How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Delta Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP
514 North Bridge Street, Visalia, CA 93291 (opens Google Maps) · Tulare County · (559) 732-8614· 44 certified beds · avg 40 residents/day · certified since Apr 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: CORPORATE INTERFACE SERVICES (40 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 15, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.97
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 29 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint F-0573
The facility required residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits or pay privately as a condition of moving in, or failed to tell residents which types of care it does not provide. Both practices are against the rules. · from a complaint F-0620
The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · from a complaint F-0849
View all 29 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint · F-0573 |
| Aug 14, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility required residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits or pay privately as a condition of moving in, or failed to tell residents which types of care it does not provide. Both practices are against the rules. · from a complaint · F-0620 |
| Aug 14, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · from a complaint · F-0849 |
| May 15, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| May 15, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0759 |
| May 15, 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 |
| May 15, 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. · F-0557 |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| May 15, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| May 15, 2025 | 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. · F-0686 |
| May 15, 2025 | 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 |
| May 15, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727 |
| Feb 8, 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0912 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0550 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0690 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 24, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0757 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0758 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0912 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 10).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 13 | 0 | 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)
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: 3.97
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.30
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) | 3.97 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 39% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.30 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 12% in California; bottom 9% 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) | 0.29 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 30% in California; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 36.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.33, RN 0.32, weekend 3.87.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.33 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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 Delta Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP. 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 - Partnership
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate Interface Services LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/18/2024 |
| Corporate Interface Services LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2025 |
| Delta Wellness GP, LLC | Organization | General Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/09/2020 |
| Eretz Delta Properties | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/30/2020 |
| Grossman, Stephen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2025 |
| Grossman, Stephen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2025 |
| Madrigal, Dario | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/20/2025 |
| Madrigal, Dario | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/20/2025 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | Limited Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/09/2020 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2021 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2025 |
All 11 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 Corporate Interface Services — 40 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.
- East Terrace Rehabilitation & Wellness Centre, LP — Los Angeles, CA · overall 1/5
- Eureka Rehabilitation & Wellness Center, LP — Eureka, CA · overall 2/5
- Fortuna Rehabilitation and Wellness Center, LP — Fortuna, CA · overall 2/5
- Four Seasons Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP — North Hollywood, CA · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Granada Rehabilitation & Wellness Center, LP — Eureka, CA · overall 2/5
- Hawthorne Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP — Hawthorne, CA · overall 1/5
- Ivy Creek Healthcare & Wellness Centre — San Gabriel, CA · overall 4/5
- Kings Healthcare & Wellness Center LP — Hanford, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 39 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.
- "If I ask for a copy of my family member's records, how quickly will I get them and what does it cost?"
- "Do you accept Medicaid from day one, and will you put in writing that no private payment is required as a condition of admission?"
- "How do you coordinate hospice care, and can residents stay here while receiving it?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you train staff to treat residents with dignity, and how do you protect residents' personal belongings?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
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?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 15 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaweah Health Skilled Nursing Center | 1.2 mi | Visalia, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Visalia Post Acute | 1.2 mi | Visalia, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Sequoia Vista | 2.4 mi | Visalia, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Linwood Meadows Care Center | 2.9 mi | Visalia, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Westgate Gardens Care Center | 3.0 mi | Visalia, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Tulare Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP | 8.2 mi | Tulare, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Orchards at Tulare | 8.2 mi | Tulare, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Grand Oaks Care | 8.3 mi | Tulare, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lindsay Gardens Nursing & Rehabilitation | 13.2 mi | Lindsay, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Dinuba Healthcare | 14.7 mi | Dinuba, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Palm Village Retirement Comm. | 19.2 mi | Reedley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Brighton Post Acute | 19.5 mi | Hanford, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Tulare, CA — 16 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Gateway Post Acute — Porterville, CA · overall 2/5
- River Walk Care Center — Porterville, CA · overall 2/5
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 555354.