Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Turlock Nursing & Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident returned from a hospital stay with multiple new wounds, a UTI requiring antibiotics, and was refusing further skin assessments, antibiotics, and a blood test. Facility staff documented these changes and refusals but did not notify the resident's family member, as required by policy. The family member only learned of the situation during a visit the next day, and the DON confirmed there was no documentation of notification.
A resident's 42-inch television, brought in by family and mounted in her room, was not documented on the personal belongings inventory and was not returned to her family upon discharge. The facility's policy requiring inventory and return of personal items was not followed, resulting in the family's loss of the television.
A facility failed to install bed rails for a resident as determined by the Bed Rails - Safety Assessment. The resident's bed lacked side rails or grab bars, despite the assessment indicating their necessity for enhanced mobility and fall prevention. The MDS RN confirmed the absence of bed rails and noted the lack of a corresponding physician's order and care plan interventions. The facility's policy required a side-rail safety assessment and care plan inclusion, which was not followed.
A resident's rights were violated when a CNA made an obscene gesture towards them, leading to the CNA's termination. Additionally, the facility failed to enforce its English-only policy, causing discomfort among residents who believed staff might be speaking about them in a non-English language. These incidents highlight the facility's failure to uphold resident rights and effective communication.
Two residents experienced delays in receiving prescribed pain medication, with one resident waiting up to three hours and another up to an hour. Both residents had physician orders for Norco, but the facility failed to administer it in a timely manner, contrary to their care plans and facility policy. The DON and MD acknowledged the excessive wait times.
A facility failed to assess a resident's ability to self-administer medications safely. An LVN left six oral medications on a resident's bedside table without confirming if they were taken. The resident, diagnosed with Alzheimer's and schizophrenia, was found with the medications unattended. The ADON confirmed the lack of an IDT assessment for self-administration, contrary to facility policy.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment was diagnosed with a UTI and prescribed antibiotics, but the Responsible Party (RP) was not notified of the change in condition. The RP only became aware of the diagnosis and treatment upon visiting the resident and seeing a sign indicating the UTI. The facility's policy requires notifying the RP of such changes, but this was not done.
A resident with intact cognition reported feeling threatened by the Activities Manager after raising concerns about a roommate's care. Despite reporting this to the DSS, no action was taken. The DSS and DSD did not report the resident's concerns as an allegation of abuse, violating the facility's policy requiring immediate reporting.
A facility failed to accurately code an MDS assessment for a resident by not reflecting the presence of a nephrostomy tube. The resident had a medical history of acute kidney failure and other conditions, and their care plan indicated a nephrostomy tube. However, the MDS assessment incorrectly coded the section related to urinary appliances. The error was confirmed by both the MDS Coordinator and the DON.
A resident with a history of psychosis and schizophrenia did not receive Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessments every six months as required by their care plan. Despite receiving antipsychotic medication, the facility failed to adhere to the care plan's directive for regular AIMS assessments, with gaps noted in the assessment schedule. Interviews with staff confirmed the expectation for regular assessments, but the facility lacked a specific policy to ensure compliance.
The facility failed to conduct psychiatric evaluations for two residents as ordered by physicians. One resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of psychosis did not receive a psychiatric evaluation despite orders and permission from the Power of Attorney. Another resident with depression and anxiety also lacked a scheduled evaluation. The facility lacked a specific policy for following physician's orders, leading to deficiencies in care.
A resident with a Stage 4 pressure ulcer on the right heel was incorrectly reclassified to Stage 3 by an NP, contrary to NPUAP guidelines. The NP based the reclassification on observed improvements, but was unaware that reverse staging is not permitted. Interviews with facility staff revealed a lack of awareness about the prohibition against reverse staging, leading to the deficiency.
