Deficiency Index

Plumas District Hospital Dp/Snf

Quincy, California · CCN 555939

1 survey since 2026, and no finding has been recorded at harm level.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
4
Surveys
1
Harm or worse
0
Immediate jeopardy
0
The record, 2026–2026
’26
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Harm or worseNone

No finding on record has been cited at harm level or above.

Citations on record4

Across 1 surveys carrying at least one finding.

The facility

Certified beds
36
Ownership
Government - Hospital district
Chain
Independent
County
Plumas · rural
Medicare-certified since
2026

CMS ratings

Overall
—
Health inspection
—
Staffing
—
Quality measures
—

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=4, floor 20).

Last survey on record

Feb 10, 2026

272 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Enforcement

No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ—K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD375.0%E125.0%F—
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 4 of the 4 citations on record.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Plumas District Hospital Dp/Snf, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF755Feb 10, 2026

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident when:The facility failed to ensure the safe disposal and storage of controlled substances when one controlled substance was not double locked according to facility's controlled substance storage policy.The facility failed to ensure the safe and effective use of medication when the policy for medication storage was not implemented for one medication cart. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF610Feb 10, 2026

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to investigate suspicions of abuse for one resident of eight sampled residents (Resident 6) when:Facility reported that Resident 6's son verbally assaulted Resident 6 and coerced her to give him money and did not investigate.Facility reported that when Resident 6's son visited the facility during the months of January 2026 and February 2026, he yelled and made other residents feel uncomfortable and did not investigate.These failures caused Resident 6 mental anguish and had the potential to cause mental anguish to the rest of the facility residents.During a record review of facility policy titled Abuse and Neglect Prevention and Reporting (undated), indicated Abuse is the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable… […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF657Feb 10, 2026

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to revise and implement comprehensive care plans to reflect changes in condition and identified needs for 3 of 8 residents when reviewed for care planning (Residents 2, 6, and 8). These failures had the potential to result in inconsistent care, unmanaged symptoms, and unmet resident needs.Findings: During a record review on 2/9/26 at 3:00 p.m. of Resident 8's admission record, the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including muscle weakness, difficulty walking, dysfunction of the bladder, pressure ulcer of the sacral region, stage 4, chronic pain syndrome, and osteomyelitis. During an observation on 2/9/26 at 10:00 a.m., Resident 8 was observed with an indwelling urinary catheter in place. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF690Feb 10, 2026

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate management of an indwelling urinary catheter for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for urinary catheter care (Resident 8) when the facility failed to obtain or maintain a physician order for the catheter, failed to assess and document the continued medical necessity for catheter use, failed to include catheter care and monitoring interventions in the comprehensive care plan, and failed to document routine catheter care. This deficient practice placed Resident 8 at risk for urinary tract infection, urethral trauma, obstruction, and other catheter-related complications. During a record review on 2/9/26 at 3:00 p.m. […]

Read all 4 findings in full →

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Feb 10, 2026Standard and complaint4 findings

Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.

Comparable facilities

The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.

Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction