CaliforniaSacramento

Saylor Lane Healthcare Center

3500 Folsom Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95816 · Sacramento County · 42 certified beds · avg 39 residents/day · certified since Dec 31, 1971

Part of chain: CYPRESS HEALTHCARE GROUP (13 facilities, chain avg rating 3.8★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.16
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 (41)

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
May 8, 2025F · 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.
May 8, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 8, 2025E · 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.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status.
Apr 15, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 15, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
May 17, 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.
May 17, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
May 17, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 17, 2024E · 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.
May 17, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
May 17, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 17, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 17, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
May 17, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
May 17, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
May 17, 2024C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
May 19, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
May 19, 2022F · 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.
May 19, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
May 19, 2022E · 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.
May 19, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 19, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave.
May 19, 2022D · 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.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not notify the appropriate authorities when a resident with a mental disorder or intellectual disability had a significant change in condition.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
May 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (11 → 13).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022150F
2024110F
2025150F

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)4.164.313.95top 47% in California; top 33% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.490.610.69top 49% in California; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.773.903.50top 48% in California; top 30% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.430.510.48top 41% in California; top 43% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)20.036.745.8top 7% in California; top 3% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.038.142.9

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 4.11, RN 0.48, weekend 3.72. 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: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Belton, StacyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/23/2022
Belton, StacyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/23/2022
Cepec, MilanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/09/2019
Cepec, MilanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/09/2019
Dunn, ZandaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/04/2023
Dunn, ZandaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/04/2023
Jackson, MatthewIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Jackson, MatthewIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Jackson, MatthewIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Jackson, RobertIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Jackson, RobertIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Jackson, RobertIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Kumar, MunishIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2024
Kumar, MunishIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2024
Leung, VictoriaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/20/2024
Leung, VictoriaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/20/2024
Murray, DustinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/10/2020
Murray, DustinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/10/2020
Orencia, Marie GraceIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/14/2023
Orencia, Marie GraceIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/14/2023

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
McKinley Park Care Center0.4 miSacramento, CA★★★★☆3/5
University Post-Acute Rehab0.6 miSacramento, CA★★★★★4/5
Mid-Town Oaks Post-Acute0.7 miSacramento, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Sherwood Healthcare Center1.4 miSacramento, CA★★★★★4/5
Advanced Health Care of Sacramento2.2 miSacramento, CA★★★★★4/5
Pioneer House2.3 miSacramento, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Asbury Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center2.8 miSacramento, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Woodside Healthcare Center2.9 miSacramento, CA★★★★★4/5
Bridgewood Post Acute3.7 miSacramento, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Cedarwood Post Acute4.0 miSacramento, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Gramercy Court4.2 miSacramento, CA★★★★☆2/5abuse
River Bend Nursing Center4.4 miWest Sacramento, CA★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Sacramento →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055417.