Lakeport Post Acute

1291 Craig Avenue, Lakeport, CA 95453 (opens Google Maps) · Lake County · (707) 263-6382· 81 certified beds · avg 78 residents/day · certified since May 26, 1986 · 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 Jun 19, 2025

Serious findings on record

most recent May 13, 2026

Fines, last 3 years

3.81

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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 13, 2026 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: May 26, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 49 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

May 13, 2026G · Actual 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
Jun 19, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The 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. F-0725
Jun 19, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. F-0697

View all 49 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 13, 2026	▲ G · Actual 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
Jun 19, 2025	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The 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. · F-0725
Jun 19, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Jun 19, 2025	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 19, 2025	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
Jun 19, 2025	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 19, 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. · F-0684
Jun 19, 2025	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
Jun 19, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Jun 19, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Feb 25, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658
Dec 18, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss. · F-0574
Dec 18, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Dec 18, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813
Dec 18, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not have a proper governing body legally responsible for its policies and operations, or that body failed to appoint a properly licensed administrator to manage the facility. · F-0837
Dec 18, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868
Dec 18, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Dec 18, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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
Dec 18, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Dec 18, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943
Dec 18, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0644
Dec 18, 2023	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
Dec 18, 2023	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
Dec 18, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685
Dec 18, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · F-0745
Dec 18, 2023	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
Dec 18, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908
Dec 18, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · from a complaint · F-0551
Dec 18, 2023	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
Nov 6, 2023	E · Potential for more than 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
Oct 5, 2023	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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Jun 28, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585
Jun 28, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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 28, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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 28, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Jun 28, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The 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. · F-0725
Jun 28, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Jun 28, 2022	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
Jun 28, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jun 28, 2022	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
Jun 28, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0553
Jun 28, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0623
Jun 28, 2022	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
Jun 28, 2022	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
Jun 28, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · F-0660
Jun 28, 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 28, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · F-0710
Jun 28, 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 28, 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 9).

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

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2022

2023

2025

2026

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

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2022	18	0	E
2023	20	0	F
2025	10	0	F
2026	1	1	G ▲

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)

3.81

4.31

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.40

0.61

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

3.38

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)	3.81	4.31	3.95	bottom 27% in California; top 48% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.40	0.61	0.69	bottom 32% in California; bottom 22% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.38	3.90	3.50	bottom 20% in California; top 49% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.36	0.51	0.48	bottom 48% in California; bottom 44% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	29.8	36.7	45.8	top 28% in California; top 14% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	20.0	38.1	42.9	top 19% in California; top 13% 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 3.51, RN 0.37, weekend 3.11.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.51 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 Lakeport Post Acute. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.

Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.

Before you compare prices

Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

How to read ownership records →

Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Apt, Frederick	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Feramisco, Jamison	Individual	Contracted Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	10/01/2022
Hancock, Mark	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
Ploeger, Corbyn	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	02/26/2024

All 6 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.

Las Colinas Post Acute — Ontario, CA · overall 2/5
Lincoln Meadows Care Center — Lincoln, CA · overall 5/5
Lindsay Gardens Nursing & Rehabilitation — Lindsay, CA · overall 4/5
Linwood Meadows Care Center — Visalia, CA · overall 3/5
Loma Linda Post Acute — Loma Linda, CA · overall 4/5
Lone Tree Post Acute — Antioch, CA · overall 4/5
Marin Post Acute — San Rafael, CA · overall 2/5abuse
Marysville Post-Acute — Marysville, CA · overall 5/5

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.

"What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
"What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
"How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
"Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
"If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"

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 30% 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 (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Rocky Point Care Center	1.2 mi	Lakeport, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Ukiah Post Acute	16.4 mi	Ukiah, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Redwood Cove Healthcare Center	16.5 mi	Ukiah, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Meadowood Nursing Center	17.0 mi	Clearlake, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Cloverdale Healthcare Center	17.4 mi	Cloverdale, CA	★★★★★	5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Lakeport →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555222.