Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
88
72 employees · 16 contractors · 25 on an average day The Sequoias Portola Valley
Nursing Home, Assisted Living, Continuing Care Retirement Community, Hospice Care, Memory Care, Respite Care & Skilled Nursing · Portola Valley, CA
ALM Inspection Grade
B-
ALM's inspection grade is 82 / 100, a B- — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
ALM's inspection grade is 82 / 100, a B- — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
CMS overall rating
5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
The Sequoias Portola Valley
Nursing Home, Assisted Living, Continuing Care Retirement Community, Hospice Care, Memory Care, Respite Care & Skilled Nursing · Portola Valley, CA
ALM Inspection Grade
B-
ALM's inspection grade is 82 / 100, a B- — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
ALM's inspection grade is 82 / 100, a B- — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
CMS overall rating
5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
The Sequoias Portola Valley accepts Medicare and private pay.
Eight care types are available at The Sequoias Portola Valley in Portola Valley, CA. The community is a continuing care retirement community, and its levels are independent living, memory care, hospice care, assisted living, nursing home care, skilled nursing, and respite care.
Assisted living helps with daily tasks, and the resident keeps a private residence. A secured setting with supervision is what memory care brings when a resident’s wandering carries risk. Skilled nursing takes over once a resident’s own health requires licensed nursing care. Hospice care meets end-of-life needs, and respite care is booked for the time a regular caregiver spends away on a trip or in recovery.
Because independent living, assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing share one community here, a resident can move from one level to the next without leaving. The 328 beds are spread across those levels.
Short-Term Rehab takes someone after an illness, injury, or hospitalization, and from there they return to their usual arrangement or go on to longer-term care. Staffing reaches 4 hours and 56 minutes of nursing for each resident daily.
Suzanne Wasley-Fairley is the administrator, and Sequoia Living, Inc. operates the community. Residents can take up hiking and bird-watching, lawn bowling, garden activities, trips and excursions, and resident-led groups and committees, and pets are allowed. Medicare covers eligible short-term skilled care, and private pay covers the rest directly.
Quality ratings
The Overall CMS Rating combines results from health inspections, staffing levels and quality measures. Health inspections carry the most weight. Staffing and quality scores can increase or decrease the final rating based on performance compared to state and national standards.
Based on the results of the facility's three most recent standard inspections and any complaint investigations. CMS reviews the number, scope, and severity of deficiencies, with more recent findings weighted more heavily.
Measures average nursing staff hours per resident per day, including Registered Nurses (RNs) and total nursing staff. Ratings are adjusted based on the level of care residents require and are compared to state and national benchmarks.
Based on clinical and physical health indicators reported to CMS, such as hospital readmissions, falls, pressure ulcers, and improvements in mobility. These measures reflect how well residents' health needs are being managed.
Staffing
Data period: Q2 2026 (April 1 – June 30, 2026).
Nursing care per resident per day and state rankings: CMS Provider Information.
Headcount, shifts and contractors: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ).
Total nursing care per resident / day
This nursing home is ranked 50th out of 291 nursing homes we track in California for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
4h 56m
This nursing home is ranked 50th out of 291 nursing homes we track in California for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
4h 56mStandout metric: LPN / LVN is +19% above California average
3 of 6 metrics below California average
Daily care time per resident, by role
Registered nurse (RN)
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. All 4 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
4 staff · 4.7-hour shifts
43m
↑ 12% · CA 38mThis facility: 43m per resident per day, 12% above the California average of 38m (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. All 4 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
4 staff · 4.7-hour shiftsUS average: 42m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 42m
LPN / LVN
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. All 10 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
10 staff · 7.6-hour shifts
1h 20m
↑ 19% · CA 1h 7mThis facility: 1h 20m per resident per day, 19% above the California average of 1h 7m (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. All 10 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
10 staff · 7.6-hour shiftsUS average: 52m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 52m
Certified nursing assistant
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. All 53 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
53 staff · 7.2-hour shifts
2h 53m
↑ 11% · CA 2h 36mThis facility: 2h 53m per resident per day, 11% above the California average of 2h 36m (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. All 53 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
53 staff · 7.2-hour shiftsUS average: 2h 26m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 2h 26m
Physical therapist
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
2m
↓ 70% · CA 6mThis facility: 2m per resident per day, 70% below the California average of 6m (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
US average: 4m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 4m
Total nursing, weekends
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–Sun
3h 1m
↓ 23% · CA 3h 56mThis facility: 3h 1m per resident per day, 23% below the California average of 3h 56m (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–SunUS average: 3h 32m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 3h 32m
RN, weekends
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–Sun
7m
↓ 77% · CA 32mThis facility: 7m per resident per day, 77% below the California average of 32m (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–SunUS average: 29m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 29m
Headcount
Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
88
72 employees · 16 contractors · 25 on an average day
Average hours one staff member works on a day they are on shift, across every role.
