California ›Garden Grove

The Grove Post Acute

12332 Garden Grove Blvd., Garden Grove, CA 92843 · Orange County · 97 certified beds · avg 92 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1980

Part of chain: DAVID JOHNSON (48 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.74
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 (39)

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
Feb 10, 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
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint
Dec 31, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint
Jun 19, 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.
Jun 19, 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.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Jun 19, 2025D · 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.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Jun 19, 2025D · 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.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · from a complaint
Jun 19, 2025D · 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.
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Jun 19, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 19, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jun 19, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Feb 12, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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. · from a complaint
Nov 19, 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. · from a complaint
Nov 19, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
May 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
May 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022E · 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.
Dec 2, 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign.
Dec 2, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective.
Dec 2, 2022B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 19).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022120E
202440D
2025210E
202620D

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)3.744.313.95bottom 23% in California; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.460.610.69bottom 45% in California; bottom 31% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.503.903.50bottom 31% in California; top 42% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.250.510.48bottom 22% in California; bottom 22% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)17.636.745.8top 5% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)11.138.142.9top 6% in California; top 4% 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 4.04, RN 0.49, weekend 3.77. 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
Garden Grove Post Acute LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—08/16/2022
Garden Grove Property Holdings, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—08/16/2022
Johnson, FrankIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—04/01/2022
Dehghanmanesh, AdrianIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE08/16/2022
Denning, CameronIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2024
Denning, CameronIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/30/2025
Farrales, MaryIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Farrales, MaryIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Johnson, DavidIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2022
Johnson, FrankIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE03/22/2021
Kochek, JoshuaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2022
Kochek, JoshuaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2022
Oxford, MichealIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/03/2022
Oxford, MichealIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/03/2022
Song, ChaewonIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/30/2025
Sun Meridian Management Services LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/22/2021
VBN New York LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/16/2022

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
Pacific Haven Subacute and Healthcare Center0.5 miGarden Grove, CA★★★★☆3/5
Alta Gardens Care Center0.6 miGarden Grove, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Garden Park Care Center0.7 miGarden Grove, CA★★★★☆3/5
Chapman Care Center1.0 miGarden Grove, CA★★★★☆4/5
Citrus Post-Acute1.4 miSanta Ana, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Coventry Court Health Center2.4 miAnaheim, CA★★★★☆3/5
Buena Vista Care Center2.8 miAnaheim, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Garden Grove Post Acute2.9 miGarden Grove, CA★★★★☆3/5
Mainplace Post Acute2.9 miOrange, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Harbor Villa Care Center3.4 miAnaheim, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Town & Country3.5 miSanta Ana, CA★★★★★3/5
Orange Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LLC3.5 miOrange, CA★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Garden Grove →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555021.