How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Manzanita Healthcare Center
5318 Manzanita Avenue, Carmichael, CA 95608 (opens Google Maps) · Sacramento County · (916) 331-8513· 99 certified beds · avg 94 residents/day · certified since Mar 2, 1978 · 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: CYPRESS HEALTHCARE GROUP (13 facilities, chain avg rating 3.8★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 15, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Nov 12, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.11
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 · Nov 12, 2025 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 12, 2025 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint
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): 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: Nov 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 46 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. F-0804
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
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
View all 46 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 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 |
| Apr 15, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2026 | 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. · F-0609 |
| Apr 15, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2026 | 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 12, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Aug 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925 |
| Apr 14, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 6, 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 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0550 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 6, 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0600 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Jul 1, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Jul 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0919 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · F-0557 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Dec 7, 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 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 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 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 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 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 6).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 22
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 22 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 14 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 6 | 0 | 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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.11
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.90
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.63
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 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) | 5.11 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 12% in California; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.90 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 14% in California; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.63 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 11% in California; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.75 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 13% in California; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 30.6 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 31% in California; top 15% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 43.8 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 37% in California; bottom 46% 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 4.75, RN 0.83, weekend 4.31.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.75 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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 Manzanita Healthcare Center. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dhir, Sunil | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Dhir, Sunil | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/10/2023 |
| Fulkerson, Jessica | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/18/2025 |
| Fulkerson, Jessica | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/18/2025 |
| Jackson, Matthew | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Jackson, Matthew | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Jackson, Matthew | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Jackson, Robert | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Jackson, Robert | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Jackson, Robert | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Kaur, Shalendar | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Kaur, Shalendar | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Sanofsky, Jack | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Sanofsky, Jack | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Sanofsky, Jack | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Tyson, Zachary | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Tyson, Zachary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
All 17 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 Cypress Healthcare Group — 13 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.
- Oak Ridge Healthcare Center — Roseville, CA · overall 4/5
- Pioneer House — Sacramento, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Saylor Lane Healthcare Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 4/5
- Sherwood Healthcare Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 5/5
- Woodside Healthcare Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 5/5
- Asbury Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 3/5
- Auburn Ravine Healthcare Center — Auburn, CA · overall 5/5
- College Oak Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 12 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How is pest control handled here, and when was the last treatment or inspection?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 31% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 17 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 41 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sacramento Post-Acute | 0.5 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| College Oak Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 1.4 mi | Sacramento, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| American River Center | 2.0 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Eskaton Village Care Center | 2.1 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Whitney Oaks Care Center | 2.6 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Citrus Heights Post Acute | 2.7 mi | Citrus Heights, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mission Carmichael Healthcare Center | 2.7 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mountain Manor Senior Residence | 3.5 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| River Pointe Post-Acute | 3.6 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| River City Post Acute | 3.6 mi | Carmichael, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Fair Oaks Healthcare Center | 3.8 mi | Fair Oaks, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Casa Coloma Health Care Center | 4.8 mi | Rancho Cordova, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Sacramento, CA — 37 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- McKinley Park Care Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 4/5
- Mid-Town Oaks Post-Acute — Sacramento, CA · overall 3/5
- North Pointe Care Center — Sacramento, CA · overall 2/5abuse
- Pioneer House — Sacramento, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Rancho Seco Care Center — Galt, CA · overall —/5abuseSFF
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555083.