California ›Bakersfield

The Orchards Post-Acute

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

730 34 Street, Bakersfield, CA 93301 (opens Google Maps) · Kern County · (661) 327-7687· 150 certified beds · avg 143 residents/day · certified since Feb 10, 1997 · 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: LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 18, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 19, 2026
$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)

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

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

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

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

▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

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

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 86 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The 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. F-0550

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The 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). F-0628

  3. 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

View all 86 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0550
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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). · F-0628
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0677
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0695
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0919
Mar 19, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Jan 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 29, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921
Mar 25, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 · F-0607
Mar 13, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Mar 13, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0881
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0550
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0623
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0725
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0756
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0636
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0690
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0695
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0919
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0626
Dec 11, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 11, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 11, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0726
Sep 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 28, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0686
Aug 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0690
Jul 17, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0609
Jun 19, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 19, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925
Jun 17, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0677
May 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 28, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0676
Feb 15, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0636
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0638
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0677
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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). · F-0742
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0919
Feb 5, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Jan 22, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed. · from a complaint · F-0914
Nov 14, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint · F-0557
Nov 6, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Oct 6, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
Oct 2, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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 · F-0838
Oct 2, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Oct 2, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0725
Oct 2, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0806
Sep 5, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0609
Aug 28, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 21, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

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

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 35
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 22
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

2 fines totaling $23,603.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

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

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.95
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.48
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.70
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

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 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 3.92, RN 0.48, weekend 3.68.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.92 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Orchards Post-Acute. 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 / 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

Showing 20 of 35 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 15 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Links Healthcare Group — 32 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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 31 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
  • "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 34% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 35 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

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
Shafter Nursing Care17.4 miShafter, CA★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Kern, CA — 17 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Bakersfield →

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

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details