Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
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 Santa Fe Lodge during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Staff interviews and record review showed that multiple CNAs and an LVN did not know who the facility’s Abuse Coordinator was or which external agencies must receive abuse allegations within the required two-hour timeframe. The DSD stated that the Administrator is the Abuse Coordinator and that all staff are expected to know to report suspected abuse to the Administrator, who then reports to the state survey agency, APS, law enforcement, and the Ombudsman. The facility’s written abuse prevention policy confirms these responsibilities and timelines, yet interviewed staff were unable to identify the Abuse Coordinator or the mandated reporting entities.
A resident with schizophrenia, impulse disorder, and HTN, who lacked decision-making capacity, allegedly yelled "rape" when a CNA entered the room. The CNA delayed reporting the allegation to an LVN, and the LVN further delayed notifying the DON and did not immediately inform the administrator. As documented on an SBAR form, the allegation of physical and sexual abuse by staff was not reported to law enforcement, the Ombudsman, or the state agency until several hours later, exceeding the facility’s policy requirement to report abuse allegations within two hours.
A resident with dementia, impaired cognition, gait and mobility issues, and a known fall risk experienced a fall that triggered an alarm, after which an LVN found the resident on the floor with an abrasion and notified the primary nurse. Despite facility policy requiring prompt assessment, documentation of a change of condition (COC), and physician notification for injuries and falls, no post-fall assessment, COC documentation, or MD notification was found in the record. The DON and nursing staff later confirmed that a fall is considered a change of condition and that the charge nurse was responsible for completing the COC, but this was not done.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment was placed on bed and wheelchair alarms and started on Lexapro and Remeron without documented informed consent from the resident or their representative. Staff confirmed that required consents were not obtained prior to implementing these interventions, contrary to facility policy.
The facility did not ensure that executed advance directives were obtained and maintained in the medical records for three residents, despite documentation indicating that these legal documents existed. For two residents with severe cognitive impairment and one with intact cognition, the actual ADs were missing from their files, and the Social Services Assistant confirmed the documents could not be found. Facility policy required that ADs be readily retrievable, but this was not followed.
Three residents with significant medical conditions did not have weekly weights obtained or documented as required by physician orders and facility policy. Staff responsible for weighing residents lacked access to the electronic record system and relied on others to enter data, resulting in missing documentation for required weekly weights. This failure occurred despite clear orders and care plans indicating the need for close monitoring due to recent weight loss.
Surveyors found that food items in the kitchen walk-in refrigerator, including sliced cheese, a jar of pickles, and whipping cream, were not labeled with required open or received dates. Both the Certified Dietary Manager and Registered Dietitian confirmed that labeling is necessary to track food quality and freshness, and facility policy requires all items to be properly dated and labeled.
Two residents with significant medical and mental health conditions signed binding arbitration agreements that did not include a provision allowing them or their representatives to communicate with federal, state, or local officials. The Admission Coordinator confirmed the omission during interviews and record reviews.
Multiple infection control lapses were observed, including unlabeled and improperly stored personal care items in a shared restroom, a resident with severe cognitive impairment independently accessing communal drink pitchers, uncleaned dryer lint traps, soiled bed linens with suspected fecal matter, and a used cup left on a hallway handrail. Staff interviews confirmed these practices did not follow facility policy and posed risks for cross-contamination.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and mental health conditions was left exposed while sitting in a shower chair, with privacy curtains only partially drawn and the room door open as a CNA prepared for care. This exposure was visible to others in the hallway, and both the CNA and RN Supervisor acknowledged the lapse in maintaining the resident's privacy and dignity, contrary to the care plan and facility policy.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple mental health diagnoses was observed sitting in a wheelchair with the call light secured to the bed's grab bar, out of reach. Staff confirmed the call light was not accessible, despite facility policy requiring call lights to be within reach for all residents.
A resident was readmitted with multiple diagnoses and a new order for Depakote to treat bipolar disorder, but the facility failed to update the MDS and admission records to reflect the new diagnosis. Despite documentation in physician orders and progress notes, the bipolar disorder was not included in the resident's official records, contrary to facility policy requiring current and detailed health records.