A resident with peripheral vascular disease and moderate cognitive impairment did not receive proper incontinence care. During an observation, a CNA failed to clean both sides of the labia from front to back, as required by facility policy. This was confirmed by interviews with the CNA, DSD, IP, and DON.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment fell while attempting to climb over bed rails, but the facility failed to conduct a timely bed rail safety assessment as required by policy. Despite the incident, the next assessment was only completed during a routine quarterly review, indicating a lapse in communication and adherence to safety protocols.
The facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for residents at high risk of MDRO colonization, including a resident with a dialysis catheter and another with a Stage 4 pressure ulcer. Additionally, staff did not follow proper hand hygiene and glove use during incontinence care for a resident, leading to potential contamination. The Infection Preventionist and Director of Nursing acknowledged these lapses in infection prevention measures.
The facility failed to follow the approved menu and portion sizes, serving meatloaf portions less than the required 4 ounces. This occurred due to a miscommunication by the Dietary Manager regarding the correct food package size and confusion over the recipe instructions. The Registered Dietitian confirmed the error, which could lead to residents not receiving adequate caloric intake.
A resident admitted for status post left hemiarthroplasty was scheduled for a follow-up appointment with an orthopedic surgeon, but the facility was unaware of the appointment and did not perform the necessary hip x-ray. This resulted in the resident arriving at the appointment without the required x-ray, leading to the surgeon being unable to assess the resident's recovery.
A facility failed to arrange transportation for a resident's follow-up appointment with an orthopedic surgeon, resulting in the resident's family member having to transport the resident in her private vehicle. The facility was unaware of the appointment despite it being documented in the resident's physician's orders.
Failure to Notify Family of Resident's Significant Change in Condition After Hospitalization
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify a resident's family member of significant changes in the resident's condition following her return from a seven-day hospital stay. Upon her return, the resident was found to have multiple new areas of skin breakdown, including bruising, open wounds, and excoriations, as well as a urinary tract infection requiring antibiotics. The resident also refused further skin assessments, antibiotic medication, and a blood test as ordered by her physician. These changes and refusals were documented in the resident's clinical record. Despite these significant developments, there was no documentation that the family member was informed of the resident's return to the facility, the new wounds, or the refusals of treatment. The family member confirmed during an interview that she was not notified of the resident's return, the assessment findings, or the refusals of care, and only became aware of the situation during a visit the following day. The Director of Nursing also confirmed that there was no record of such notifications and stated that staff assumed the family member was already aware due to her visits to the hospital. The facility's policy required staff to observe, record, and report any change in a resident's condition, including notifying the resident's responsible party. However, this policy was not followed in this instance, resulting in the family member being unaware of the resident's significant changes in condition and care refusals after her return from the hospital.
Failure to Return Resident's Personal Belongings Upon Discharge
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement its policy regarding resident possessions when it did not return a 42-inch television to the family of a resident upon her discharge. The resident's admission record indicated she was admitted and later discharged from the facility, but her television, which was brought in by her family and mounted by maintenance staff, was not included on her personal belongings inventory. As a result, the television was not listed on the discharge inventory and was not returned to the family. Interviews with the resident's family member and the Social Services Director confirmed that the television was the resident's personal property and that it was not documented on the inventory list, despite being present in the resident's room and previously noted in the facility's Grievance / Theft & Loss Tracking Log. The facility's policy requires all personal belongings to be inventoried and returned upon discharge, but this process was not followed, leading to the family's loss of the television.
Failure to Install Bed Rails as Assessed
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident had bed rails installed as determined by the facility's Bed Rails - Safety Assessment (BRSA). During an observation, it was noted that the resident's bed did not have side rails or grab bars attached, despite the BRSA indicating the need for grab/transfer assist bars or rails to facilitate enhanced bed mobility, provide stability during transfers, assist in entering and exiting the bed independently, and prevent falling. The resident's Admission Record indicated a diagnosis of muscle weakness, and the Verification of Informed Consent signed by the resident specified the use of 1/2 bed rails every shift for mobility and transfer. The Minimum Data Set Registered Nurse (MDS RN) confirmed that there were no bed rails in place and stated that if the BRSA indicated the use of bed rails, there should be a corresponding physician's order and inclusion in the resident's Care Plan. However, the Order Summary Report did not contain an order for side rails, and the Care Plan lacked interventions for bed rails. The facility's policy on side-rails emphasized the need for a side-rail safety assessment and inclusion in the care plan when side-rails are required, which was not adhered to in this case.