6.8 h
↓ 12% · CA 7.7 hThis facility: 6.8 h, 12% below the California average of 7.7 h (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
15,561 staff hours this quarter
See full California ranking →86% of staff hours were worked by the facility's own employees
California average: 95.5% · Contractors this quarter: Physical Therapy Assistant (5), Speech Language Pathologist (4), Respiratory Therapy Technician (4), Occupational Therapy Aide (1), Qualified Social Worker (1), Medical Director (1)
Why it matters: employees work here week after week and get to know each resident's routines and needs. Agency contractors often rotate between facilities, so a higher employee share usually means more consistent care.
By The Numbers
Community insights.
Bed count
A large-scale community that may provide a wide range of amenities, services, and structured programs.
371
Rank #39 / 344Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 39th out of 344 nursing homes we track in California for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other California facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
A large-scale community that may provide a wide range of amenities, services, and structured programs.
371
Rank #39 / 344Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 39th out of 344 nursing homes we track in California for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other California facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.High-capacity home · May provide extensive amenities, services and programs.
43 nursing-home beds (CMS) + 328 state-licensed beds.
Years of operating
A longer operating history, which may indicate experience navigating regulations and delivering ongoing care. This is the number of years in operation under current management.
Rank #26 / 198Years in operation — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 26th out of 198 nursing homes we track in California for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other California facilities. Longer operating histories may benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
A longer operating history, which may indicate experience navigating regulations and delivering ongoing care. This is the number of years in operation under current management.
Rank #26 / 198Years in operation — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 26th out of 198 nursing homes we track in California for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other California facilities. Longer operating histories may benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
41
years
Walk Score
Car-dependent. Most errands require a car, with limited nearby walkable options.
Rank #324 / 343Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 324th out of 343 nursing homes we track in California for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across California facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Car-dependent. Most errands require a car, with limited nearby walkable options.
Rank #324 / 343Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 324th out of 343 nursing homes we track in California for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across California facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
12
/ 100
Occupancy rate
Occupancy lower than 85% suggests more openings may be available.
Rank #210 / 302Occupancy rate — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 210th out of 302 nursing homes we track in California for occupancy. Shows this facility's occupancy rate versus the California average, with its Statewide rank out of 302. Higher occupancy signals strong local demand and financial stability. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Occupancy lower than 85% suggests more openings may be available.
Rank #210 / 302Occupancy rate — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 210th out of 302 nursing homes we track in California for occupancy. Shows this facility's occupancy rate versus the California average, with its Statewide rank out of 302. Higher occupancy signals strong local demand and financial stability. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
79.3%
This home usually has availability
Similar to the California average: 82.2%
Avg. Length of Stay
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
76
days
About This Community
IssuanceNovember 5, 1985
CountySan Mateo
License Number410500567
State License TypesRCFE License #410500567
The Sequoias Portola Valley is legally operated by Sequoia Living, Inc., and administered by Suzanne Wasley-Fairley.
Short-Term Rehab
Housekeeping
Pets Allowed
Garden
Activities
Hiking Activities
Bird-Watching
Lawn Bowling
Gardening
- Trips and excursions organized by the Life Enrichment team
Building TypeSingle-story
Room Types
Studio
1 Bed
2 Bed
This profile shows two inspection records, and their totals often differ. Inspection History and the Inspection Scorecard below are state data — the figures the state publishes and the state inspection reports we hold on file — covering the entire facility. CMS Health Inspection History covers only this home's Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing beds, from federal certification surveys.
Inspection History
In California, the Department of Social Services (for assisted living facilities) and the Department of Public Health (for nursing homes) conduct inspections to ensure resident safety and regulatory compliance.
ALM Inspection Grade
82 / 100
Combined grade: CMS inspection data for this community's nursing-home beds and
California inspection data for its
state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count
How the two records combine
Nursing-home beds (CMS) · 12% of the grade
B+ · 88/100
6 points above the California average for CMS-certified facilities (82/100).
43 certified beds, 12% of the grade. Graded with CMS-certified facilities on the national scale.
