How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Rock Creek Care Center
260 Racetrack Street, Auburn, CA 95603 (opens Google Maps) · Placer County · (530) 885-7051· 84 certified beds · avg 79 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1973 · 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★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 23, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.19
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The 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 F-0627
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 honor residents' individual preferences, choices, values, and beliefs in their daily life and care. F-0675
View all 33 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0627 |
| Jan 23, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' individual preferences, choices, values, and beliefs in their daily life and care. · F-0675 |
| Jan 23, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0912 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 · F-0812 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Oct 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 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0912 |
| Oct 1, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Jul 3, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0558 |
| Jul 3, 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 |
| Jul 3, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0755 |
| Jun 27, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Jun 27, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0688 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0912 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | 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. · F-0658 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0810 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 23, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 3).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 4
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 14 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 14 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 4 | 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)
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: 4.19
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.56
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.78
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) | 4.19 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 45% in California; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.56 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 37% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.78 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 47% in California; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.47 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 34% in California; top 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 46.7 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 20% in California; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 50.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 29% in California; bottom 39% 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 4.08, RN 0.55, weekend 3.69.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.08 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 Rock Creek 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bay Bridge Capital Partners, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 11/05/2021 |
| Hudson River Opco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 11/05/2021 |
| Apt, Frederick | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Draper, Blake | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Draper, Blake | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Jergensen, Joshua | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Mitchell, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Zaidi, Faraz | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/18/2023 |
All 8 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.
- 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
- San Francisco Post Acute — San Francisco, CA · overall 5/5
- San Jacinto Valley Post Acute — Hemet, CA · overall 5/5
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.
- "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you learn each resident's personal preferences and make sure staff actually follow them?"
- "Can I see the actual room my family member would live in before we decide?"
- "Who reviews your menus, and can I see this week's menu and join my family member for a meal?"
- "How is your kitchen staffed, and have meals ever been delayed because of staffing?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 47% 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 (12 closest of 15 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Auburn Ravine Healthcare Center | 1.6 mi | Auburn, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Auburn Oaks Care Center | 3.9 mi | Auburn, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Siena Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 4.0 mi | Auburn, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Westview Healthcare Center | 4.5 mi | Auburn, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Lincoln Meadows Care Center | 12.4 mi | Lincoln, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Oak Ridge Healthcare Center | 14.4 mi | Roseville, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Roseville Point Health & Wellness Center | 14.7 mi | Roseville, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Roseville Care Center | 15.1 mi | Roseville, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Pine Creek Care Center | 15.1 mi | Roseville, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Folsom Care Center | 15.3 mi | Folsom, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Gold Country Health Center | 18.5 mi | Placerville, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fair Oaks Healthcare Center | 18.8 mi | Fair Oaks, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055446.