Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around November 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of October 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Grandell Rehabilitation And Nu during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and impaired cognition was found on the floor after a roommate alerted staff, but the fall investigation did not include a written statement from the roommate who reported it. The incident was documented as unwitnessed, the resident could not explain what happened, and staff concluded the resident likely tried to toilet independently; however, the DON later stated there were unanswered questions and that the roommate’s statement should have been included.
Failure to Order Recommended Nutritional Supplement: A resident with osteomyelitis, a left AKA, diabetes, poor intake, and other comorbidities had a dietitian recommendation for Glucerna Shake BID for added calories and protein, but no physician order was entered and the MAR showed the supplement was never provided. Staff stated the former RD had been responsible for entering the order into the EMR for the MD to sign.
The facility's Facility Assessment did not accurately reflect current staffing levels, documenting the need for two RN Supervisors overnight and one RN on the first floor during the day, while actual staffing consisted of one RN Supervisor overnight and three LPNs on the first floor during the day. Staff interviews and records confirmed that the assessment was not updated after staffing changes, resulting in discrepancies between documented and actual staffing needs.
Inaccurate MDS assessments were completed for two residents. One resident with Candida auris and contact precautions had an IPA that did not document isolation/quarantine for an active infectious disease, despite a physician order, CCP interventions, and a posted precaution sign. Another resident with osteomyelitis and an AKA had a significant change MDS that failed to reflect documented weight loss of more than 5% in 1 month and more than 10% in 6 months, even though the weight history showed a marked decline and staff confirmed the omission.
Incomplete investigation of resident fall
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not thoroughly investigate an alleged fall involving a resident with impaired cognition and did not include a written statement from the resident’s roommate, who first reported the incident. Resident #256 had diagnoses including Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s Disease, and Anxiety Disorder, and the resident’s assessment documented severe cognitive impairment with inability to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status. The resident was also identified as being at risk for falls, with care plan interventions addressing safety, room environment, and toileting assistance. On 06/24/2025, Resident #256 was found on the floor in the room after the roommate alerted staff. The accident and incident report documented that the fall was unwitnessed and that the resident could not state what happened. A staff statement noted that the roommate saw the resident on the floor and reported it to nursing staff, but the incident report did not identify the roommate and no statement from the roommate was obtained. Nursing documentation described the resident lying on the right side near the bed, denying head injury but reporting right hip pain with bruising noted, and the resident appeared to have been trying to self-transfer to the bathroom. The investigation summary concluded that the root cause was the resident’s lack of safety awareness and attempting to toilet independently, and stated there was no cause to believe abuse, mistreatment, or neglect occurred. However, the investigation did not include the roommate’s written account, and the Director of Nursing stated there were unanswered questions in the investigation and that the roommate’s statement should have been included. The facility policy required witness statements as part of the investigation, and interviews confirmed that the nursing supervisor and DON were responsible for obtaining and reviewing statements, but the roommate was not identified or interviewed in the record.
Failure to Order Recommended Nutritional Supplement
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that Resident #7 maintained, to the extent possible, acceptable nutritional and hydration status. Resident #7 had diagnoses including osteomyelitis and a left above-knee amputation, and the significant change MDS documented a BIMS score of 15, indicating intact cognitive skills for daily decision making. The resident’s MDS also documented a height of 65 inches and a weight of 119 pounds, with no significant weight loss identified in one month or six months. A dietary re-admission progress note written by the dietitian on 06/09/2025 recommended Glucerna Shake 240 milliliters twice daily to provide additional calories and protein. The note stated the resident was at risk for malnutrition due to a mechanically altered diet, help needed with feeding, incontinence, above-knee amputation with infection, impaired skin integrity, pain medication use, history of Lasix use, poor intake, diabetes mellitus, and other comorbidities. However, the resident’s physician orders showed no evidence that Glucerna Shakes were ordered, and the MARs for June, July, and August 2025 showed no evidence that the supplement was ever provided. During interviews, staff stated the former dietitian had been responsible for entering the physician order into the EMR for the supplement, and the current dietitian stated they would ensure the physician ordered it.
Inaccurate Facility Assessment of Nursing Staffing Levels
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that its Facility Assessment accurately reflected current staffing levels and needs, as required by its own policy and regulatory standards. The Facility Assessment, last updated in March 2025, documented the need for two Registered Nurse (RN) Supervisors on the 11:00 PM-7:00 AM shift and one RN on the first floor during the 7:00 AM-3:00 PM shift. However, review of staffing sheets and interviews with staff revealed that only one RN Supervisor was scheduled for the overnight shift, and the first floor was staffed with three Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) instead of an RN during the day shift. The staffing coordinator and Director of Nursing confirmed that the par level sheet, which determines minimum staffing, had been updated to reflect these changes, and that the RN position on the first floor had been replaced by an LPN about a month prior to the survey. Despite these changes, the Facility Assessment was not updated to reflect the current staffing model, leading to discrepancies between documented and actual staffing practices. The Administrator acknowledged that the numbers in the Facility Assessment were based on staffing from specific dates in March 2025 and did not represent daily or current needs. The failure to update the Facility Assessment as required resulted in inaccurate documentation of the resources necessary to provide competent care to residents during both routine operations and emergencies.
Inaccurate MDS Assessments for Isolation Status and Significant Weight Loss
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately reflected resident status for two residents reviewed during the recertification survey. The report identified deficiencies in assessment accuracy for Transmission Based Precautions and Nutrition, with the MDS coordinator and other disciplines responsible for completing and verifying the assessments. The facility policy stated that the MDS coordinator is responsible for coordinating the assessment and care planning process to ensure timely and accurate completion of the MDS. For one resident with diagnoses including candidiasis, type 2 diabetes, and chronic kidney disease, the Interim Payment Assessment dated 07/25/2025 documented an active diagnosis of multidrug resistant organism and a BIMS score of 15, but did not document Isolation or Quarantine for an active infectious disease in Section O. The resident had a physician’s order for Contact Precautions related to positive Candida auris, and the care plan included contact isolation protocol, monitoring for infection, and staff and resident education. During observation, the resident was in bed and a sign outside the room indicated Contact Precautions with gown, glove, and hand hygiene instructions. For another resident with diagnoses including osteomyelitis and left above-knee amputation, the significant change MDS assessment documented a BIMS score of 15 and recorded a weight of 119 pounds, but stated there had been no weight loss of 5% or more in one month or 10% or more in six months. The resident’s weight history showed 132.8 pounds on 04/16/2025 and 119 pounds on 05/13/2025, a 10.39% loss in one month, and 142 pounds on 11/13/2024 and 119 pounds on 05/13/2025, a 16.20% loss in six months. Interviews confirmed that the weight loss should have been documented in the MDS, and the MDS Director stated each discipline was responsible for accuracy of their section and that the signature only attested to completion.
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 947 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 17 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 Long Beach
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beach Terrace Care Center | 0.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 0 |
| Park Avenue Extended Care Facility | 0.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Long Beach Nursing And Rehabilitation Center | 1.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| The Grand Rehabilitation And Nursing At South Poin | 1.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| West Lawrence Care Center. Llc | 3.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Grandell Rehabilitation And Nu.
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 October 2026) and official state health department websites.