Citations
Strong
40 severity-weighted points (20 citations) · 2× lower than the typical CMS-certified CA facility (median: 95)
Enforcement
Typical
$12,703 in fines · 1 enforcement action
Persistence
Concern
31 days to fix issues · slower than the typical CMS-certified CA facility (median: 25)
California state-licensed beds · 88% of the grade
B- · 81/100
2 points below the California average for state-licensed facilities (83/100).
328 licensed beds, 88% of the grade. Graded with California state-licensed facilities on the California scale.
Serious citations
Typical
1 serious citation in 7 inspections
Moderate citations
Typical
0.29 moderate citations per inspection (2 in 7 inspections) · 2× more than the typical state-licensed CA facility (median: 0.15)
Complaint visits
Typical
0.3 complaint visits per 100 resident beds (1 across 328 beds) · 96% fewer than the typical state-licensed CA facility (median: 7.9)
How the final grade is calculated
B- · 82/100
88 × 12% + 81 × 88% = 82 / 100
The two grades are combined in proportion to the beds each record covers: 43 CMS-certified nursing-home beds (12%) and 328 California state-licensed beds (88%). The result, 82 out of 100, is a B- on the same scale every ALM Inspection Grade uses.
Inspection Scorecard
This scorecard compares key inspection, citation, and complaint metrics at this facility against the California state average. Metrics rated ≥15% worse than average are highlighted in red; those ≥15% better are highlighted in green.
Overall vs. CA average
0 Worse
No metrics in this bucket.
4 Better
Metrics better than California average:
• Total citations (57% below)
• Serious citations (Type A) (67% below)
• Moderate citations (Type B) (50% below)
• Citations per inspection (20% below)
• Total citations (57% below)
• Serious citations (Type A) (67% below)
• Moderate citations (Type B) (50% below)
• Citations per inspection (20% below)
Citations
| This Facility | CA Average | vs. CA Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total citations
Formal regulatory issues recorded by inspectors across all inspection types.
| 3 | 7.0 | This facility has 57% fewer total citations than a typical California nursing home (3 vs. CA avg 7).↓ 57% better |
|
Serious citations (Type A)
Citations that pose an immediate risk to resident health or safety. Type A citations are the most serious and typically require prompt corrective action.
| 1 | 3.0 | This facility has 67% fewer serious citations (type a) than a typical California nursing home (1 vs. CA avg 3).↓ 67% better Rank #1 / 294 Serious citations (Type A) — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 1st out of 294 nursing homes we track in California for # of serious citations. Shows this facility's # of serious citations compared to the California average among the 294 nursing homes in the ranking pool. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. |
|
Moderate citations (Type B)
Citations that do not pose an immediate risk but still represent a departure from required care or operational standards.
| 2 | 4.0 | This facility has 50% fewer moderate citations (type b) than a typical California nursing home (2 vs. CA avg 4).↓ 50% better |
|
Citations per inspection
Average citations per inspection.
| 0.4 | 0.5 | This facility has 20% fewer citations per inspection than a typical California nursing home (0.4 vs. CA avg 0.5).↓ 20% better |
Inspections & Visits
| This Facility | CA Average | vs. CA Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total inspections
Combined count of official scheduled inspections, complaint visits and other regulatory visits. California counts each evaluation report, so one trip can count twice when it serves two purposes.
| 7 | 19.0 | This facility has had 63% fewer total inspections than the California average (7 vs. CA avg 19). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 63% fewer |
|
Complaint visits
On-site visits triggered by formal complaints filed by residents, families, or staff.
| 1 | 6.0 | This facility has had 83% fewer complaint visits than the California average (1 vs. CA avg 6). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 83% fewer |
|
Other visits
Regulatory visits that are neither routine inspections nor complaint investigations — administrative check-ins, follow-up reviews, licensing-related visits.
| 3 | 5.0 | This facility has had 40% fewer other visits than the California average (3 vs. CA avg 5). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 40% fewer |
|
Official inspections
Routine, scheduled inspections conducted by state regulators to evaluate whether the facility meets federal and state standards.
| 3 | 4.0 | This facility has had 25% fewer official inspections than the California average (3 vs. CA avg 4). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 25% fewer |
|
Complaint investigations
On-site investigations triggered by complaints filed with California regulators.
| 2 | 8.0 | This facility has had 75% fewer complaint investigations than the California average (2 vs. CA avg 8). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 75% fewer |
CMS Health Inspection History
Federal inspection data published by CMS, covering this home's Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing/nursing beds only.
