River Walk Care Center
1100 West Morton Avenue, Porterville, CA 93257 · Tulare County · 99 certified beds · avg 89 residents/day · certified since Jan 19, 1996
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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 5, 2025 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Sep 16, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Mar 13, 2025 · F-0688 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Why it matters: Without this care, residents can develop stiff, contracted joints and lose the ability to move on their own.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: May 2, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 17, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Nov 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (50)
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 5, 2026 | 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). · from a complaint |
| Apr 2, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint |
| Feb 26, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Feb 26, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. |
| Feb 26, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. |
| Feb 9, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 27, 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 |
| Sep 5, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Aug 21, 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 |
| May 29, 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 30, 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 |
| Apr 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint |
| Apr 30, 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 13, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · from a complaint |
| Mar 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 12, 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 12, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Nov 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 17, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Oct 17, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 17, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint |
| Oct 17, 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 |
| Oct 17, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint |
| Oct 17, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · from a complaint |
| Oct 17, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. · from a complaint |
| Oct 17, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 3, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 19, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper care or assistance for a resident who uses a prosthesis, such as an artificial limb. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2022 | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 7).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 17 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 12 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 10 | 0 | E |
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)
3 fines totaling $164,778, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2025 | Fine | $24,252 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | Fine | $64,200 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | Payment Denial | 5 days from May 9, 2025 |
| Oct 3, 2024 | Fine | $76,326 |
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) | 3.34 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 6% in California; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.40 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 34% in California; bottom 23% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.01 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 4% in California; bottom 32% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.26 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 24% in California; bottom 24% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.8 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 18% in California; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 44.4 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 36% in California; bottom 45% 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 4.14, RN 0.50, weekend 3.73. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| McClung, Barbra | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2009 |
| Moyle, Kensett | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 70% | 04/01/2009 |
| Andrighetto, Patty | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/16/2011 |
| Lawrence, Michelle | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/28/2009 |
| Magnolia Health Corporation | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2009 |
| Moyle, Kensett | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2009 |
| Moyle, Kensett | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2009 |
| Moyle, Kensett | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2009 |
| Moyle, Lindsey | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2009 |
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 an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "If I ask for a copy of my family member's records, how quickly will I get them and what does it cost?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sequoia Transitional Care | 0.6 mi | Porterville, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sierra View Medical Center | 0.6 mi | Porterville, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Sierra Valley Rehab Center | 1.1 mi | Porterville, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Gateway Post Acute | 1.6 mi | Porterville, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Lindsay Gardens Nursing & Rehabilitation | 10.3 mi | Lindsay, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Grand Oaks Care | 19.6 mi | Tulare, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Tulare Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP | 19.6 mi | Tulare, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Orchards at Tulare | 19.6 mi | Tulare, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in Porterville →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555658.