Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF has received an excellent Trust Grade of A, which means it is highly recommended and stands out among nursing homes. It ranks #139 out of 1,155 facilities in California, placing it in the top half, and #5 out of 14 in Santa Barbara County, indicating only a few local options are better. The facility is improving, having reduced its number of issues from 7 in 2024 to 5 in 2025. Staffing is a notable strength, with a 5 out of 5 rating and a low turnover rate of 24%, significantly below the state average of 38%. While there have been no fines, which is great, there are some concerns. Recent inspections revealed issues like a brown substance in the ice machine and food items stored above safe temperatures, which could lead to foodborne illnesses. Additionally, the food service manager lacked proper training, and dietary staff did not monitor dishwashing temperatures correctly, raising potential health risks for residents. Overall, while there are strengths to consider, families should be aware of these areas needing improvement.
- Trust Score
- A
- In California
- #139/1155
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 24% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 24 points below California's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most California facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 125 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of California nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (24%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (24%)
24 points below California average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 19 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
2 deficiencies
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
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement scheduled toileting interventions for one of three sample...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Deficiency F0697
(Tag F0697)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to administer pain medications per physician orders for one resident (Resident 1).
This failure had the potential to result in negative reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of four sampled residents (Resident 5), was transferred from wheelchair to bed using a two person assist.
This fa...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the grilled cheese sandwich, provided as an alternative meal option, was of similar or nutritive value to the sch...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food and ice were stored in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when:
1. The ice machine lo...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0637
(Tag F0637)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled residents (Resident 61), had a comprehe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. During a review of Resident 61's Physician Note (PN), dated 2/7/24, the PN indicated, Resident 61's had diagnoses including left below-knee amputation (leg below the knee surgically removed) and ri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0700
(Tag F0700)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an entrapment risk assessment (an assessment to evaluate and monitor a patient's risk for getting entangled on a bed r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that food was prepared in a form to meet resident needs for one of 18 sampled residents (Resident 67), when a minced an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of 18 sampled residents (Resident 6) food preferences were honored in a timely manner.
This facility failure to honor Resident 6...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was consistently dated in the kitchen in one of three chilling (refrigerator/freezer) units.
This failure had the...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0801
(Tag F0801)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Food Service Manager (FSM) demonstrated skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service wh...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0551
(Tag F0551)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure family notification was documented in the medical record for one of seven sampled residents (Resident 21), when Resident 21 develope...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was developed for one of two sampled residents (Resident 628) who had an automatic implantable cardioverter def...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of five sampled residents (Resident 43), had a comprehensive care plan (plan to care for resident), that addressed Resident 43's...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure food was prepared in a form to meet the individual needs of a resident, Resident 33.
This failure had the potential to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure monitoring for signs and symptoms of bleeding was documented in the clinical record for one of two sampled residents (Resident 58) o...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
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 ensure:
1. the planned menu was followed when incorr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
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 store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with pro...
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 A (90/100). 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.
- • 24% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 24 points below California's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf Staffed?
CMS rates Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 24%, compared to the California average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf?
State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF during 2023 to 2025. These included: 19 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf?
Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by COMMONSPIRIT HEALTH, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 95 certified beds and approximately 90 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Santa Maria, California.
How Does Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf Compare to Other California Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in California, Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (24%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Marian Regional Medical Center 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 5-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 Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf Stick Around?
Staff at Marian Regional Medical Center D/P SNF tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 24%, the facility is 22 percentage points below the California average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 21%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.
Was Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf Ever Fined?
Marian Regional Medical Center 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 Marian Regional Medical Center D/P Snf on Any Federal Watch List?
Marian Regional Medical Center 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.