Total health inspections
3
↓ 75% · CA 12This facility: 3, 75% below the CA average of 12 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Total health citations
20
Rank #34 / 294Health citations — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 34th out of 294 nursing homes we track in California for health citations. Shows this facility's total health deficiency citations benchmarked to the California State average, with a ranking across all 294 CA facilities. Lower citation counts earn a better rank. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.↓ 60% · CA 49.7This facility: 20, 60% below the CA average of 49.7 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Citations per inspection
6.67
Rank #256 / 294Citations per inspection — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 256th out of 294 nursing homes we track in California for citations per inspection. Shows average deficiency citations per CMS inspection for this facility versus the California mean across 294 facilities with citation data. Lower is better. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.↑ 40% · CA 4.77This facility: 6.67, 40% above the CA average of 4.77 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Citation severity
100% corrected
20 of 20 citations corrected
Critical
J–L
0
↓ 100% · CA 0.3This facility: 0, 100% below the CA average of 0.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Immediate jeopardy
Serious
G–I
0
↓ 100% · CA 0.9This facility: 0, 100% below the CA average of 0.9 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Actual harm
Moderate
D–F
20
↓ 58% · CA 47.1This facility: 20, 58% below the CA average of 47.1 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
No harm, more than minimal risk
Minor
A–C
0
↓ 100% · CA 1.5This facility: 0, 100% below the CA average of 1.5 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
No harm, minimal riskLatest inspection: Aug 07, 2025 · 5 citations, all corrected
Most cited category: Resident Assessment & Care Planning, 6 of 20 citations · 8 categories in total
Citations history
Most recent first
Aug 07, 2025
5 citations
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
May 24, 2024
9 citations
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Administration moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nursing Services moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Dec 30, 2021
6 citations
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Top deficiency categories
Share of 20 citations
Resident Assessment & Care Planning
6 deficiencies (30%)
Pharmacy Services
4 deficiencies (20%)
Nutrition & Dietary
3 deficiencies (15%)
Infection Control
2 deficiencies (10%)
Resident Rights
2 deficiencies (10%)
Quality of Life & Care
1 deficiency (5%)
Administration
1 deficiency (5%)
Nursing & Physician Services
1 deficiency (5%)
How citations are counted
Health citations are formal notices following inspections when they fail to comply with safety and care standards.
19 of 20 citations resulted from standard inspections; and 1 of 20 resulted from complaint investigations.
Includes all CMS health inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Source
Data sourced from CMS Health Deficiencies reports, which cover the Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing and nursing beds and no other part of the community. Citation severity codes range from A (least serious) to L (most serious). Immediate Jeopardy (J-L) citations indicate situations where the facility's noncompliance has placed residents at risk of death or serious harm.
Enforcement
Penalties and fines
Penalties and fines
Federal penalties imposed by CMS for regulatory violations, including civil money penalties (fines) and denials of payment for new Medicare/Medicaid admissions.
Source: CMS Penalties Database · Data as of Oct 2026
1 penalty in the past 3 years
Latest: Oct 30, 2023 · $12,703 civil money penalty
Oct 30, 2023 · $12,703 civil money penalty
Total fines
$12,703
↓ 78% · CA $57KThis facility: $12,703, 78% below the California average of $56,949. Average among the 478 California facilities with a penalty on record.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.US avg $66KUS average: $66,281, among the 6,725 US facilities with a penalty on record.Rank #211 / 296Federal fines — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 211th out of 296 nursing homes we track in California for federal fines. Shows this facility's cumulative CMS federal fine dollars versus the California average among facilities with fines, and where it ranks among 296 facilities in the pool. Lower total dollars mean a better rank. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Number of fines
1
↓ 46% · CA 1.85This facility: 1, 46% below the California average of 1.85. Average among the 478 California facilities with a penalty on record.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.US avg 1.88US average: 1.88, among the 6,725 US facilities with a penalty on record.
Payment denials
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
0
CA avg 0.59California average: 0.59. Average among the 478 California facilities with a penalty on record.US avg 0.35US average: 0.35, among the 6,725 US facilities with a penalty on record.
Penalty history · past 3 years
Oct 30, 2023
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$12,703
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$12,703Fine amount comparison
This facility
$12,703
California average
$56,949
US average
$66,281
Totals count every penalty on record; the history lists the past 3 years. California and US averages are among facilities with a penalty on record.
A civil money penalty is a fine for noncompliance, per day or per instance. A payment denial stops Medicare/Medicaid payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
Health Outcomes
Quality of care over time
How residents at this home fare on health outcomes and preventive care, compared with the California average.
