How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Citrus Heights Post Acute
7807 Uplands Way, Citrus Heights, CA 95610 (opens Google Maps) · Sacramento County · (916) 967-2929· 162 certified beds · avg 156 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1989 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: PACS GROUP (274 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 23, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.91
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 34 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. F-0658
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. F-0684
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. F-0812
View all 34 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 23, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0812 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0760 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791 |
| Apr 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0803 |
| Apr 14, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0810 |
| Jul 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint · F-0557 |
| Jun 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0812 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0880 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0919 |
| Apr 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0880 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Mar 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0812 |
| Mar 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Mar 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Mar 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Mar 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0880 |
| Feb 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Dec 28, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 · F-0880 |
| Dec 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0686 |
| Dec 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726 |
| Dec 28, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 4 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 10 | 0 | E |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.91
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.79
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.54
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.91 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 35% in California; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.79 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 17% in California; top 28% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.54 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 34% in California; top 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.67 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 17% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 33.8 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 42% in California; top 21% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 28.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 33% in California; top 26% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 4.16, RN 0.84, weekend 3.77.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.16 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Citrus Heights Post Acute. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capital SNF Holding Company, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 02/01/2024 |
| Providence Group NH, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 02/01/2024 |
| Apt, Frederick | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Apt, Frederick | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Ballesteros, Terri | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2024 |
| Ballesteros, Terri | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2024 |
| Javaheri, Ashkan | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2024 |
| Javaheri, Ashkan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2024 |
| Jergensen, Joshua | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Jergensen, Joshua | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Mitchell, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Mitchell, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Providence Administrative Consulting Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2024 |
| Providence Group INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/15/2026 |
| Reeves, Heather | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2024 |
| Truist Bank | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/07/2023 |
All 16 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Pacs Group — 274 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- City View Post Acute — San Francisco, CA · overall 2/5
- Concord Post Acute — Concord, CA · overall 2/5abuse
- Copper Ridge Care Center — Redding, CA · overall 5/5
- Costa Del Sol Healthcare — Los Angeles, CA · overall 2/5
- Cottonwood Canyon Healthcare Center — El Cajon, CA · overall 3/5
- Country Hills Post Acute — El Cajon, CA · overall 1/5
- Crystal Cove Care Center — Newport Beach, CA · overall 4/5
- Crystal Ridge Care Center — Grass Valley, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 273 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
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 did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How do you coordinate and monitor care for residents who receive dialysis?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "How do residents get dental care here — is there a dentist who visits, and how are appointments arranged?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 34% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 16 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 42 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fair Oaks Healthcare Center | 1.3 mi | Fair Oaks, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Manzanita Healthcare Center | 2.7 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Sacramento Post-Acute | 3.3 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| American River Center | 3.9 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| College Oak Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 4.0 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Eskaton Village Care Center | 4.3 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Roseville Care Center | 4.4 mi | Roseville, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Pine Creek Care Center | 4.4 mi | Roseville, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Whitney Oaks Care Center | 4.6 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mountain Manor Senior Residence | 4.7 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| River Pointe Post-Acute | 4.7 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| River City Post Acute | 4.7 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Sacramento, CA — 37 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- City Creek Post Acute — Sacramento, CA · overall 5/5
- Double Tree Post Acute Care Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 2/5abuse
- Elk Grove Post Acute — Elk Grove, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Folsom Care Center — Folsom, CA · overall 4/5
- Gramercy Court — Sacramento, CA · overall 4/5abuse
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555337.