Ceres Postacute Care
1711 Richland Avenue, Ceres, CA 95307 · Stanislaus County · 46 certified beds · avg 44 residents/day · certified since Oct 1, 1977
Part of chain: RMG CAPITAL PARTNERS (9 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 4, 2025 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Apr 22, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 4, 2025 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Apr 14, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (37)
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 28, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · from a complaint |
| Dec 2, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not follow the rules about disclosing who owns it, or did not tell the state agency about changes in ownership or key administrative staff. · from a complaint |
| May 16, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. |
| May 16, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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 16, 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. |
| May 16, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| May 16, 2025 | 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. |
| May 16, 2025 | 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. |
| May 16, 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. |
| May 16, 2025 | 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. |
| May 16, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| May 16, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| May 16, 2025 | 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. |
| May 16, 2025 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
| Apr 4, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint |
| May 23, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. |
| May 23, 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. |
| May 23, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| May 23, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| May 23, 2024 | 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 23, 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. |
| May 23, 2024 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
| Jan 29, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jun 7, 2019 | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed. |
| Jun 7, 2019 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 12).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 13 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 15 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 1 | 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)
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) | 4.19 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 45% in California; top 32% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.20 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 1% in California; bottom 3% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.00 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 33% in California; top 23% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.19 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 9% in California; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 34.1 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 43% in California; top 22% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 3.88, RN 0.19, weekend 3.71. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bansal, Jagan | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 04/17/2023 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 04/17/2023 |
| RMG Capital Partners, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/01/2019 |
| Bansal, Jagan | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Reliant Management Group, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2015 |
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 tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "Who owns this facility, and has ownership or top management changed recently?"
- "Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| River View Post Acute | 3.2 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Valley Skilled Nursing Center | 4.2 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Modesto Post Acute Center | 4.2 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Golden Modesto Care Center | 4.6 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Crestwood Manor | 4.7 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Garden City Healthcare Center | 4.9 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Almond Vista Healthcare | 5.5 mi | Modesto, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| English Oaks Convalescent & Rehabilitation Hospita | 6.6 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Vintage Faire Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 7.4 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Riverbank Post-Acute | 9.2 mi | Riverbank, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055935.