How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
North Starr Postacute Care
180 Starr Avenue, Turlock, CA 95380 (opens Google Maps) · Stanislaus County · (209) 632-1075· 31 certified beds · avg 26 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1989 · 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: RMG CAPITAL PARTNERS (9 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 8, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Aug 20, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.94
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 20, 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 · Aug 20, 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: Sep 15, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
View all 23 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 8, 2026 | 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 |
| May 8, 2026 | 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 8, 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 |
| May 8, 2026 | 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 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
| May 8, 2026 | 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 |
| May 8, 2026 | 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 |
| Aug 20, 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Sep 13, 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. · F-0658 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
| May 6, 2022 | 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 |
| May 6, 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 |
| May 6, 2022 | 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 |
| May 6, 2022 | 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 |
| May 6, 2022 | 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 6, 2022 | 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 |
| May 6, 2022 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 7
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 7 | 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: 3.94
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.38
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.77
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) | 3.94 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 37% in California; top 42% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.38 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 28% in California; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.77 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 48% in California; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.39 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 46% in California; top 49% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 38.2 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 43% in California; top 32% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 3.94, RN 0.38, weekend 3.78.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.94 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for North Starr Postacute Care. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bansal, Jagan | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 04/17/2023 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 04/17/2023 |
| RMG Capital Partners, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/01/2019 |
| Bansal, Jagan | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/03/2015 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Bansal, Maneesh | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/30/2015 |
| Reliant Management Group, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2015 |
All 9 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 RMG Capital Partners — 9 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.
- Northgate Postacute Care — San Rafael, CA · overall 2/5abuse
- Northvine Postacute Care — Santa Rosa, CA · overall 1/5
- Riverside Postacute Care — Riverside, CA · overall —/5abuseSFF
- California Post-Acute Care — Lynwood, CA · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Camden Postacute Care, INC — Campbell, CA · overall 4/5
- Ceres Postacute Care — Ceres, CA · overall 3/5
- Fresno Postacute Care — Fresno, CA · overall 3/5
- Main West Postacute Care — Turlock, CA · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
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?"
- "If my family member's health suddenly changes, how quickly do you reassess them and update their care?"
- "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "Where do you post your daily staffing numbers, and can I see today's?"
- "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?"
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 38% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 18 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main West Postacute Care | 0.9 mi | Turlock, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Covenant Village Care Center | 0.9 mi | Turlock, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Turlock Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 1.0 mi | Turlock, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ceres Postacute Care | 9.7 mi | Ceres, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Grace Home INC. | 11.0 mi | Livingston, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| River View Post Acute | 12.2 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Crestwood Manor | 13.4 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Valley Skilled Nursing Center | 13.5 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Modesto Post Acute Center | 13.5 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Golden Modesto Care Center | 13.6 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Garden City Healthcare Center | 14.4 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Almond Vista Healthcare | 15.1 mi | Modesto, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Stanislaus, CA — 17 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Oakdale Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Oakdale, CA · overall 4/5
- Riverbank Post-Acute — Riverbank, CA · overall 1/5
- San Luis Care Center — Newman, CA · overall 3/5
- Vintage Faire Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — Modesto, CA · overall 3/5
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 555347.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).