How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Oakdale Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
275 South Oak Avenue, Oakdale, CA 95361 (opens Google Maps) · Stanislaus County · (209) 848-4159· 115 certified beds · avg 93 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1971 · 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 →
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 22, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.60
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 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. F-0801
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
View all 33 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 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · F-0557 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0657 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · F-0636 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 22, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 23, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Mar 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Mar 21, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials. · F-0680 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0725 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 28, 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Mar 28, 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 28, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 11).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 19
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 11
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 | 19 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 11 | 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)
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: 4.60
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.23
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.04
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) | 4.60 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 24% in California; top 20% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.23 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 6% in California; top 9% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.04 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 31% in California; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.95 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 8% in California; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 51.4 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 12% in California; bottom 33% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 29.2 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 36% in California; top 28% 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 4.19, RN 1.12, weekend 3.68.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.19 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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 Oakdale Nursing and Rehabilitation Center. 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 →
Government - Hospital district
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chock, Edward | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/30/2007 |
| Cummins, Daniel | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2011 |
| Krieger, Frances | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/02/2022 |
| McCormick, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2011 |
| McCormick, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2011 |
| Oak Valley Hospital District | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2011 |
| Pringle, William | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/12/2022 |
| Sanders, Louise | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2011 |
| Teter, James | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/30/2007 |
All 9 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Do you have a qualified dietician on staff, and how involved are they in each resident's nutrition plan?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you train staff to treat residents with dignity, and how do you protect residents' personal belongings?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
- "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 51% 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 17 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riverbank Post-Acute | 5.1 mi | Riverbank, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Crestwood Manor | 8.5 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Golden Modesto Care Center | 9.0 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| River View Post Acute | 9.6 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Modesto Post Acute Center | 9.7 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Valley Skilled Nursing Center | 9.7 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Garden City Healthcare Center | 10.3 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| English Oaks Convalescent & Rehabilitation Hospita | 11.2 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Almond Vista Healthcare | 11.2 mi | Modesto, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Vintage Faire Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 11.4 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ceres Postacute Care | 12.2 mi | Ceres, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bethany Home Society San Joaquin County | 14.8 mi | Ripon, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
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.
- San Luis Care Center — Newman, CA · overall 3/5
- Turlock Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Turlock, 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 056155.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).