Bruceville Terrace - D/P SNF of Methodist Hospital

Name: Bruceville Terrace - D/P SNF of Methodist Hospital
Address: 8151 BRUCEVILLE ROAD, Sacramento, CA, 95823, US
Telephone: 9164236000

8151 Bruceville Road, Sacramento, CA 95823 · Sacramento County · 171 certified beds · avg 165 residents/day · certified since Mar 10, 1989

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

Part of chain: COMMONSPIRIT HEALTH (18 facilities, chain avg rating 2.7★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

5.28

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

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 (33)

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
Jun 11, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
May 7, 2026	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.
May 7, 2026	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.
May 7, 2026	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.
May 7, 2026	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.
May 7, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them.
May 7, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Feb 24, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint
Dec 19, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint
Jul 30, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to share a room with their spouse or a roommate of their choosing, or moved residents to a different room without written notice beforehand. · from a complaint
Jul 22, 2025	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. · from a complaint
Jul 22, 2025	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. · from a complaint
Jul 22, 2025	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. · from a complaint
Jul 8, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Feb 27, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Feb 27, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Feb 27, 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.
Feb 27, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Feb 27, 2025	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.
Feb 27, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Oct 10, 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. · from a complaint
Sep 18, 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. · from a complaint
Jul 11, 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. · from a complaint
Feb 9, 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.
Feb 9, 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.
Feb 9, 2024	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.
Feb 9, 2024	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.
Feb 9, 2024	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.
Feb 9, 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.
Feb 9, 2024	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.
Feb 9, 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.
Feb 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.
Feb 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 6).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2024	13	E
2025	12	E
2026	8	F

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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)	5.28	4.31	3.95	top 10% in California; top 9% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	1.76	0.61	0.69	top 2% in California; top 3% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	4.80	3.90	3.50	top 9% in California; top 8% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	1.31	0.51	0.48	top 5% in California; top 3% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	18.3	36.7	45.8	top 5% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	25.4	38.1	42.9	top 29% in California; top 23% 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 5.06, RN 1.69, weekend 4.59. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Commonspirit Health	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	100%	02/01/2019
Dignity Community Care	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	02/01/2019
Carswell, Scott	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2021
Commonspirit Health	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2019
Dignity Community Care	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2019
Melfi, Mitch	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2021
Melfi, Mitch	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2021
Morissette, Daniel	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2019
O'Quinn, Marvin	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2021
O'Quinn, Marvin	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2021
Petersdorf, John	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2019
Petersdorf, John	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	11/14/2022
Petersdorf, John	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2019
Scharmann, Steven	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2019
Scharmann, Steven	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	11/14/2022
Scharmann, Steven	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2019

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

"Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
"Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"Who on your staff manages IV therapy, and what training and monitoring is in place?"
"What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
"When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
"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
City Creek Post Acute	2.2 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Double Tree Post Acute Care Center	3.7 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Bridgewood Post Acute	3.9 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Capital Post Acute	4.3 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Elk Grove Post Acute	4.7 mi	Elk Grove, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Acc Care Center	6.1 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★★★	3/5
University Post-Acute Rehab	7.0 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Greenhaven Healthcare Center	7.2 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Cedarwood Post Acute	7.3 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Saylor Lane Healthcare Center	7.5 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Asbury Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center	7.8 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
McKinley Park Care Center	8.0 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★★☆	3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Sacramento →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555344.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Bruceville Terrace - D/P SNF of Methodist Hospital

8151 Bruceville Road, Sacramento, CA 95823 · 9164236000

Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 3/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Who on your staff manages IV therapy, and what training and monitoring is in place?"
☐ "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
☐ "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
☐ "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?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 555344 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)