Vienna Nursing and Rehabilitation Center

Name: Vienna Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Address: 800 SO. HAM LANE, Lodi, CA, 95242, US
Telephone: 2093687141

800 So. Ham Lane, Lodi, CA 95242 · San Joaquin County · 150 certified beds · avg 137 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

5.06

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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 (35)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Jul 1, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to manage their own money and financial affairs. · from a complaint
Feb 20, 2026	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The 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 20, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Feb 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
Feb 20, 2026	B · Minimal risk, repeated	The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Dec 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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
Oct 18, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Oct 18, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
Oct 18, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Oct 18, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Oct 18, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Oct 18, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Oct 18, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Oct 18, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Oct 18, 2024	B · Minimal risk, repeated	The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Feb 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Nov 1, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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. · from a complaint
Oct 14, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Oct 14, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Oct 14, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Oct 14, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Oct 14, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Oct 14, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Oct 14, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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 increased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 15).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2022	7	E
2023	1	D
2024	11	E
2026	16	F

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)

Measure	This facility	California avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	5.06	4.31	3.95	top 14% in California; top 12% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.59	0.61	0.69	top 33% in California; top 49% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	4.50	3.90	3.50	top 14% in California; top 12% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.31	0.51	0.48	bottom 37% in California; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	22.1	36.7	45.8	top 11% in California; top 4% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	31.6	38.1	42.9	top 40% in California; top 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 4.63, RN 0.54, weekend 4.12. 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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Davis, Dana	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	—	01/01/2023
Heffel Family Properties, LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	—	01/01/2023
Heffel, Kenneth	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	—	01/01/1967
Lipka, Kendra	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	—	01/01/2023
Wright, Corey	Individual	Direct Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Davis, Dana	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	07/08/2013
Davis, Dana	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	03/11/2011
Freund, Edmund	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	08/01/2024
Heffel, Kenneth	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	07/08/2013
Heffel, Kenneth	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/1985
Lipka, Kendra	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Lipka, Kendra	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/1985
Wright, Corey	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	07/08/2013
Wright, Corey	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	09/01/1987
Wright, Corey	Individual	Limited Partnership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	03/11/2011
Wright, Corey	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/14/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"How are residents' personal funds handled here, and what records can families review?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
"Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
"What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
"How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
"Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Fairmont Rehabilitation Hospital	1.7 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Lodi Nursing & Rehabilitation	1.8 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Arbor Rehabilitation & Nursing Center	2.2 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Lodi Creek Post Acute	2.5 mi	Lodi, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Creekside Center	6.5 mi	Stockton, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Crystal Creek Post-Acute	6.6 mi	Stockton, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Meadowood a Health and Rehabilitation Center	6.9 mi	Stockton, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Clearwater Healthcare Center	7.3 mi	Stockton, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5
Delta Oaks Post Acute	7.9 mi	Stockton, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Rancho Seco Care Center	8.4 mi	Galt, CA		—/5	abuseSFF
Riverwood Health Care	8.6 mi	Stockton, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Oak Grove Post Acute	9.3 mi	Stockton, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Lodi →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055481.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Vienna Nursing and Rehabilitation Center

800 So. Ham Lane, Lodi, CA 95242 · 2093687141

Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "How are residents' personal funds handled here, and what records can families review?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
☐ "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
☐ "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
☐ "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 055481 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)