Quartz Hill Post Acute
2120 Benton Drive, Redding, CA 96003 · Shasta County · 115 certified beds · avg 105 residents/day · certified since Apr 10, 1989
Part of chain: WEST HARBOR HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 3.3★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.43
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5
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 (37)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · from a complaint |
| Feb 28, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint |
| Feb 13, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 23, 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. · from a complaint |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint |
| Jan 23, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 24, 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 24, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · from a complaint |
| Jun 14, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility employed staff who were not licensed, certified, or registered as required by state law. · from a complaint |
| Aug 29, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 10, 2023 | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. |
| Mar 10, 2023 | 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, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (20 → 5).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2023 | 21 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 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)
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) | 4.43 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 32% in California; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.37 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 25% in California; bottom 17% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.02 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 32% in California; top 22% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.18 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 7% in California; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 43.1 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 30% in California; top 45% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 26% in California; top 20% in the U.S. |
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 4.57, RN 0.38, weekend 4.14. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Galbasini, Kevin | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 36% | 06/27/2017 |
| Gill, Daniel | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 36% | 06/27/2017 |
| Rosenhan, Cameron | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 18% | 06/27/2017 |
| Valley Capital Investments LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 06/27/2017 |
| West Harbor Healthcare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 90% | 06/27/2017 |
| Galbasini, Kevin | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2017 |
| Galbasini, Kevin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2017 |
| Gill, Daniel | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2017 |
| Gill, Daniel | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2017 |
| Rosenhan, Cameron | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2017 |
| Rosenhan, Cameron | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2017 |
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 often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vibra Hospital of Northern California D/P SNF | 0.9 mi | Redding, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Redding Post Acute | 1.4 mi | Redding, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| River Valley Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP | 1.7 mi | Redding, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Copper Ridge Care Center | 2.5 mi | Redding, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Crestwood Wellness and Recovery Center | 3.5 mi | Redding, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Marquis Care at Shasta | 3.9 mi | Redding, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Veterans Home of California - Redding | 6.8 mi | Redding, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Oak River Rehab | 11.3 mi | Anderson, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555356.