Resident Rights and Language Policy Violations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to respect and honor the rights of a resident when a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) displayed an obscene gesture towards the resident. The incident occurred when the CNA, identified as CNA 9, was preparing another resident for a shower and accidentally bumped into the resident's bed. This led to an exchange of foul language and gestures between the resident and CNA 9. The incident was witnessed by an admissions staff member, who reported it to the Director of Staff Development. The facility's investigation confirmed the incident, and CNA 9 admitted to the gesture, leading to his termination for misconduct. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure that staff adhered to the policy of speaking only English within the facility. This issue was raised by residents who felt uncomfortable and believed that staff might be speaking about them in a non-English language. The facility's policy, which establishes English as the official language, was not consistently followed, as confirmed by interviews with staff and residents. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the ongoing issue and the need for staff to speak English in resident care areas. The deficiencies highlight the facility's failure to uphold resident rights to a dignified existence and effective communication. The incidents involving both the obscene gesture and the language policy breach had the potential to negatively impact the residents' psychosocial well-being and their perception of care within the facility.
Delayed Pain Management for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure timely responses to requests for pain relief for two residents, resulting in prolonged pain and discomfort. Resident 6, who suffers from bursitis in the right elbow, reported that it sometimes takes two to three hours for staff to respond to his call light for pain medication. His records indicated a physician's order for Norco to be administered every four hours as needed, but there was a significant gap between doses, with no medication given between 2 p.m. on one day and 7:30 a.m. the next day. Resident 6's care plan emphasized the need for immediate response to pain complaints, which was not adhered to. Resident 7, who has a medical diagnosis of pain in the right hip, also experienced delays in receiving pain medication. She reported that it typically takes 30 minutes to receive her medication, but it can take up to an hour. The Director of Nursing and the Medical Director both acknowledged that these wait times were excessive and not in line with their expectations. The facility's policy on pain management requires that pain relief be provided in a timely manner, consistent with professional standards and the residents' care plans, which was not achieved in these cases.
Failure to Assess Resident's Ability to Self-Administer Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) assessed a resident's ability to self-administer medications safely and accurately. This deficiency was observed when a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) left six oral medications on the bedside table of a resident diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease and schizophrenia, without confirming if the resident took them. The medications were left unattended within the resident's reach, and the resident was found in bed with her eyes closed, indicating she might not have taken the medications. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed that the medications should not have been left at the bedside and that the medication nurse should have ensured the resident took her medications before leaving the room. Upon reviewing the resident's clinical record, the ADON found no IDT assessment indicating the resident was safe to self-administer medications. The facility's policy requires an assessment and approval process for self-administration, which was not followed in this case.
Failure to Notify Responsible Party of Resident's UTI Diagnosis
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the Responsible Party (RP) of a change in condition for a resident diagnosed with a urinary tract infection (UTI). The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment due to dementia, was prescribed antibiotics for the UTI. Despite the diagnosis and treatment, there was no documentation indicating that the RP was informed of these changes. This lack of communication was discovered when the RP visited the resident and noticed a sign indicating the UTI and antibiotic treatment. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed that the family was not notified of the change in condition until the RP's visit, which was a day after the diagnosis. The facility's policy requires licensed nurses to notify the resident's family or RP of any change in condition, but this protocol was not followed. The ADON acknowledged that the RP should have been informed of the UTI diagnosis and treatment as per the facility's policy.