A resident with a history of traumatic subdural hemorrhage, seizures, and hypertension was admitted and had a positive PASARR Level I screening for SMI, but the facility did not complete or document the required Level II evaluation, as confirmed by interviews and record review.
A resident was readmitted with a new diagnosis of bipolar disorder, but the facility did not update the MDS or develop a care plan to address this condition. Interviews confirmed that staff were aware a care plan was needed for the new diagnosis, but it was not completed, contrary to facility policy requiring care plan updates after significant changes or hospital readmissions.
The facility did not meet the required minimum of 80 square feet per resident in multiple-occupancy rooms, as shown by facility records and room measurements. Despite a waiver request and staff reporting no issues providing care in the available space, the documented room sizes for 20 rooms were below regulatory standards.
A resident with dementia and major depressive disorder eloped from an LTC facility due to inadequate supervision. The resident left through an exit door that was not properly monitored or secured during mealtime, as staff were occupied with feeding other residents. The resident was found with a skin tear upon return. Facility policy emphasized continuous supervision to prevent such incidents, which was not followed.
The facility failed to maintain an acceptable temperature range, affecting several resident rooms, a dining room, and a hallway. The air conditioning unit malfunctioned, leading to temperatures exceeding the facility's acceptable range. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the issue, and the Maintenance Director confirmed the malfunction, stating that the HVAC technician was working on repairs. The facility's policy emphasized maintaining comfortable and safe temperatures, which was not adhered to during the malfunction.
Staff Lack Knowledge of Abuse Reporting Roles and Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that staff understood and followed its abuse reporting policies and procedures. During interviews, three of six sampled staff members (two CNAs and one LVN) were unable to identify the facility’s Abuse Coordinator and did not know the external agencies to which allegations of resident abuse must be reported. Specifically, these staff members did not know that allegations of abuse must be reported to the California Department of Public Health, the Ombudsman, adult protective services, and local law enforcement within two hours when abuse is suspected. The Director of Staff Development stated that the Administrator is the Abuse Coordinator and that all staff are expected to know this and to understand the reporting requirements. The record review included an admission record and history and physical for a resident admitted with schizophrenia, impulse disorder, and hypertension, with documentation that the resident lacked capacity to understand and make decisions due to schizophrenia. The facility’s written policy, “Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program,” revised 11/28/2022, states that the Administrator or designee serves as Abuse Coordinator and is responsible for reporting known or suspected abuse to proper authorities, and that staff must report suspected abuse to the Administrator or designee. The policy further specifies that allegations of abuse must be reported immediately, but no later than two hours after suspicion is formed, to the state survey agency, adult protective services, law enforcement, and the Ombudsman. Despite these written requirements, interviewed staff demonstrated a lack of knowledge of both the designated Abuse Coordinator and the mandated external reporting entities and timelines.
Failure to Timely Report Allegation of Abuse to Required Authorities
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to timely report an allegation of abuse involving Resident 1 to the California Department of Public Health, the Ombudsman, and local law enforcement within the two-hour timeframe required by its Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program policy. Resident 1, who had been admitted with schizophrenia, impulse disorder, and hypertension, and was documented in a History and Physical as lacking capacity to understand and make decisions due to schizophrenia, allegedly yelled "rape, rape" when CNA 2 entered the room around 1 PM on 4/4/2026. CNA 2 did not report this allegation until approximately 2:45 PM, when CNA 2 informed LVN 2 that Resident 1 had alleged CNA 2 raped and touched the resident. LVN 2 stated that CNA 2 reported the allegation at 3 PM and acknowledged not reporting the allegation to the Administrator, instead waiting until 5 PM to inform the DON, and stated that the allegation should have been reported right away. Review of Resident 1's Change of Condition/Interact Assessment Form (SBAR) dated 4/4/2026 showed that the resident made an allegation of physical and sexual abuse by unidentified staff, and that the RN supervisor reported the allegation to local law enforcement at 8:30 PM. The SBAR further indicated the Administrator reported the allegation to the Ombudsman at 8:24 PM and to the Department at 8:25 PM. The DON confirmed these reporting times were greater than two hours from when the allegation was made and acknowledged that the allegation was not reported to the Department, the Ombudsman, and local law enforcement in accordance with the facility's Abuse Prevention and Prohibition Program policy, which requires allegations of abuse to be reported immediately, but no later than two hours after forming the suspicion, to the state survey agency, adult protective services, law enforcement, and the Ombudsman.
Failure to Assess and Notify Physician After Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow its Change of Condition policy after a fall experienced by Resident 1. Resident 1 had multiple diagnoses including abnormalities of gait and mobility, unspecified dementia, and a history of falling, and had been assessed as a fall risk on a Fall Risk Evaluation that directed staff to alert the physician if a fall occurred. An MDS assessment indicated Resident 1 had moderately impaired cognition and was dependent for ADLs, requiring supervision or touching assistance. Despite these identified risks, when Resident 1 fell, the required assessments and notifications were not completed. On 1/9/2026 at approximately 3 AM, LVN 2 heard an alarm from the back hallway, entered Resident 1’s room, and found Resident 1 sitting on the floor in front of the roommate’s bed. Resident 1 stated, “I do not know, I just fell.” LVN 2 noted an abrasion on Resident 1’s mid-back on the right side and notified Resident 1’s primary nurse, LVN 3, who stated LVN 2 would resume follow-up. There was no documented evidence that a post-fall assessment was completed, that the physician was notified, or that a Change of Condition (COC) form was initiated for this event, despite the facility’s policy requiring prompt handling, documentation, and physician notification for changes such as bruises, lacerations, and other injuries. During subsequent interviews and record reviews, the DON confirmed that the progress note from 1/9/2026 indicated a fall and that LVN 2, as charge nurse, was responsible for completing the COC, which was not found in the record. The DON also confirmed there was no documentation that the physician was notified or that an assessment was completed after the fall. LVN 1 and LVN 3 both acknowledged that a fall constitutes a change of condition and that it is important to assess the resident and notify the physician and family, yet LVN 3 stated they did not assess Resident 1 after the fall and relied on LVN 2 to “take care of the incident.” The facility’s Change of Condition policy required proper assessment, prompt handling, licensed nurse documentation, completion of a COC, and prompt physician notification with daily assessments, which were not carried out in this case.
Failure to Obtain Informed Consent for Alarms and Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain informed consent for the use of bed and wheelchair alarms, as well as for the administration of two anti-depressant medications, Lexapro and Remeron, for one resident. The resident, who had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and muscle weakness, was assessed as having severely impaired cognition. Despite facility policy requiring informed consent prior to the use of safety devices and psychotherapeutic medications, there was no documentation of consent being obtained from the resident or their responsible party before implementing these interventions. Observations confirmed that the resident was using bed and wheelchair pad alarms, and physician orders for both the alarms and the medications specified that informed consent should be obtained. Interviews with facility staff, including a CNA, LVN, and RN Supervisor, confirmed that the required consents were not present in the resident's records. Facility policies reviewed also indicated that informed consent must be obtained and documented prior to the use of such interventions, but this process was not followed for the resident in question.
Failure to Maintain Advance Directives in Resident Medical Records
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that advance directives (ADs) were obtained and maintained in the medical records for three of five sampled residents. For each of these residents, documentation indicated that an AD had been executed, as shown by their Advance Healthcare Directive Acknowledgement (AHDA) forms. However, during record review, the Social Services Assistant (SSA) was unable to locate copies of the actual ADs in the residents' medical records, despite facility policy requiring that such documents be readily retrievable. Resident 14 and Resident 145 both had severe cognitive impairment and lacked capacity to make decisions, as documented in their History and Physicals and Minimum Data Sets. Their care plans referenced respecting the wishes specified in their ADs, but the actual AD documents were not present in their records. Resident 38, who had intact cognition and capacity, also had an AHDA indicating an executed AD, but the AD itself was missing from the file. In all three cases, the POLST forms on file noted that the POLST was not a substitute for an AD and should complement, not replace, the AD. The SSA confirmed responsibility for obtaining and filing ADs upon admission and acknowledged that the facility had not followed through in securing and maintaining these documents in the residents' records. Facility policy required that executed ADs be obtained and kept in a specific section of the medical record, but this was not done for the three residents in question.
