Fountain Valley Post Acute

11680 Warner Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (opens Google Maps) · Orange County · (714) 241-9800· 151 certified beds · avg 138 residents/day · certified since Jan 30, 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★)

2/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected Jan 13, 2026

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

3.70

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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 77 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

May 20, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint F-0695
May 20, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint F-0760
Apr 24, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint F-0655

View all 77 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
May 20, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0695
May 20, 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. · from a complaint · F-0760
Apr 24, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0655
Jan 13, 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
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Jan 13, 2026	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
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0605
Jan 13, 2026	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
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0656
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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 · F-0684
Jan 13, 2026	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
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693
Jan 13, 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
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
Jan 13, 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
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805
Jan 13, 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. · F-0810
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0838
Jan 13, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jan 13, 2026	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. · F-0849
Jan 13, 2026	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
Jan 13, 2026	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	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
Jan 13, 2026	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Jan 13, 2026	B · Potential for 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
Jan 13, 2026	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	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
Nov 25, 2025	B · Potential for 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. · from a complaint · F-0695
Apr 10, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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 · F-0684
Feb 12, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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 · F-0609
Feb 12, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Nov 7, 2024	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
Nov 7, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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
Nov 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
Nov 7, 2024	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
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0656
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0676
Nov 7, 2024	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
Nov 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
Nov 7, 2024	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
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
Nov 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
Nov 7, 2024	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
Nov 7, 2024	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. · F-0810
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · from a complaint · F-0813
Nov 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · from a complaint · F-0883
Nov 7, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · from a complaint · F-0887
Nov 7, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	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 · F-0550
Nov 7, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Nov 7, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. · from a complaint · F-0576
Oct 4, 2024	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
Apr 25, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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 · F-0609
Dec 7, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · from a complaint · F-0694
Oct 24, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Oct 24, 2023	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
Jun 13, 2022	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
Jun 13, 2022	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908
Jun 13, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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
Jun 13, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0656
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0657
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Jun 13, 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
Jun 13, 2022	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
Jun 13, 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
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
Jun 13, 2022	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
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813
Jun 13, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jun 13, 2022	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. · F-0849
Jun 13, 2022	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · F-0636
Jun 13, 2022	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. · F-0638

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (21 → 25).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2022	19	F
2023	3	D
2024	23	E
2025	4	D
2026	28	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)

How to file a complaint about care →

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

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

3.70

4.31

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.38

0.61

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

3.40

3.90

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)	3.70	4.31	3.95	bottom 21% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.38	0.61	0.69	bottom 28% in California; bottom 19% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.40	3.90	3.50	bottom 22% in California; top 48% 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 (%)	37.7	36.7	45.8	bottom 45% in California; top 30% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	21.4	38.1	42.9	top 22% in California; top 16% 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 4.14, RN 0.43, weekend 3.79.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.14 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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 Fountain Valley 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 - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Apt, Frederick	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Jergensen, Joshua	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Mitchell, John	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Nielsen, Chad	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2024
Nielsen, Chad	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2024

All 5 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.

Garden City Healthcare Center — Modesto, CA · overall 2/5
Gateway Post Acute — Porterville, CA · overall 2/5
Hanford Post Acute — Hanford, CA · overall 3/5
Hayward Gardens Post Acute — Hayward, CA · overall 5/5
Hemet Hills Post Acute — Hemet, CA · overall 1/5
Highland Palms Healthcare Center — Highland, CA · overall 4/5
Huntington Valley Healthcare Center — Huntington Beach, CA · overall 2/5
Jurupa Hills Post Acute — Riverside, CA · overall 2/5

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

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

"How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
"What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
"What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
"If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
"How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
"What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"

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 38% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
"Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 124 within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
South Coast Global Medical Center D/P SNF	2.3 mi	Santa Ana, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
South Coast Post Acute	2.9 mi	Santa Ana, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Plaza Healthcare Center	2.9 mi	Santa Ana, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Huntington Valley Healthcare Center	3.0 mi	Huntington Beach, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5
Pacific Haven Subacute and Healthcare Center	3.6 mi	Garden Grove, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Citrus Post-Acute	3.7 mi	Santa Ana, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Sea Cliff Healthcare Center	4.0 mi	Huntington Beach, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Beachside Nursing Center	4.0 mi	Huntington Beach, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
The Grove Post Acute	4.1 mi	Garden Grove, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Alta Gardens Care Center	4.1 mi	Garden Grove, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Newport Subacute Healthcare Center	4.2 mi	Costa Mesa, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Garden Park Care Center	4.5 mi	Garden Grove, CA	★★★★☆	3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Orange, CA — 72 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Freedom Village Healthcare Center — Lake Forest, CA · overall 5/5
French Park Care Center — Santa Ana, CA · overall 1/5
Garden Grove Post Acute — Garden Grove, CA · overall 4/5
Gordon Lane Care Center — Fullerton, CA · overall 2/5abuse
Greenfield Care Center of Fullerton, LLC — Fullerton, CA · overall 5/5
Harbor Villa Care Center — Anaheim, CA · overall 2/5
Healthbridge Children's Hospital - Orange D/P SNF — Orange, CA · overall 3/5

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Fountain Valley →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555328.