Failure to Report Allegation of Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of abuse involving a resident, identified as Resident #15, who had a medical history including Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorder, somatoform disorder, and depression. The resident, who had intact cognition as indicated by a BIMS score of 15, reported feeling threatened by the Activities Manager after raising concerns about the care of a roommate. The resident claimed the Activities Manager made a threatening statement suggesting harm could be done without evidence. Despite reporting this to the Director of Social Service (DSS), no action was taken. The DSS, along with the Director of Staff Development (DSD), met with the resident but did not report the resident's concerns as an allegation of abuse. The DSS and DSD dismissed the resident's fears of being poisoned as unfounded after a conversation with the resident. Both the Executive Director and the Director of Nursing stated that they expected staff to report any allegations of abuse immediately, but neither received any report regarding Resident #15. The Activities Manager denied making any threatening statements. The facility's failure to report the allegation of abuse violated their policy, which mandates immediate reporting of such allegations.
Inaccurate MDS Assessment for Resident with Nephrostomy Tube
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately code a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for a resident, specifically not reflecting the presence of a nephrostomy tube. The resident, who was admitted on 07/26/2024, had a medical history including acute kidney failure, hydronephrosis, type two diabetes mellitus, and obstructive and reflux uropathy. The resident's care plan, initiated on 07/29/2024, indicated the presence of a nephrostomy tube. However, the admission MDS assessment dated 08/02/2024 incorrectly coded the section H0100 as 'None of the above' instead of 'indwelling catheter' to reflect the nephrostomy tube. During an observation and interview on 08/05/2024, a urinary drainage bag was noted at the resident's bedside, and the resident's emergency contact confirmed the presence of a nephrostomy tube. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged the error, stating that the nephrostomy tube should have been reflected on the MDS. The Director of Nursing also confirmed that the MDS should have accurately reflected the presence of the nephrostomy tube, indicating a lapse in the facility's assessment process.
Failure to Conduct Timely AIMS Assessments for a Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessments every six months for a resident, as required by the care plan intervention. The resident, who was admitted on 12/07/2021, had a medical history of unspecified psychosis, schizophrenia, and other specified persistent mood disorders. The care plan for this resident included a directive to perform AIMS assessments every six months and with each increase in dose of antipsychotic medication. However, the medical record showed that AIMS assessments were not conducted at the required intervals, with assessments recorded on 12/08/2021, 06/15/2023, 07/31/2024, and 08/11/2024, indicating a lapse in adherence to the care plan. Interviews with facility staff, including the Pharmacy Consultant and the Director of Nursing (DON), confirmed the expectation that AIMS assessments should be completed every six months to monitor for tardive dyskinesia, a potential side effect of the antipsychotic medication quetiapine fumarate. Despite this expectation, the facility did not have a specific policy regarding the completion of AIMS assessments. The DON acknowledged that care plans should be followed, and a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) emphasized the importance of reviewing care plans to ensure interventions are completed as scheduled.
Failure to Conduct Psychiatric Evaluations as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow physician's orders for psychiatric evaluations for two residents, leading to deficiencies in care. Resident #81, admitted with a history of unspecified psychosis, schizophrenia, and mood disorders, was ordered a psychiatric evaluation and medication adjustment by the Medical Director in April 2024. Despite the Power of Attorney's permission and the order being noted, there was no documented evidence that the evaluation occurred. Interviews revealed that the facility was unable to secure a psychiatric provider for the evaluation, and the last psychiatric visit for the resident was in October 2023. Resident #9, with a history of depression and anxiety disorder, was also not provided with a psychiatric evaluation as ordered in May 2024. The resident's care plan included interventions for anxiety and depression, but the facility failed to schedule the required psychiatric evaluation. Interviews with the Director of Social Services and the Medical Director indicated that the facility's psychotropic team was responsible for scheduling evaluations, but no evaluation was documented after September 2023. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility lacked a specific policy for following physician's orders, relying instead on standard practice. This lack of adherence to physician's orders for psychiatric evaluations resulted in deficiencies in the care provided to both residents, as the necessary evaluations and potential medication adjustments were not conducted.
