New Bethany Skilled Nursing
1441 Berkeley Dr, Los Banos, CA 93635 · Merced County · 35 certified beds · avg 29 residents/day · certified since Jun 15, 2000
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.85
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
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 (29)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 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 |
| Sep 5, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | 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). |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Sep 5, 2025 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · from a complaint |
| Oct 7, 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 28, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 28, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · from a complaint |
| Jun 21, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 21, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Jun 21, 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. |
| Sep 23, 2022 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2022 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2022 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. |
| Sep 23, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| Sep 23, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 15).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 7 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 16 | 0 | F |
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) | 4.85 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 18% in California; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.53 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 42% in California; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.23 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 23% in California; top 17% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.28 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 29% in California; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 22.2 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 12% in California; top 4% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.45, RN 0.48, weekend 3.88. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fonesca, Lucinda | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 02/11/2021 |
| D'cruz, Astrida | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2021 |
| Fonesca, Lucinda | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2021 |
| Fonesca, Lucinda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2021 |
| Fonseca, Julia | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2021 |
| Moises, Acacia | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2021 |
| Petrovich, Helen | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2021 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "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?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How does your quality improvement program work, and can you share a recent example of a problem you found and fixed?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Los Banos Post Acute | 2.0 mi | Los Banos, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 1 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555758.