CaliforniaModesto

Golden Modesto Care Center

1900 Coffee Road, Modesto, CA 95355 · Stanislaus County · 120 certified beds · avg 112 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1974

Part of chain: GOLDEN SNF OPERATIONS (7 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
10
Serious findings on record
$182,248
Fines, last 3 years
4.20
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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 · Aug 21, 2025 · F-0692 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.

Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.

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: Sep 19, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 11, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

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: Jan 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 10, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

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: Nov 14, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 26, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

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: Jun 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, repeated · Aug 17, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (H): Multiple residents were actually harmed by the same failure — a pattern of real harm, not an isolated incident.

Corrected: Sep 23, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, repeated · Aug 9, 2019 · F-0656

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.

Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.

Severity (H): Multiple residents were actually harmed by the same failure — a pattern of real harm, not an isolated incident.

Corrected: Sep 9, 2019 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, repeated · Aug 9, 2019 · F-0689

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (H): Multiple residents were actually harmed by the same failure — a pattern of real harm, not an isolated incident.

Corrected: Sep 9, 2019 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 9, 2019 · F-0684

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: Sep 9, 2019 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 9, 2019 · F-0686

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.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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: Sep 9, 2019 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 18, 2018 · F-0660

The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving.

Why it matters: Poor discharge planning can send a resident home or elsewhere without the support, equipment, or follow-up care they need.

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: Aug 15, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (74)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 24, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint
Jun 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 11, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 16, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Aug 21, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint
Aug 21, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint
Aug 21, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint
Mar 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Mar 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Dec 11, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Dec 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 25, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Oct 10, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Oct 10, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Sep 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
Sep 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Apr 26, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Dec 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Nov 22, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Nov 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint
Nov 8, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly. · from a complaint
Nov 8, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 10, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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. · from a complaint
Sep 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Sep 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Sep 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
Aug 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Aug 17, 2023▲ H · Actual harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Aug 17, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint
Aug 17, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give all staff the required training on its quality improvement program — the internal system for finding problems and making care better. · from a complaint
Aug 9, 2019▲ H · Actual harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 9, 2019▲ H · Actual harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Aug 9, 2019▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Aug 9, 2019▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 9, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.
Aug 9, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Aug 9, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Aug 9, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Aug 9, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Aug 9, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Aug 9, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Aug 9, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 18, 2018▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving.
May 18, 2018F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
May 18, 2018F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 18, 2018E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
May 18, 2018D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away.
May 18, 2018D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
May 18, 2018D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
May 18, 2018D · Potential for harm, one-offWhen a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care.
May 18, 2018D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 18, 2018D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
May 18, 2018D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
May 18, 2018C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2018261G ▲
2019124H ▲
2023131H ▲
2024123G ▲
202561G ▲
202650E

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)

13 fines totaling $182,248, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

DateTypeAmount / length
Aug 21, 2025Fine$42,114
Dec 11, 2024Fine$33,430
Sep 19, 2024Payment Denial6 days from Nov 8, 2024
Apr 26, 2024Fine$60,834
Nov 13, 2023Fine$4,587
Nov 6, 2023Fine$4,587
Oct 17, 2023Fine$4,587
Oct 10, 2023Fine$4,587
Oct 2, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 25, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 18, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 11, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 5, 2023Fine$4,587
Aug 28, 2023Fine$4,587

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

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.204.313.95top 44% in California; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.370.610.69bottom 26% in California; bottom 18% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.003.903.50top 34% in California; top 23% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.250.510.48bottom 21% in California; bottom 21% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)45.036.745.8bottom 25% in California; bottom 50% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)80.038.142.9bottom 4% in California; bottom 6% in the U.S.

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 3.95, RN 0.35, weekend 3.76. 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: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Cafive Operations Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%03/01/2023
CH Cafive Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest61%03/01/2023
Barias, KarenIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Barias, KarenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Barias, KarenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Cafive Opco Manager LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Cafive Opco Manager LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2025
Cafive SNF Consulting LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Cafive SNF Consulting LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2025
CH Cafive Holdings LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Couve Healthcare Consulting LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/31/2023
Couve Healthcare Consulting LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2025
Dickerson, RyanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Dickerson, RyanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Earl, StevenIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Earl, StevenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Earl, StevenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Herzka, YisroelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Meador, DanielIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Meador, DanielIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Crestwood Manor0.6 miModesto, CA★★★★★5/5
Modesto Post Acute Center0.7 miModesto, CA★★★★★4/5
Valley Skilled Nursing Center0.7 miModesto, CA★★★★☆4/5
River View Post Acute1.4 miModesto, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Garden City Healthcare Center1.6 miModesto, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Almond Vista Healthcare2.7 miModesto, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
English Oaks Convalescent & Rehabilitation Hospita3.4 miModesto, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Vintage Faire Nursing & Rehabilitation Center4.1 miModesto, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Ceres Postacute Care4.6 miCeres, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Riverbank Post-Acute4.9 miRiverbank, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Oakdale Nursing and Rehabilitation Center9.0 miOakdale, CA★★★★☆3/5
Bethany Home Society San Joaquin County9.5 miRipon, CA★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Modesto →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 056301.