Improper Wound Staging by Nurse Practitioner
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a Nurse Practitioner (NP) followed professional standards of practice for wound staging for a resident with a pressure ulcer. Specifically, the NP incorrectly reverse staged a Stage 4 pressure injury on the resident's right heel to a Stage 3, contrary to the guidelines set by the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP). The NPUAP guidelines clearly state that pressure injuries should not be reverse staged as it does not accurately reflect the healing process. The resident in question was admitted to the facility with a medical history that included a Stage 4 pressure ulcer on the right heel. The wound was initially assessed by a Wound Physician's Assistant (WPA) and documented as Stage 4, with debridement revealing muscle, tendon, and bone. Despite this, the NP assessed the wound and reclassified it as Stage 3, citing improvements such as the absence of discharge, smell, and raw edges. However, the NP was unaware that wounds could not be down staged, which led to the incorrect classification. Interviews with facility staff, including the Medical Director and Director of Nursing, revealed a lack of awareness regarding the prohibition against reverse staging. The Medical Director deferred to the wound team for staging expertise, while the Director of Nursing expected documentation from the wound team regarding wound progression. The NP's actions were based on her observations of the wound's improvement, but this did not align with the established guidelines, resulting in the deficiency.
Improper Incontinence Care for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide proper incontinence care for a resident, identified as Resident #58, who was observed during incontinence care. The resident, admitted on 06/12/2024, had a medical history of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and was receiving palliative care. The resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicated moderate cognitive impairment and complete dependence on staff for toileting and bed mobility, with consistent incontinence of bowel and bladder. The care plan directed staff to check and change the resident during personal care and assist with toileting. During an observation, two CNAs were seen providing incontinence care to the resident. CNA #12 did not follow the facility's perineal care policy, which required cleaning both sides of the labia from front to back. Instead, CNA #12 only wiped down the center of the perineum without spreading the labia to clean the sides. This incorrect procedure was confirmed by interviews with the CNA, the Director of Staff Development, the Infection Preventionist, and the Director of Nursing, all of whom stated that proper cleaning should involve spreading the labia and cleaning both sides from front to back.
Failure to Reassess Bed Rail Safety After Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to reevaluate the appropriateness of continued use of bed rails for a resident after an incident where the resident attempted to climb over the bed rails and fell. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and a history of senile degeneration of the brain, anxiety disorder, restlessness, agitation, and generalized muscle weakness, was admitted with an order for half-length side rails to aid in mobility and transfers. Despite the fall incident, a bed rail safety assessment was not conducted immediately after the fall, and the next assessment was only completed during a routine quarterly review. The facility's policy required that bed rail safety assessments be conducted after any incident involving bed rails, but this was not adhered to in the case of the resident's fall. Interviews with the Assistant Director of Nurses and the Director of Nursing confirmed that a new bed rail safety assessment should have been completed within 24 hours of the incident. However, the responsible staff member, LVN #49, was not aware of the incident and did not complete the necessary assessment, highlighting a lapse in communication and adherence to safety protocols.
Failure to Implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions and Proper Infection Control
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for residents at high risk of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) colonization and transmission. Resident #54, who had a dialysis catheter, did not have EBP signage or a personal protective equipment (PPE) cart at their room. A certified nursing assistant (CNA) provided care without wearing a gown, contrary to the facility's policy and CDC guidelines. The Infection Preventionist (IP) and Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that EBP should have been followed for Resident #54 due to the presence of a hemodialysis catheter. In another instance, the facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene and glove use during incontinence care for Resident #58. Two CNAs were observed handling soiled wipes improperly, with one CNA handing wipes over the resident to the other CNA, who then touched the bed rail with soiled gloves. The CNAs did not change gloves or wash hands before making the resident comfortable, which was against the facility's incontinence care policy. The Director of Staff Development and the IP confirmed that the CNAs should have changed gloves and washed hands between dirty and clean tasks. Additionally, the facility did not maintain EBP for Resident #91, who had a Stage 4 pressure ulcer. The resident's room lacked EBP signage and a PPE cart, and a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) provided wound care without wearing a gown. The IP and DON admitted that Resident #91 should have remained on EBP due to the open wound, but the resident was overlooked when their indwelling catheter was removed. The failure to adhere to EBP protocols was acknowledged by the facility's staff, highlighting a lapse in infection prevention measures.
