Riverbank Post-Acute
2649 Topeka Street, Riverbank, CA 95367 · Stanislaus County · 99 certified beds · avg 96 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967
Part of chain: LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$73,295
Fines, last 3 years
3.88
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Mar 15, 2025 · F-0689
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 (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Apr 1, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 17, 2024 · 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: Feb 14, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (65)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Apr 13, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 13, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 23, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 23, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Mar 23, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint |
| Mar 23, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint |
| Nov 25, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · from a complaint |
| Nov 25, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 10, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 10, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 10, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 15, 2025 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Mar 15, 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. |
| Mar 15, 2025 | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2025 | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. |
| Jul 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jul 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint |
| Jul 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Jun 21, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 5, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 5, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint |
| Mar 27, 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 |
| Mar 27, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 27, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 17, 2024 | ▲ 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 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint |
| Sep 22, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 22, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| Sep 22, 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. |
| Sep 22, 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. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. |
| Sep 22, 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. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide at least one adequately sized room for dining and activities, with good lighting, airflow, and furniture. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. |
| Sep 22, 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. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2023 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 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 11, 2019 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 6).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 21 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 16 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 11 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2026 | 7 | 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)
2 fines totaling $73,295, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 15, 2025 | Fine | $29,322 |
| Mar 15, 2025 | Payment Denial | 7 days from Apr 11, 2025 |
| Jan 17, 2024 | Fine | $43,973 |
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) | 3.88 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 33% in California; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.26 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 6% in California; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.62 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 41% in California; top 36% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.24 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 19% in California; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 54.0 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 8% in California; bottom 27% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 70.6 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 7% in California; bottom 11% 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 3.80, RN 0.25, weekend 3.55. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beardsley, Mary | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Beardsley, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Bernholz, Victoria | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Bernholz, Victoria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Carter, Melissa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Carter, Melissa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Dahl, Matthew | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Dahl, Matthew | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Forbright Bank | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Frojelin, Antonette | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Frojelin, Antonette | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Links Healthcare Group LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Links Healthcare Group LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2025 |
| Links Support Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Links Support Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2025 |
| Mallare, Leilani | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2025 |
| Mallare, Leilani | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2025 |
| Rodriguez, Curtis | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Rodriguez, Curtis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
| Rodriguez, Curtis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/25/2023 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
- "Who provides social services here, and how would they support my family member's emotional and social needs?"
- "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crestwood Manor | 4.6 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Golden Modesto Care Center | 4.9 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Oakdale Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 5.1 mi | Oakdale, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Modesto Post Acute Center | 5.5 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Valley Skilled Nursing Center | 5.5 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Garden City Healthcare Center | 5.8 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| River View Post Acute | 6.1 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| English Oaks Convalescent & Rehabilitation Hospita | 6.2 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Vintage Faire Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 6.3 mi | Modesto, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Almond Vista Healthcare | 6.5 mi | Modesto, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055084.