Failure to Obtain and Document Weekly Weights as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain and document weekly weights for three residents as required by physician orders and the facility's own policy. For one resident with heart failure and dementia, the weight was not taken upon readmission or on the date specified by the physician order. The Restorative Nurse Assistant (RNA) reported weighing the resident upon return but did not have access to the electronic documentation system and provided the weight to the Infection Preventionist (IP) on paper. The IP did not enter the weight into the system and had no documentation to confirm the weight was taken. Another resident with dysphagia, hypertension, and acute kidney failure experienced significant weight loss, and a physician order was in place for weekly weights. However, the medical record showed no weights were recorded on two consecutive weeks as required. Both the Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) and the Registered Nurse Supervisor (RNS) confirmed that weights were missing and acknowledged the importance of monitoring weight for residents experiencing weight loss. A third resident with multiple diagnoses, including dementia and anxiety disorder, also had a physician order for weekly weights due to recent weight loss. The care plan and nutritional assessment indicated the need for close monitoring, but the weekly weight for one of the required weeks was not documented. The RNA, responsible for weighing residents, stated that weights were sometimes taken on different days depending on workload and that the Director of Nursing (DON) was responsible for entering weights into the electronic record. The facility's policy required weekly weights for all residents for four weeks after admission or readmission, but this was not consistently followed or documented.
Failure to Label and Date Food Items in Kitchen Refrigerator
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed that the facility failed to ensure proper food storage practices in the kitchen's walk-in refrigerator. Specifically, a transparent container with sliced cheese was not labeled with an open date, a halfway-filled jar of hamburger pickles was not labeled with an open date, and two unopened plastics of whipping cream were not labeled with a received date. These observations were made during a walkthrough with the Certified Dietary Manager, who confirmed that food items should be labeled with open and receive dates to monitor quality and freshness. Further interview with the Registered Dietitian confirmed that all items in the refrigerator should be labeled with open and receive dates to track when food items arrived, determine when to discard them, and ensure the highest quality of food served to residents. Review of the facility's policy and procedure on Refrigerator/Freezer Storage indicated that leftover food or unused portions of packaged foods should be covered, dated, and labeled, and that all items should have appropriate delivery, open, and thaw dates. The facility's failure to follow these procedures led to the cited deficiency.
Arbitration Agreements Lacked Required Communication Provision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that its binding arbitration agreements included a provision allowing residents or their representatives to communicate with federal, state, or local officials. This deficiency was identified during interviews and record reviews for two residents. In both cases, the Admission Coordinator confirmed that the arbitration agreements signed by the residents' responsible parties did not contain a selection or statement affirming the right to communicate with authorities such as surveyors or the Ombudsman. One resident had a history of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and anxiety, while the other had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder, and psychosis, with documented intact cognition and partial assistance needs for daily activities. The omission in the arbitration agreements was acknowledged by the Admission Coordinator, who stated the importance of allowing such communication to honor residents' rights.
