Eskaton Village Care Center

Name: Eskaton Village Care Center
Address: 3939 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, CA, 95608, US
Telephone: 9169742060

3939 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, CA 95608 · Sacramento County · 35 certified beds · avg 35 residents/day · certified since Apr 19, 1993

4/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

0.00

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 (38)

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 14, 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
Mar 20, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Mar 20, 2026	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.
Mar 20, 2026	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.
Mar 20, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Mar 20, 2026	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.
Mar 20, 2026	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.
Mar 20, 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.
Mar 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems.
Jan 9, 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.
Jan 9, 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.
Jan 9, 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.
Jan 9, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Jan 9, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jan 9, 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.
Jan 9, 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.
Jan 9, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Jan 9, 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.
Jan 9, 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 9, 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.
Jul 3, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · from a complaint
May 1, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 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.
Feb 29, 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.
Feb 29, 2024	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 29, 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 29, 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 29, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Feb 29, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave.
Feb 29, 2024	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.
Feb 29, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Feb 29, 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.
Feb 29, 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.
Feb 29, 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.
Feb 29, 2024	D · Potential for 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.
Feb 29, 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.
Feb 29, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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 29, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 8).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2024	18	E
2025	11	E
2026	9	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)

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)	0.00	4.31	3.95	—
Registered Nurse hours	0.00	0.61	0.69	—
Weekend total nurse staffing	0.00	3.90	3.50	—
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.00	0.51	0.48	—
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	0.0	36.7	45.8	—
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 0.00, RN 0.00, weekend 0.00. Staffing rating: 1/5.

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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Eskaton Properties Incorporated	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	04/19/1993
Baik, Ginna	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Baik, Ginna	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Beloud, Sean	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	05/20/2024
Beloud, Sean	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	05/20/2024
Dela Cruz, Melody	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	08/27/2024
Dela Cruz, Melody	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	08/27/2024
Eskaton Properties Incorporated	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	04/19/1993
Eskaton Properties Incorporated	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	04/19/1993
Garberson, Thomas	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	10/01/2023
Garberson, Thomas	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	10/01/2023
Garberson, Thomas	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/01/2023
Hansen Hunter LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/25/2021
Heffernan, Nancy	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	08/15/2021
Heffernan, Nancy	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	08/15/2021
Hewitt, Maureen	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	08/15/2021
Hewitt, Maureen	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	08/15/2021
Javaheri, Ashkan	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	05/01/2024
Javaheri, Ashkan	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	05/01/2024
Jenkins, Mark	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	02/22/2019

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
"Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
"Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
"How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
"How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
"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
Whitney Oaks Care Center	0.5 mi	Carmichael, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
American River Center	0.5 mi	Carmichael, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Mission Carmichael Healthcare Center	0.6 mi	Carmichael, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
College Oak Nursing and Rehabilitation Center	0.9 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Sacramento Post-Acute	1.9 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Mountain Manor Senior Residence	2.0 mi	Carmichael, CA	★☆☆☆☆	2/5
River Pointe Post-Acute	2.1 mi	Carmichael, CA	★☆☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
River City Post Acute	2.1 mi	Carmichael, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Manzanita Healthcare Center	2.1 mi	Carmichael, CA	★★★★★	3/5
Arden Park Post Acute	3.0 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Gramercy Court	3.5 mi	Sacramento, CA	★★★★☆	2/5	abuse
Casa Coloma Health Care Center	3.8 mi	Rancho Cordova, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Carmichael →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555555.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Eskaton Village Care Center

3939 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, CA 95608 · 9169742060

Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
☐ "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
☐ "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
☐ "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
☐ "How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
☐ "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
☐ "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 555555 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)