CMS star rating for the care of long-stay residents, who live at the home for 100 days or more. It is built from the long-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
5
/ 5
Significantly above average
CMS star rating for the care of short-stay residents, mostly people recovering after a hospital stay for under 100 days. It is built from the short-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
5
/ 5
Significantly above average
Average of five long-stay measures: pressure ulcers, falls with major injury, unplanned weight loss, worsening ability to walk, and needing more help with daily activities. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
6.3
Score · lower is better
↑ 10% · CA 5.7This facility: 6.3, 10% above the CA average of 5.7 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of three long-stay measures: needing more help with daily activities, worsening ability to walk, and loss of bowel or bladder control. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
15.6
Score · lower is better
↑ 64% · CA 9.5This facility: 15.6, 64% above the CA average of 9.5 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.11 long-stay measures: 5 better, 4 worse, 2 near CA average
3 short-stay measures: 1 better, 2 near CA average
Long-stay residents
People who live at the home · 11 measures
Daily care & independence
Needed more help with daily activities
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
11.5%
↑ 13% · CA 10.2This facility: 11.5, 13% above the CA average of 10.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
11.5%
↑ 13% · CA 10.2This facility: 11.5, 13% above the CA average of 10.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Walking ability worsened
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
14.5%
↑ 63% · CA 8.9This facility: 14.5, 63% above the CA average of 8.9 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
14.5%
↑ 63% · CA 8.9This facility: 14.5, 63% above the CA average of 8.9 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Bowel or bladder incontinence (low-risk residents)
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
20.8%
↑ 113% · CA 9.8This facility: 20.8, 113% above the CA average of 9.8 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
20.8%
↑ 113% · CA 9.8This facility: 20.8, 113% above the CA average of 9.8 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Safety & clinical stability
Urinary tract infection
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
0.0%
↓ 100% · CA 1.2This facility: 0.0, 100% below the CA average of 1.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
0.0%
↓ 100% · CA 1.2This facility: 0.0, 100% below the CA average of 1.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Falls with major injury
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
2.5%
↑ 57% · CA 1.6This facility: 2.5, 57% above the CA average of 1.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
2.5%
↑ 57% · CA 1.6This facility: 2.5, 57% above the CA average of 1.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Pressure ulcers (high-risk residents)
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
1.3%
↓ 70% · CA 4.3This facility: 1.3, 70% below the CA average of 4.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
1.3%
↓ 70% · CA 4.3This facility: 1.3, 70% below the CA average of 4.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Physical & mental health
Lost too much weight
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
1.6%
↓ 60% · CA 4.1This facility: 1.6, 60% below the CA average of 4.1 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
1.6%
↓ 60% · CA 4.1This facility: 1.6, 60% below the CA average of 4.1 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Depressive symptoms
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
0.0%
↓ 100% · CA 7.6This facility: 0.0, 100% below the CA average of 7.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
0.0%
↓ 100% · CA 7.6This facility: 0.0, 100% below the CA average of 7.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Antipsychotic use
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
6.8%
↓ 45% · CA 12.3This facility: 6.8, 45% below the CA average of 12.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
6.8%
↓ 45% · CA 12.3This facility: 6.8, 45% below the CA average of 12.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Preventive care
Pneumococcal vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
98.7%
≈ 0% · CA 98.7This facility: 98.7, level with the CA average of 98.7 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
98.7%
≈ 0% · CA 98.7This facility: 98.7, level with the CA average of 98.7 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
95.2%
↓ 3% · CA 97.9This facility: 95.2, 3% below the CA average of 97.9 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
95.2%
↓ 3% · CA 97.9This facility: 95.2, 3% below the CA average of 97.9 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Short-stay residents
Rehab and recovery after a hospital stay · 3 measures
Physical & mental health
New antipsychotic medication
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.9%
↓ 34% · CA 1.3This facility: 0.9, 34% below the CA average of 1.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.9%
↓ 34% · CA 1.3This facility: 0.9, 34% below the CA average of 1.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Preventive care
Pneumococcal vaccine
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
93.4%
↓ 1% · CA 94.6This facility: 93.4, 1% below the CA average of 94.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
93.4%
↓ 1% · CA 94.6This facility: 93.4, 1% below the CA average of 94.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
90.1%
↓ 3% · CA 93.1This facility: 90.1, 3% below the CA average of 93.1 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
90.1%
↓ 3% · CA 93.1This facility: 90.1, 3% below the CA average of 93.1 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Arrows show whether a figure is above or below the average. Green is better for residents, red is worse, and yellow means within 5% of the average. The line on each bar marks the average.