Failure to Follow Infection Prevention and Control Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to infection prevention and control practices for six sampled residents, as evidenced by multiple observations and staff interviews. Personal toiletries and resident care items belonging to four residents were found unlabeled and improperly stored in a shared restroom, with items such as an opened cleanser, uncapped shaving cream, and a wash basin left accessible. Staff confirmed these items should have been labeled and secured in residents' closets to prevent cross-contamination, especially since some residents were ambulatory and could access items not belonging to them. Additionally, a resident with severe cognitive impairment was observed independently pouring water from a communal pitcher on a medication cart in the hallway, with no staff intervention. Staff interviews confirmed that residents should not be allowed to serve themselves from communal drink pitchers due to infection control concerns, as residents could contaminate the pitchers with dirty hands or by returning unwanted liquid. Facility policy also required measures to prevent the transmission of communicable diseases, which were not followed in this instance. Further deficiencies included a heavy accumulation of lint in two out of three dryer lint traps in the shared laundry room, contrary to the facility's schedule requiring frequent cleaning. Staff acknowledged the risk and admitted to not cleaning the lint traps as often as required. In another instance, a resident's bed sheets and room wall were observed with brown streaks suspected to be stool, and staff confirmed the resident had a history of handling feces and was unable to clean their own hands. Lastly, a used cup with leftover liquid was found on a hallway handrail, and staff stated that such items should not be left unattended as they could be used by other residents, posing an infection risk.
Failure to Maintain Resident Privacy and Dignity During Personal Care
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple mental health diagnoses was not provided adequate privacy and dignity during personal care. The resident was observed sitting in a shower chair at the bedside with the right flank and thigh exposed. The privacy curtains were only partially drawn, and the room door was propped open while a CNA was outside the room donning PPE. During this time, several male residents were walking in the hallway, making the resident's exposure visible to others. The resident's care plan specifically included interventions to maintain privacy and respect the resident's rights. Facility policy and procedures also required staff to close the room entrance door and ensure bodily privacy during personal care. Both the CNA and the RN Supervisor acknowledged that the resident's body was exposed and should have been covered for dignity and privacy. The failure to follow these protocols resulted in the resident being exposed in a manner inconsistent with facility policy and the resident's care plan.
Call Light Not Within Reach for Cognitively Impaired Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's call light was within reach, as observed during a survey. The resident, who had a history of unspecified dementia, psychotic and mood disturbances, and anxiety, was assessed as having severely impaired cognition and required varying levels of assistance with activities of daily living. During the observation, the resident was seated in a wheelchair in the middle of the room, facing away from the bed, while the call light was secured around the right-side grab bar of the bed, making it inaccessible to the resident. A Certified Nursing Assistant confirmed that the call light was not within the resident's reach and acknowledged that it should have been accessible in case the resident needed help. The Registered Nurse Supervisor also stated that call lights must be within reach for all residents, including those who are confused, to allow them to call for assistance. The facility's policy and procedure on call lights required staff to ensure that call lights are within reach when residents are in their rooms or on the toilet.
Failure to Update Assessment After Significant Change in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a required assessment following a significant change in condition for a resident who was readmitted with multiple diagnoses, including dementia and major depressive disorder. Upon review, it was found that the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) did not reflect a new diagnosis of bipolar disorder, despite the presence of a physician's order for Depakote to treat this condition. The MDS Coordinator confirmed that the resident's hospital records, which should have been reviewed upon readmission, indicated treatment for bipolar disorder, and that this diagnosis should have been documented in both the Admission Record and the MDS. Further review of the resident's active orders and physician progress notes confirmed ongoing treatment for bipolar disorder, yet the diagnosis was not included in the facility's official records. The facility's policy requires that health records be current and detailed, consistent with good medical and professional practice. The omission of the bipolar disorder diagnosis in the resident's records and assessment tools represented a failure to update documentation after a significant change in the resident's condition.
Failure to Complete Required PASARR Level II Evaluation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a required Level II Pre-Admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) evaluation for a resident who had a positive Level I PASARR screening for serious mental illness (SMI). The resident was initially admitted with diagnoses including traumatic subdural hemorrhage, seizures, and hypertension. The Level I PASARR screening, conducted after admission, indicated the need for a Level II evaluation, but there was no documentation that this evaluation was ever completed. Interviews with the Registered Nurse Supervisor and the Director of Nursing confirmed that there were no records of a Level II PASARR evaluation for the resident, despite facility policy requiring such an evaluation for residents with a positive Level I result. The facility's policy also required staff to review PASARR information regularly, follow up with the appropriate contractors, and maintain documentation, none of which was evidenced in this case.
