Lodi Nursing & Rehabilitation

Name: Lodi Nursing & Rehabilitation
Address: 1334 S. HAM LANE, Lodi, CA, 95242, US
Telephone: 2093343825

1334 S. Ham Lane, Lodi, CA 95242 · San Joaquin County · 74 certified beds · avg 69 residents/day · certified since Feb 14, 1977 · 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: ASPEN SKILLED HEALTHCARE (35 facilities, chain avg rating 3.7★)

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

4.23

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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 (44)

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
Jul 2, 2026	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. · from a complaint
Mar 6, 2026	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.
Mar 6, 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 6, 2026	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.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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).
Mar 6, 2026	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.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 6, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Sep 8, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · from a complaint
Sep 8, 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. · from a complaint
Nov 1, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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.
Nov 1, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Nov 1, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Nov 1, 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.
Nov 1, 2024	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.
Nov 1, 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.
Nov 1, 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.
Nov 1, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 1, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Nov 1, 2024	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.
Nov 1, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Nov 1, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 1, 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.
Nov 1, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 1, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated.
Oct 13, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Oct 13, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Oct 13, 2023	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.
Oct 13, 2023	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.
Oct 13, 2023	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.
Oct 13, 2023	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.
Oct 13, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Oct 13, 2023	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.
Oct 13, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Oct 13, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Oct 13, 2023	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.
Oct 13, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Oct 13, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Sep 12, 2023	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. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (15 → 12).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2023	14	E
2024	15	F
2025	2	D
2026	13	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)	4.23	4.31	3.95	top 42% in California; top 31% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.43	0.61	0.69	bottom 39% in California; bottom 26% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.86	3.90	3.50	top 41% in California; top 27% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.37	0.51	0.48	top 49% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	26.8	36.7	45.8	top 22% in California; top 9% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	42.9	38.1	42.9	bottom 39% in California; bottom 49% 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 4.14, RN 0.42, weekend 3.78. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Alhl, LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	02/01/2016
Bradshaw, Peter	Individual	Indirect Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	07/07/2023
Elsner, Eric	Individual	Indirect Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2016
Kirkwood, Jared	Individual	Indirect Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2019
Orgill, Craig	Individual	Indirect Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2019
Parti, Rajesh	Individual	Indirect Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2016
Parti, Shruty	Individual	Indirect Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2016
Paxman, Marcus	Individual	Indirect Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/2022
Alhl, LLC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2016
Alhl, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2016
Aspen Healthcare Services LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Bailey, Douglas	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2019
Bailey, Douglas	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2019
Bradshaw, Jeffrey	Individual	Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	07/08/2026
Bradshaw, Jeffrey	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Brady, Vern	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/10/2015
Brady, Vern	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	07/10/2015
Brady, Vern	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Case, Ryan	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
East West Bank	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	02/01/2016

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
"Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
"What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
"How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
"How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
"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
Fairmont Rehabilitation Hospital	0.4 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Arbor Rehabilitation & Nursing Center	0.7 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Vienna Nursing and Rehabilitation Center	1.8 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Lodi Creek Post Acute	2.1 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Creekside Center	6.2 mi	Stockton, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Clearwater Healthcare Center	6.4 mi	Stockton, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5
Crystal Creek Post-Acute	6.5 mi	Stockton, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Meadowood a Health and Rehabilitation Center	7.0 mi	Stockton, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Delta Oaks Post Acute	7.3 mi	Stockton, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Riverwood Health Care	7.7 mi	Stockton, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Oak Grove Post Acute	8.5 mi	Stockton, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Crestwood Manor - 104	9.0 mi	Stockton, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Lodi →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555049.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Lodi Nursing & Rehabilitation

1334 S. Ham Lane, Lodi, CA 95242 · 2093343825

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

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
☐ "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
☐ "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
☐ "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
☐ "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 555049 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)