at 12 noon for anxiety. The DON stated the CP conducted the MRR and sent recommendations to the facility, and that Nursing was responsible for communicating recommendations to the physician and ensuring new orders were transcribed. The DON also stated there was no clear process for conducting MRR at the facility. The facility policy stated the consultant pharmacist reviews each resident’s medication regimen monthly, irregularities or clinically significant risks are reported to the DON and/or prescriber, recommendations are implemented and documented, and physicians must respond to recommendations and explain disagreements by the next visit.
Unsafe Medication Storage and Labeling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure safe storage and labeling of medications when three vitamin supplement bottles—Kirkland Adult Gummies C 250 mg, Kirkland extra strength D3 50 mcg, and Nature Made magnesium extra strength 400 mg—were found at Resident 71’s bedside in a basin on the bedside table. During observation and interview, Resident 71 stated the items were his vitamins, but no medication self-administration order was in place, and LVN 6 stated no resident in the facility was on medication self-administration. The supplements remained at the bedside during a later observation, and LVN 6 stated she had just seen them there and was not aware Resident 71 had them. CNA 6 stated the supplements had been there for 2 to 3 months and that she did not ask Resident 71 about them because he would start cursing. The DON stated medications should not be left at the resident’s bedside because it was not safe. The facility also failed to ensure proper labeling of an OTC artificial tears eye drop stored on medication cart 1. During observation, the eye drop had an opened date but no identifying label on the carton or bottle. LVN 3 stated it was being used but did not know who it was for, and stated it should have been identified with a resident’s name. The DON stated the eye drops should have a label, should be used for one patient, and should not be in the med cart if the resident could not be identified. Facility policy stated medications and biologicals are to be stored safely and securely, and nonprescription medications not labeled by the pharmacy are to be kept in the original container and identified with the resident’s name.
Food Storage Deficiencies in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store food in a safe and sanitary manner, as observed during a kitchen tour. Fresh lettuce was found in a reach-in refrigerator without any cover, leaving it exposed to potential contamination. The Dietary Supervisor acknowledged that the lettuce should have been covered with plastic wrap to maintain freshness and prevent spills from coming into contact with it. The Regional Registered Dietitian confirmed that the expectation for storing fresh produce is to keep it covered to avoid contamination. The facility's policy on food storage, revised in 2019, also indicated that vegetables should be left in cartons, bags, or paper wrapping to retard spoilage and moisture loss. Additionally, the facility failed to label and date food items in the dry storage room. A clear storage bin containing individually packed graham crackers lacked any label indicating open and use-by dates. The Dietary Supervisor admitted that the person responsible for transferring the crackers into the bin did not label and date them. The facility's Dry Goods Storage Guidelines require that all storage products be correctly labeled and dated, and the Dietary Supervisor confirmed that the graham crackers should have had open and use-by dates indicated. This failure to adhere to the facility's policy and professional standards had the potential to compromise food service safety for all 76 residents receiving food from the kitchen.
Failure to Ensure RN Coverage 8 Hours Daily
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for eight hours a day, seven days a week, as required. This deficiency was identified through interviews and record reviews conducted on June 13, 2024. Payroll data from the third and fourth quarters of 2023 revealed that there were no RNs working on specific dates: April 23, May 28, June 25, July 9, August 27, and September 2, 2023. The Central Supply/Scheduler confirmed that an RN was not scheduled on these dates. During an interview, the Director of Nursing acknowledged the importance of having RN coverage daily and stated that resident safety was at risk without an RN available.
Failure to Provide Ordered Restorative Nursing Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the Restorative Nursing Assistant (RNA) services as ordered by the physician for two residents, leading to a potential decline in their range of motion and mobility. Resident 2, who was admitted with a diagnosis of Brain Stem Stroke Syndrome, had a care plan that included participation in a Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) twice a week to address muscle weakness and lack of coordination. However, the RNA services were not provided as ordered, as confirmed by the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Restorative Nurse Assistant (RNA), who could not show evidence of the exercises being performed. Similarly, Resident 69, admitted with hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke, was also supposed to receive RNA services for passive range of motion (PROM) exercises three times a week. The care plan aimed to prevent a decline in range of motion and functional mobility. However, the RNA services were not provided, as verified by the DON and the Director of Rehabilitation (DOR), who emphasized the importance of these exercises in maintaining residents' functioning and mobility. The facility's policy on the Restorative Nursing Program, which outlines the necessity of these services, was not adhered to, resulting in the deficiency.
Inaccessible Call Lights for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that call lights were within reach and easily accessible for three of 78 sampled residents. Resident 2, who was admitted with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, spinal stenosis, and convulsions, had their call light on the floor behind the bed. Resident 6, admitted with heart disease, bradycardia, and blindness in the right eye, also had their call light on the floor behind the bed. Resident 8, admitted with seizures, Parkinson's disease, and a history of repeated falls, had their call light on the floor under the bed. During an observation and interview, the Medical Records Director confirmed that the call lights were out of reach and stated that they should be within reach so residents can call for assistance. The Administrator also confirmed that call lights should be accessible to all residents. The facility was unable to provide a policy and procedure for answering call lights upon request.
Failure to Obtain Informed Consent for Psychoactive Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident had written informed consent before being administered a psychoactive medication. The resident, who was their own responsible party, was given Ativan for anxiety without being informed of the medication's risks, benefits, and alternatives. This was confirmed during interviews and record reviews with the facility's staff, including a registered nurse and the regional director of staff development, who acknowledged the absence of the required informed consent documentation. The facility's policy mandates that informed consent must be obtained and documented before administering psychoactive medications, but this procedure was not followed in this case. The resident's medical records indicated multiple physician's orders for Ativan and Lorazepam, and the medication administration record showed that the resident received these medications multiple times in December 2023. Despite the facility's policy and the director of nursing's statement that informed consent is crucial for residents to understand the risks and benefits of psychoactive medications, the necessary consent was not obtained. This oversight was identified through a review of the resident's history and physical, order summary report, and the facility's policy and procedure on informed consent.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 979 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Oakland
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excell Health Care Center | 1 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Redwood Healthcare Center Llc | 1 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
| Mercy Retirement & Care Center | 1.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| Marina Garden Nursing Center | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Fruitvale Healthcare Center | 1.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, Llc.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.