Acc Care Center
7801 Rush River Drive, Sacramento, CA 95831 · Sacramento County · 99 certified beds · avg 92 residents/day · certified since Apr 29, 1987
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$24,087
Fines, last 3 years
5.78
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.
All citations in the current public record (45)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
| Jan 6, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint |
| Aug 8, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
| Dec 27, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Aug 3, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Aug 3, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 11).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 19 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | D |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
6 fines totaling $24,087.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2024 | Fine | $4,140 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | Fine | $3,764 |
| Jan 22, 2024 | Fine | $9,032 |
| Jan 8, 2024 | Fine | $2,258 |
| Jan 2, 2024 | Fine | $1,748 |
| Dec 11, 2023 | Fine | $3,145 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.78 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 5% in California; top 5% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.95 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 13% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.30 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 5% in California; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.55 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 26% in California; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 43.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 29% in California; top 45% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 45.5 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 34% in California; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 5.42, RN 0.89, weekend 4.97. Staffing rating: 5/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ashizawa, Winston | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/1972 |
| Asian Community Center of Sacramento Valley INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/1984 |
| Belmes, Marissa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2005 |
| Belmes, Marissa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2005 |
| Bienko, Mary | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2023 |
| Care Navigation Consulting LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2023 |
| Careforce Consulting LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/12/2024 |
| Connolly, Lora | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2020 |
| Donovan-Tift Consulting INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/20/2023 |
| Goo, Wesley | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Iseri, Joyce | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2016 |
| Luu, Brent | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Masuoka, Betty | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Mishima, Paula | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2019 |
| New Life Physical Therapy Services PC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| New Life Physical Therapy Services PC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/12/2025 |
| Pacific West Pharmacy INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/25/2021 |
| Rusynyk, Connie | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2023 |
| Rusynyk, Connie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2023 |
| Scott D Stringer MD Medical Corporation | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/14/2014 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Greenhaven Healthcare Center | 1.6 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Double Tree Post Acute Care Center | 2.7 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Capital Post Acute | 3.0 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Cedarwood Post Acute | 3.4 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bridgewood Post Acute | 5.4 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| City Creek Post Acute | 5.4 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bruceville Terrace - D/P SNF of Methodist Hospital | 6.1 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| University Post-Acute Rehab | 6.4 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| River Bend Nursing Center | 6.4 mi | West Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Pioneer House | 6.6 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in Sacramento →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555261.