CaliforniaModesto

Valley Skilled Nursing Center

515 East Orangeburg Avenue, Modesto, CA 95350 · Stanislaus County · 70 certified beds · avg 53 residents/day · certified since Jul 16, 1969

Part of chain: KALESTA HEALTHCARE GROUP (19 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.87
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: 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 (48)

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
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Feb 12, 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. · from a complaint
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint
May 6, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Apr 9, 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. · from a complaint
Apr 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Mar 27, 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
Mar 27, 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. · from a complaint
Mar 14, 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.
Mar 14, 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.
Mar 14, 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.
Mar 14, 2025D · 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.
Mar 14, 2025D · 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.
Mar 14, 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 14, 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.
Jan 15, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Aug 13, 2024E · 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. · from a complaint
Aug 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint
Nov 22, 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
Nov 22, 2023D · 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. · from a complaint
Jul 28, 2023F · 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.
Jul 28, 2023E · 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.
Jul 28, 2023E · 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.
Jul 28, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems.
Jul 28, 2023D · 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.
Jul 28, 2023D · 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.
Jul 28, 2023D · 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.
Jul 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Jul 28, 2023B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Apr 15, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day.
Apr 15, 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.
Apr 15, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Apr 15, 2022F · 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.
Apr 15, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Apr 15, 2022E · 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.
Apr 15, 2022E · 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.
Apr 15, 2022E · 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.
Apr 15, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Apr 15, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Apr 15, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Apr 15, 2022D · 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.
Apr 15, 2022D · 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.
Apr 15, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 15, 2022D · 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.
Apr 15, 2022D · 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.
Apr 15, 2022D · 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.
Apr 15, 2022B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (9 → 7).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022180F
2023110F
202420E
2025140F
202630D

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)3.874.313.95bottom 32% in California; top 45% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.500.610.69top 47% in California; bottom 37% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.303.903.50bottom 17% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.500.510.48top 30% in California; top 32% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)19.236.745.8top 6% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)40.038.142.9bottom 47% in California; top 46% 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 4.32, RN 0.55, 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Clawson, ScottIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest48%10/01/2019
Clawson, ScottIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Kalesta Healthcare Group, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%10/01/2019
Williams, RyanIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest48%10/01/2019
Blake, MarthaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Cardoso, EldbertoIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2022
Chen, Kai ShinIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/04/2021
Chen, Kai ShinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/04/2021
Clawson, ScottIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Ctr Partnership LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Duran, JuanaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/02/2019
Fields, DomoniqueIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Fields, DomoniqueIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Flake, EthanIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/07/2024
Flake, EthanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/07/2024
Jones, StevenIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Jones, StevenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Modi, IshankumarIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/04/2019
Modi, IshankumarIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/04/2019
Mosher, StevenIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE07/08/2024

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
Modesto Post Acute Center0.0 miModesto, CA★★★★★4/5
Golden Modesto Care Center0.7 miModesto, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Garden City Healthcare Center1.1 miModesto, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Crestwood Manor1.2 miModesto, CA★★★★★5/5
River View Post Acute1.4 miModesto, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Almond Vista Healthcare2.2 miModesto, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
English Oaks Convalescent & Rehabilitation Hospita3.0 miModesto, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Vintage Faire Nursing & Rehabilitation Center3.8 miModesto, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Ceres Postacute Care4.2 miCeres, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Riverbank Post-Acute5.5 miRiverbank, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Modesto →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055869.