How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Monterey Post Acute
1575 Skyline Drive, Monterey, CA 93940 (opens Google Maps) · Monterey County · (831) 373-2731· 78 certified beds · avg 75 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1969 · 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: WINDSOR (22 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 13, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.17
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: 4/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 55 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint F-0697
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
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. F-0804
View all 55 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| Dec 11, 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 13, 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 13, 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 13, 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 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · F-0691 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 13, 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 13, 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 |
| Feb 13, 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 |
| Feb 13, 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 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Oct 9, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Sep 30, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Sep 30, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Sep 23, 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 |
| Aug 14, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| May 29, 2024 | 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 |
| May 3, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0745 |
| Jun 30, 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 |
| Jun 30, 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 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0558 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | 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 30, 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 |
| Jun 30, 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 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0760 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | 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 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | 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 30, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| Jun 30, 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 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · F-0686 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Jun 30, 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. · F-0689 |
| Jun 30, 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 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. · F-0740 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 30, 2023 | 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 30, 2023 | 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 |
| Jun 30, 2023 | 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. · F-0925 |
| May 3, 2019 | 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 |
| May 3, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| May 3, 2019 | 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 |
| May 3, 2019 | 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 |
| May 3, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0677 |
| May 3, 2019 | 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 |
| May 3, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| May 3, 2019 | 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 |
| May 3, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0690 |
| May 3, 2019 | 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 |
| May 3, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · F-0849 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (21 → 14).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 21
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 21 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 7 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 15 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 1 | 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.
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: 4.17
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.40
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.97
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) | 4.17 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 46% in California; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.40 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 34% in California; bottom 23% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.97 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 35% in California; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.31 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 38% in California; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 50.5 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 13% in California; bottom 36% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 50.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 29% in California; bottom 39% 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 3.82, RN 0.37, weekend 3.63.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.82 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: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Monterey 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antelope Holdings I, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/30/2023 |
| Antelope Realty Holdings I, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 07/29/2024 |
| Robin, Aaron | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/30/2023 |
| Tress, Avrohom | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/30/2023 |
| Windsor Norcal 13 Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 01/04/2007 |
| Cummings, Daniel | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/20/2024 |
| Cummings, Daniel | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/20/2024 |
| Magana, Juan | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2025 |
| Magana, Juan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2025 |
| Newgen Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2023 |
| Newgen Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/24/2025 |
| Newgen LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2023 |
| Robin, Aaron | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/14/2023 |
| Shaw, Pamela | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2023 |
| Shaw, Pamela | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2023 |
| Tress, Avrohom | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/14/2023 |
All 16 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 Windsor — 22 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.
- National City Post Acute — National City, CA · overall 3/5
- North Long Beach Post Acute — Long Beach, CA · overall 1/5
- Oak Grove Post Acute — Stockton, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- Park View Nursing and Subacute — Reseda, CA · overall 2/5
- River City Post Acute — Carmichael, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- Rosewood Post Acute — Pleasant Hill, CA · overall 4/5
- Solano Post Acute — Vallejo, CA · overall 2/5
- South Coast Post Acute — Santa Ana, CA · overall 2/5abuse
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 21 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 assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "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?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
- "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
- "Which staff are trained in ostomy care, and how often is that care provided and checked?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
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 51% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 16 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 (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cypress Ridge Care Center | 0.1 mi | Monterey, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Canterbury Woods | 1.6 mi | Pacific Grove, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Forest Hill Manor Health Center | 1.6 mi | Pacific Grove, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Westland House | 1.8 mi | Monterey, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Oceanview Post Acute | 1.9 mi | Pacific Grove, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Carmel Hills Care Center | 3.9 mi | Monterey, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Katherine Healthcare | 15.7 mi | Salinas, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Coastal Post Acute | 16.0 mi | Salinas, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Windsor the Ridge Rehabilitation Center | 16.0 mi | Salinas, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Pacific Coast Post Acute | 16.2 mi | Salinas, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Salinas Valley Post Acute | 16.2 mi | Salinas, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055962.