How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
River Valley Care Center
9000 Larkin Road, Live Oak, CA 95953 (opens Google Maps) · Sutter County · (530) 695-8020· 99 certified beds · avg 96 residents/day · certified since Jan 20, 1993 · 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: PACS GROUP (274 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 20, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 7, 2021
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.88
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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 · Dec 7, 2021 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 7, 2021 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
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: Mar 17, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 53 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 get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. F-0812
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. F-0584
View all 53 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 20, 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 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 20, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805 |
| Jun 20, 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 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Jun 20, 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 |
| Jun 20, 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 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 20, 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. · F-0689 |
| Jun 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not designate a physician to serve as medical director — the doctor responsible for overseeing resident care policies and coordinating medical care across the facility. · from a complaint · F-0841 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · from a complaint · F-0865 |
| Apr 17, 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 |
| Apr 17, 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jan 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint · F-0557 |
| Jan 6, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Jan 6, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Oct 10, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0580 |
| Oct 10, 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 |
| Jul 11, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jul 11, 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. · F-0656 |
| Jul 11, 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. · F-0745 |
| Jul 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 27, 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Jan 2, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0580 |
| Jan 2, 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Oct 11, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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. · F-0609 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 7, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 14).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 24
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 17 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 24 | 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: 3.88
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.76
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.62
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) | 3.88 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 33% in California; top 45% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.76 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 20% in California; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.62 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 40% in California; top 37% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.69 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 16% in California; top 17% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 32.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 38% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 33.3 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 40% in California; top 33% 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 4.04, RN 0.79, weekend 3.77.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.04 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for River Valley Care 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andrus, Roman | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Apt, Frederick | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Hancock, Mark | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Jergensen, Joshua | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Mitchell, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Vemulapalli, Shailaja | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/11/2022 |
All 6 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 Pacs Group — 274 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.
- Riverwalk Post Acute — Riverside, CA · overall 3/5
- Rock Creek Care Center — Auburn, CA · overall 5/5
- Roseville Care Center — Roseville, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Rossmoor Post Acute — Walnut Creek, CA · overall 5/5
- Sacramento Post-Acute — Sacramento, CA · overall 4/5
- Salinas Valley Post Acute — Salinas, CA · overall 3/5
- San Bruno Skilled Nursing — San Bruno, CA · overall 4/5
- San Diego Post-Acute Center — El Cajon, CA · overall 1/5abuse
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 273 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 monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How do you handle residents who need modified food textures, and how do you make those meals appetizing?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 32% 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 (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gridley Post Acute | 7.4 mi | Gridley, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Bridgeview Post Acute | 7.7 mi | Yuba City, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Fountains, the | 7.8 mi | Yuba City, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Yuba City Post Acute | 8.2 mi | Yuba City, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Marysville Post-Acute | 8.6 mi | Marysville, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Country Crest Post-Acute | 17.9 mi | Oroville, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Oroville Hospital Post-Acute Center | 18.1 mi | Oroville, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Feather River Care Center | 18.2 mi | Oroville, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Colusa Medical Center - SNF | 18.6 mi | Colusa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555535.