Failure to Develop Care Plan for New Bipolar Disorder Diagnosis
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a care plan addressing bipolar disorder for a resident who was readmitted following a hospital stay. The resident's admission record indicated multiple diagnoses, including dementia and major depressive disorder, and hospital records obtained during the recent hospitalization included a new diagnosis of bipolar disorder. However, the Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed after readmission did not list bipolar disorder as an active diagnosis, and no care plan was created to address this new condition. Interviews with the Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDSC) revealed that the resident's medical record should have reflected the new bipolar disorder diagnosis and that a care plan should have been developed upon admission to ensure staff awareness and appropriate interventions. The facility's policy required the interdisciplinary team to review and update care plans when there is a significant change in a resident's condition or upon readmission from a hospital stay, but this was not done for the resident in question.
Resident Rooms Below Minimum Square Footage Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that 20 out of 23 resident rooms met the minimum required space of 80 square feet per resident in rooms with more than one occupant. Documentation from the Resident Listing Report and Client Accommodation Analysis showed that multiple rooms, each housing two residents, measured only 140 square feet, resulting in less than the required space per resident. Additionally, one room with four residents measured 308 square feet, also falling short of the standard. These findings were based on a review of facility records and room measurements. A waiver request letter from the facility stated that reasonable privacy, closet, and storage space were provided, and that there was sufficient room for nursing care and resident equipment. During an observation and interview, a CNA was able to move freely and provide care in a room with two wheelchairs present, and reported no issues with space when attending to residents. However, the documented room sizes did not meet the regulatory requirements for square footage per resident.
Resident Elopement Due to Inadequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and monitoring of a resident at risk for elopement, leading to the resident leaving the facility unnoticed. The resident, who had diagnoses of dementia and major depressive disorder, was identified as having moderately impaired cognition and required supervision for daily activities. Despite these needs, the resident was able to elope from the facility without staff noticing, as staff were occupied with assisting other residents during mealtime. The incident occurred when a CNA and a Dietary Aide entered the hallway from the exit door and failed to ensure the door was closed or locked. The resident was seen on surveillance video holding the door open and subsequently leaving the facility. Interviews with staff revealed that during mealtimes, there was no one monitoring the exit door, as staff were busy feeding residents. This lack of supervision allowed the resident to leave the facility unnoticed. Upon the resident's return, it was noted that the resident had sustained a skin tear on the left arm. The facility's policy and procedure emphasized the importance of continuous supervision and redirection to prevent accidents and elopements, which was not adhered to in this case. Staff interviews confirmed that there was a lapse in monitoring and that the exit door was not properly checked, contributing to the resident's elopement.
Facility Fails to Maintain Acceptable Temperature Range
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an acceptable temperature range as per its policy, affecting six resident rooms, one dining room, and one hallway. The air conditioning unit for the middle part of the nursing unit malfunctioned, leading to temperatures ranging from 84.4 to 97 degrees Fahrenheit, which exceeded the facility's acceptable range of 71 to 81 degrees Fahrenheit. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the issue, stating that the air conditioner had been broken since the previous day, and fans were being provided to residents as a temporary measure. The Maintenance Director confirmed the malfunction and stated that the HVAC technician was working on replacing the condenser. The air conditioning unit was reportedly fixed later that day. The facility's policy, titled 'Homelike Environment,' emphasized maintaining comfortable and safe temperatures, which was not adhered to during the malfunction. The Maintenance Supervisor's job description highlighted the responsibility for maintaining the facility in good repair, including mechanical systems, which was not fulfilled in this instance.
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 4,798 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 20 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 El Monte
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mayflower Care Center | 0 mi | — | 2 | 0 |
| The Gardens Of El Monte | 0.9 mi | — | 23 | 0 |
| Fidelity Health Care | 1.1 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
| Temple City Healthcare | 1.3 mi | — | 8 | 0 |
| Community Care Center | 1.6 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Santa Fe Lodge.
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.