How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
225 W Mc Dowell Ave, Alturas, CA 96101 (opens Google Maps) · Modoc County · (530) 233-5131· 84 certified beds · avg 54 residents/day · certified since May 4, 1990 · 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 →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★★5/5 · 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.
Showing the latest 3 of 18 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0725
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. · from a complaint F-0761
The facility did not honor residents' right to receive the visitors they choose, at the times they choose. · from a complaint F-0563
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Jan 14, 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Jun 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to receive the visitors they choose, at the times they choose. · from a complaint · F-0563 |
| Jun 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · from a complaint · F-0909 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 17, 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 |
| Apr 17, 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 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Dec 5, 2023 | 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 |
| Nov 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough staff with the right skills to meet the mental and behavioral health needs of its residents, such as those living with dementia or depression. · from a complaint · F-0741 |
| Oct 5, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727 |
| Oct 5, 2023 | 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 16, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0756 |
| Jun 16, 2022 | 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 |
| Jun 16, 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 16, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Jun 16, 2022 | 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. · F-0689 |
| Jun 16, 2022 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 3).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 6 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | D |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 7.11 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 2% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.56 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 37% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.84 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 3% in California; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.38 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 48% in California; bottom 49% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 44.1 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 28% in California; top 48% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 71.4 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 7% in California; bottom 11% 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 6.09, RN 0.48, weekend 5.00.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (6.09 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Modoc Medical Center D/P SNF. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Last Frontier Healthcare District | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 08/23/2011 |
| Boulade, Rose | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Boulade, Rose | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Dolby, Paul | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Dolby, Paul | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Johnson, Edward | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Johnson, Edward | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Johnson, Edward | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Kramer, Kevin | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/23/2013 |
| Kramer, Kevin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Kramer, Kevin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2013 |
| Last Frontier Healthcare District | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Last Frontier Healthcare District | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Madison, Carol | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Madison, Carol | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Mason, Mike | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Mason, Mike | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Richert, Edward | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Richert, Edward | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Richert, Edward | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
Showing 20 of 23 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 3 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surprise Valley Community Hospital D/P SNF | 19.5 mi | Cedarville, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555420.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details