California ›Auburn

Rock Creek Care Center

260 Racetrack Street, Auburn, CA 95603 · Placer County · 84 certified beds · avg 79 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1973

Part of chain: PACS GROUP (274 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.19
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5

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 (33)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint
Jan 23, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jan 23, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' individual preferences, choices, values, and beliefs in their daily life and care.
Jan 23, 2026B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Apr 1, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Oct 11, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Oct 11, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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 11, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Oct 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Oct 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Oct 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 11, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Oct 1, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint
Jul 3, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jul 3, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jul 3, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint
Jun 27, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 23, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 23, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Mar 23, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 23, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Mar 23, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Mar 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Mar 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Mar 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Mar 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Mar 23, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 3).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023140E
2024140F
202510E
202640E

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)

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.194.313.95top 45% in California; top 33% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.560.610.69top 37% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.783.903.50top 47% in California; top 30% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.470.510.48top 34% in California; top 37% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)46.736.745.8bottom 20% in California; bottom 45% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.038.142.9bottom 29% in California; bottom 39% 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 4.08, RN 0.55, weekend 3.69. 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bay Bridge Capital Partners, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest100%11/05/2021
Hudson River Opco LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%11/05/2021
Apt, FrederickIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Draper, BlakeIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2022
Draper, BlakeIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2022
Jergensen, JoshuaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Mitchell, JohnIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Zaidi, FarazIndividualContracted Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE09/18/2023

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Auburn Ravine Healthcare Center1.6 miAuburn, CA★★★★★4/5
Auburn Oaks Care Center3.9 miAuburn, CA★★★★★4/5
Siena Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Center4.0 miAuburn, CA★★★★★4/5
Westview Healthcare Center4.5 miAuburn, CA★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Lincoln Meadows Care Center12.4 miLincoln, CA★★★★★4/5
Oak Ridge Healthcare Center14.4 miRoseville, CA★★★★☆3/5
Roseville Point Health & Wellness Center14.7 miRoseville, CA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Roseville Care Center15.1 miRoseville, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Pine Creek Care Center15.1 miRoseville, CA★★★★★4/5
Folsom Care Center15.3 miFolsom, CA★★★★☆3/5
Gold Country Health Center18.5 miPlacerville, CA★★★★☆3/5
Fair Oaks Healthcare Center18.8 miFair Oaks, CA★★★☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Auburn →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055446.