How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Santa Paula Post Acute Center
250 March Street, Santa Paula, CA 93060 (opens Google Maps) · Ventura County · (805) 525-7134· 99 certified beds · avg 93 residents/day · certified since Jan 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 →
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 17, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.44
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: 4/5 · 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 35 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint F-0584
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
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
View all 35 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jul 16, 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 |
| Jul 16, 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 |
| Apr 17, 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. · F-0812 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · F-0568 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · F-0577 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0645 |
| Apr 17, 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 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 10, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0693 |
| Apr 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not verify that its nurse aides had completed their required training, or did not retrain aides who had been out of nurse aide work for 2 years. · from a complaint · F-0729 |
| Dec 11, 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 |
| Aug 20, 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 |
| Aug 14, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 14, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Jun 13, 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 |
| Jun 13, 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 |
| Jun 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692 |
| May 24, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Mar 21, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851 |
| Mar 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Oct 26, 2023 | 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 12, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | 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 |
| Apr 29, 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 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | 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 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | 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 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | 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 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | 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. · F-0804 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 29, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
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 | 10 | 0 | D |
| 2023 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 13 | 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: 4.44
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.52
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.92
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) | 4.44 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 32% in California; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.52 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 44% in California; bottom 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.92 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 38% in California; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.32 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 40% in California; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 36.9 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 48% in California; top 29% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 41.7 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 41% in California; top 50% 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 4.67, RN 0.54, weekend 4.12.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.67 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Santa Paula Post Acute 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 - Individual
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jacobs, Dov | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 08/30/2016 |
| LBCSP Skilled, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/01/2018 |
| Santa Paula LTC LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 08/30/2016 |
| Jacobs, Dov | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/30/2016 |
| Jacobs, Dov | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/30/2016 |
| Santa Paula LTC LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/30/2016 |
All 6 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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 we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "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?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you manage residents' personal funds, and how often do families receive an accounting?"
- "Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
- "How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
- "What is your approach to psychiatric medications — how do you try non-drug options first and work to reduce doses over time?"
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 37% 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 17 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St. John's Hospital Camarillo D/P SNF | 8.2 mi | Camarillo, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Camarillo Healthcare Center | 9.4 mi | Camarillo, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Greenfield Care Center of Fillmore, LLC | 9.6 mi | Fillmore, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Alta Healthcare Center of Camarillo | 9.9 mi | Camarillo, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Coastal View Healthcare Center | 9.9 mi | Ventura, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Victoria Care Center | 10.2 mi | Ventura, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Ventura Post Acute | 10.4 mi | Ventura, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Glenwood Care Center | 10.9 mi | Oxnard, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Oxnard Manor Healthcare Center | 11.0 mi | Oxnard, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Ojai Health & Rehabilitation | 11.6 mi | Ojai, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Community Memorial Continuing Care Center | 12.1 mi | Ojai, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Maywood Acres Healthcare | 13.3 mi | Oxnard, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Ventura, CA — 19 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Sherwood Oaks Post Acute — Thousand Oaks, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Shoreline Care Center — Oxnard, CA · overall 2/5
- Simi Healthcare Center — Simi Valley, CA · overall 3/5
- Thousand Oaks Post Acute, LLC — Thousand Oaks, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055957.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).