CaliforniaMerced

Merced Behavioral Center

1255 B Street, Merced, CA 95341 · Merced County · 96 certified beds · avg 94 residents/day · certified since Jun 26, 1985

5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.66
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

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

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 · Jun 5, 2023 · F-0692

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: Jul 7, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (17)

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 5, 2023▲ 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.
Jun 5, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Jun 5, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jun 5, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Jun 5, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Jun 5, 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.
Jun 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jun 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 5, 2023D · 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.
Jun 5, 2023D · 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.
Jun 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Jun 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Jun 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Jun 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 15, 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.
Nov 15, 2019E · 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.
Nov 15, 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.

Inspection trend by year

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
201930E
2023141G ▲

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)

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.664.313.95top 6% in California; top 6% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.540.610.69top 41% in California; bottom 43% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.563.903.50top 12% in California; top 11% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.110.510.48bottom 1% in California; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)17.836.745.8top 5% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)14.338.142.9top 10% in California; top 7% 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 3.74, RN 0.35, weekend 3.01. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ownership Data Not Available

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
La Sierra Care Center1.4 miMerced, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Merced Nursing & Rehabilitation Ctr1.5 miMerced, CA★★★★☆3/5
Golden Merced Care Center1.6 miMerced, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Franciscan Post-Acute Care Center2.1 miMerced, CA★★★★☆4/5
Anberry Post Acute2.5 miMerced, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Anberry Nursing and Rehabilitation Center8.2 miAtwater, CA★★★★★4/5
Grace Home INC.15.4 miLivingston, CA★★★★★5/5
Palms Care Center16.1 miChowchilla, CA★★★★☆4/5
Chowchilla Memorial Healthcare District16.1 miChowchilla, CA★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Merced →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 05A147.