California ›Yountville

Veterans Home of California - Yountville - SNF

100 California Drive, Yountville, CA 94599 · Napa County · 274 certified beds · avg 163 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1978

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
9.16
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 (37)

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 26, 2026F · 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.
Mar 26, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
Mar 26, 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.
Mar 26, 2026D · 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.
Mar 26, 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.
Mar 26, 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.
Mar 7, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Mar 7, 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.
Mar 7, 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.
Mar 7, 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 7, 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 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Mar 7, 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.
Mar 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Feb 6, 2025D · 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 29, 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
Aug 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange for a doctor to be available for emergencies 24 hours a day. · from a complaint
Aug 29, 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. · from a complaint
Jul 17, 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
Apr 11, 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.
Apr 11, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way.
Apr 11, 2024D · 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.
Apr 11, 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.
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Apr 11, 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
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Apr 11, 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.
Apr 11, 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.
Apr 11, 2024D · 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.
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Mar 7, 2024D · 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 7, 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
Sep 25, 2023D · 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202310D
2024210F
202590F
202660F

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)9.164.313.95top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours2.830.610.69top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing7.813.903.50top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)1.470.510.48top 4% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)26.236.745.8top 20% in California; top 8% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)18.838.142.9top 18% in California; top 12% 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 7.02, RN 2.17, weekend 5.98. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

Government - State

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Veterans Home of CaliforniaOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%11/15/2015
Koppes, JessicaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/23/2025
Koppes, JessicaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/23/2025
Kreisher, TimothyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/22/2024
Peters, JohnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2020
Peters, JohnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2020
Veterans Home of CaliforniaOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/15/2015
Veterans Home of CaliforniaOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/15/2015

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
Napa Post Acute6.2 miNapa, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Napa Valley Care Center6.3 miNapa, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Napa Community Health Center6.4 miNapa, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
The Meadows of Napa Valley8.8 miNapa, CA★★★★★5/5
Sonoma Post Acute9.1 miSonoma, CA★★★★☆3/5
Valley of the Moon Post Acute9.4 miSonoma, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Broadway Villa Post Acute9.7 miSonoma, CA★★★★★3/5
Dept of State Hospitals - Napa D/P SNF9.9 miNapa, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Spring Lake Village15.8 miSanta Rosa, CA★★★★★4/5
Summerfield Health Care Center16.6 miSanta Rosa, CA★★★★★5/5
Santa Rosa Post Acute17.1 miSanta Rosa, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Park View Post Acute17.3 miSanta Rosa, CA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Yountville →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555095.