California ›Bakersfield

The Orchards Post-Acute

730 34 Street, Bakersfield, CA 93301 · Kern County · 150 certified beds · avg 143 residents/day · certified since Feb 10, 1997

Part of chain: LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$23,603
Fines, last 3 years
3.95
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Mar 19, 2026 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Apr 30, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 11, 2024 · F-0693 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Unnecessary or poorly managed feeding tubes can cause serious complications like lung infections and take away the ability to eat normally.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jan 16, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (86)

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
Jun 18, 2026D · 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.
Jun 18, 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).
Jun 18, 2026D · 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 18, 2026D · 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.
Jun 18, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint
Jun 18, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint
Jun 18, 2026D · 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 18, 2026D · 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 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 18, 2026D · 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 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 18, 2026D · 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 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 19, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Jan 5, 2026D · 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
Apr 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Mar 25, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Mar 13, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care.
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Mar 13, 2025E · 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.
Mar 13, 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.
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that.
Mar 13, 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.
Mar 13, 2025D · 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 13, 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.
Mar 13, 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.
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 13, 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.
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · from a complaint
Dec 11, 2024▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint
Dec 11, 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
Dec 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. · from a complaint
Sep 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Aug 28, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint
Aug 27, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint
Jul 17, 2024D · 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
Jun 19, 2024E · 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
Jun 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint
Jun 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. · from a complaint
May 6, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint
May 6, 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
Mar 28, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 15, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, 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.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, 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.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Feb 15, 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.
Feb 15, 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.
Feb 15, 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.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Feb 15, 2024D · 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.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 5, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
Jan 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed. · from a complaint
Nov 14, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint
Nov 6, 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. · from a complaint
Oct 6, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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
Oct 2, 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. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint
Oct 2, 2023D · 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. · from a complaint
Sep 5, 2023D · 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
Aug 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Aug 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. · from a complaint
Aug 21, 2023D · 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (19 → 13).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023110F
2024351G ▲
2025220F
2026181G ▲

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)

2 fines totaling $23,603.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 19, 2026Fine$14,380
Dec 11, 2024Fine$9,223

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)3.954.313.95bottom 37% in California; top 42% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.480.610.69bottom 49% in California; bottom 34% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.703.903.50bottom 47% in California; top 33% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.380.510.48top 48% in California; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)34.436.745.8top 44% in California; top 23% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)52.438.142.9bottom 23% in California; bottom 32% 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 3.92, RN 0.48, weekend 3.68. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Clawson, ScottIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Earl, StevenIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Rodriguez, CurtisIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Sanofsky, JackIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Tilford, TobyIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Anderson, ChadIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Anderson, ChadIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Beardsley, MaryIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Beardsley, MaryIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Bernholz, VictoriaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Bernholz, VictoriaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Carter, MelissaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Carter, MelissaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Deguzman, MyrnaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Deguzman, MyrnaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Eide Bailly LLPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Farrer, ToddIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/18/2025
Farrer, ToddIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/18/2025
Forbright BankOrganization5% or Greater Security InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020
Frojelin, AntonetteIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/17/2020

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
San Joaquin Nursing Center and Rehabilitation Cent0.6 miBakersfield, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Valley Healthcare Center1.5 miBakersfield, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
The Rehabilitation Center of Bakersfield2.3 miBakersfield, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Height Street Skilled Care2.4 miBakersfield, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Kern River Transitional Care3.1 miBakersfield, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Rosewood Health Facility4.0 miBakersfield, CA★★★★☆3/5
Parkview Julian Healthcare Center4.2 miBakersfield, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Bakersfield Post Acute4.3 miBakersfield, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Bayshire Riverwalk Post-Acute9.0 miBakersfield, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Arvin Post Acute15.7 miArvin, CA★☆☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Bakersfield →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555702.