SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Seneca District Hospital D/P SNF in Chester, California has a Trust Grade of B+, indicating it is above average and recommended for potential residents. It ranks #456 out of 1155 facilities in California, placing it in the top half, and #1 out of 2 in Plumas County, meaning it is the best option locally. The facility's trend is improving, having reduced issues from 4 in 2024 to 2 in 2025. However, staffing is a concern with only 1 out of 5 stars, indicating high turnover at 41%, which is similar to the state average but still below optimal levels. While the facility has no fines and boasts good quality measures, there have been serious incidents, such as a staff member withholding medications from residents and inappropriate comments made by a housekeeper that caused discomfort. Additionally, there were failures in ensuring proper blood sugar testing procedures, which could lead to inaccurate health assessments. Overall, while the facility has strengths in quality measures and no fines, the staffing issues and specific incidents of concern should be carefully considered by families.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In California
- #456/1155
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 41% turnover. Near California's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most California facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 27 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for California. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ○ Average
- 10 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (41%)
7 points below California average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near California avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
The Ugly 10 deficiencies on record
Sept 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one of two residents sampled for dignity (Resident 1), was tr...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow their policies to ensure that Resident 1 was kept safe after he bought two electronic hand warmers to use when we went outside.
Thi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to observe the meal preferences of one of eight sampled ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that blood sugar testing equipment was dated when opened and that the glucometers (a machine used to test blood sugar)...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, this requirement was not met when the facility failed to obtain the services of a registered nurse for eight consecutive hours, seven days a week. This had the po...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to protect twelve (12) of twelve (12) residents (Resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, this requirement was not met when the facility failed to obtain the services of a registered nurse for eight consecutive hours, seven days a week. This had the po...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to record sanitizing temperatures for the dishwashing machine.
This had the potential for staff to not recognize low, non-saniti...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2022
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when:
Personal staff items were observed in the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, and nursing schedule review, the facility failed to utilize the services of a registered nurse for eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week.
This had the potential to adve...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade B+ (80/100). Above average facility, better than most options in California.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most California facilities.
- • 41% turnover. Below California's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • No significant concerns identified. This facility shows no red flags across CMS ratings, staff turnover, or federal penalties.
About This Facility
What is Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within California, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf Staffed?
CMS rates SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 41%, compared to the California average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf?
State health inspectors documented 10 deficiencies at SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF during 2022 to 2025. These included: 8 with potential for harm and 2 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf?
SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 16 certified beds and approximately 14 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in CHESTER, California.
How Does Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf Compare to Other California Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in California, SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (41%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the below-average staffing rating.
Is Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in California. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf Stick Around?
SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF has a staff turnover rate of 41%, which is about average for California nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf Ever Fined?
SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Seneca District Hospital D/P Snf on Any Federal Watch List?
SENECA DISTRICT HOSPITAL D/P SNF is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.