Failure to Follow Approved Menu and Portion Sizes
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the menu approved by the Registered Dietitian (RD) was followed, specifically regarding the portion size of meatloaf served to residents. The meatloaf portions served were less than the required 4 ounces, with some slices weighing only 3.5 ounces. This discrepancy was observed during a kitchen inspection where the Dietary Manager (DM) and kitchen staff confirmed the incorrect portion sizes. The issue arose because the cook used 30 pounds of ground turkey instead of the required 37.5 pounds of ground beef for 150 servings, leading to insufficient meatloaf portions for the 134 residents, of which three were NPO and receiving nutrition via gastrostomy tube. The DM admitted to miscommunicating the correct food package size to the cooks, resulting in the shortage. Additionally, there was confusion regarding the recipe title, which indicated a 3-ounce portion, while the instructions specified a 4-ounce portion. The RD confirmed that the recipe was not followed correctly and acknowledged that serving smaller portions could lead to residents not receiving the necessary caloric intake. The facility's policy on meal production was reviewed, highlighting the need for accurate meal production and sufficient product forecasting according to resident preferences and physician's diet orders.
Failure to Provide Required X-Ray for Follow-Up Appointment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for a resident who was admitted for status post left hemiarthroplasty. The resident was scheduled for a follow-up appointment with an orthopedic surgeon, but the facility was unaware of the appointment and did not perform the necessary hip x-ray for the resident to bring to the appointment. This oversight resulted in the resident arriving at the appointment without the required x-ray, leading to the orthopedic surgeon being unable to assess the resident's recovery and detect potential complications. Interviews with the family member, Assistant of Staff Development, and Director of Staff Development revealed that the facility did not follow its usual process of preparing residents for their appointments. The physician's orders indicated a follow-up appointment, but the licensed nurse did not obtain an order for an x-ray. The orthopedic surgeon's clinic supervisor confirmed that x-rays are always required for follow-up appointments, and the facility should have provided the resident with a CD containing the x-ray image. This failure to adhere to professional standards of practice resulted in the resident missing a critical assessment of their surgical recovery.
Failure to Arrange Transportation for Medical Appointment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assist in making transportation arrangements for a resident who was scheduled to have an orthopedic surgeon appointment. The resident had recently undergone hip surgery and was scheduled for a follow-up appointment. On the day of the appointment, the resident's family member arrived at the facility to accompany the resident, only to find that the facility was unaware of the appointment and had not arranged transportation. As a result, the family member had to transport the resident in her private vehicle at the last minute. Interviews with the Assistant of Staff Development and the Director of Staff Development revealed that the usual process for handling residents' appointments and transportation was not followed in this case. The resident's physician's orders, which included the follow-up appointment details, were received and signed by a facility licensed nurse, but this information was not communicated to the staff responsible for arranging transportation. The facility's handbook states that the facility is responsible for arranging transportation for medical appointments when family assistance is not available, but this protocol was not adhered to for this resident.
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 188 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Turlock
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Covenant Village Care Center | 0.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Brandel Manor | 0.3 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| North Starr Postacute Care | 1 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Main West Postacute Care | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Ceres Postacute Care | 9.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Turlock Nursing & Rehabilitation Center.
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 June 2026) and official state health department websites.