Quality measures are calculated by CMS from Minimum Data Set (MDS) resident assessments and Medicare claims.
Money and staffing.
The Sequoias Portola Valley’s finances from its CMS cost report for the fiscal year ending December 2024, compared with 289 California nursing homes that filed a recent report. Includes all financial data for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
FY Dec 2024
Is it financially stable?
Losing money on care, and more than last year
−372.7% operating margin
−37.9 pts vs prior year
An operating loss in 7 of the last 8 reported years. Other income ($27.8M) trims the net loss to −$1.8M. Watch for cost-cutting that reaches staffing.
Does it invest in staff?
Spends more on payroll than most California homes
111.8% payroll share of revenue
CA average 61.6%Rank #16 / 289Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 16th out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Payroll rose $0.7M while revenue rose $0.4M. Check hours per resident in the staffing section to confirm it reaches the floor.
FY 2024 scorecard
Each row shows the FY 2024 figure, the change since the prior report, the trend, and how it compares with California homes.
Revenue & profit
Losing money on care
| Metric | FY 2024 | vs prior year | Trend 2017 → 2024Trend | CA median | Compared with CA homesRank in CA | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue What the home earns from resident care, after discounts and bad debt. | $7.9M | +$0.4M | Trend 20172024 | CA median $15.3M | Rank in CA Rank #263 / 289Net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 263rd out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for net patient revenue. Shows this facility's net patient revenue compared to the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher revenue generally means more resources for staffing and capital — read alongside Payroll %. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 9% of homes | Below CA median Higher net patient revenue than 9% of CA homes that filed a recent report. Revenue mostly follows how big a home is. |
| Operating expenses Everything it costs to run the home: staff, supplies, rent, admin. | $37.5M | +$5.0M | Trend 20172024 | CA median $16.0M | Rank in CA Rank #15 / 289Operating expenses — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 15th out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for operating expenses. Shows everything it cost to run the home — staff, supplies, rent, admin — compared with other California homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Expenses in dollars mostly follow how big a home is, so this compares size, not efficiency; read it next to operating margin. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 95% of homes | Exceeds revenue Operating expenses are higher than net patient revenue, so resident care runs at a loss. |
| Net patient income Revenue minus operating expenses. Negative means care loses money. | −$29.6M | −$4.5M | Trend 20172024 | CA median $0.5M | Rank in CA Rank #285 / 289Net patient income — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 285th out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for net patient income. Shows net patient revenue minus operating expenses, compared with other California homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Homes that lost money on care are in the pool too, so a rank in the bottom half usually means a loss. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 1% of homes | Loss, widening Resident care lost money this year, more than in the prior report. |
| Operating margin Net patient income as a share of revenue. The clearest health signal. | −372.7% | −37.9 pts | Trend 20172024 | CA median 3.3% | Rank in CA Rank #282 / 289Operating margin — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 282nd out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for operating margin. Shows net patient income as a share of net patient revenue, compared with other California homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Unlike the dollar figures it does not follow size, so it is the fairest comparison of financial health between a small home and a large one. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 2% of homes | Loss A negative margin means resident care costs more than it earns. |
| Other income Money not from resident care: investments, grants, services. | $27.8M | — | Trend — | CA median $0.1M | Rank in CA Rank #9 / 283Other income — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 9th out of 283 nursing homes we track in California for other income. Shows income from outside resident care — investments, grants, rentals, services — compared with other California homes reporting a recent fiscal year. It is not part of net patient revenue; a high rank here can offset a loss on care. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 97% of homes | Offsets part of the loss Income from outside resident care covers part of the loss on care. |
| Net income The bottom line after other income. | −$1.8M | −$2.4M | Trend — | CA median $1.1M | Rank in CA Rank #264 / 289Net income — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 264th out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for net income. Shows the bottom line after other income, compared with other California homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Homes with a net loss are in the pool too, so a rank in the bottom half usually means a loss. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 9% of homes | Loss The bottom line is below zero even after other income. |
Staffing spend
Spends more of revenue on staff than most California homes
| Metric | FY 2024 | vs prior year | Trend 2017 → 2024Trend | CA median | Compared with CA homesRank in CA | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Payroll costs Salaries and wage-related benefits, not counting contract labor. | $8.9M | +$0.7M | Trend 20172024 | CA median $8.8M | Rank in CA Rank #141 / 289Payroll costs — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 141st out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for payroll costs. Shows total staff payroll — salaries plus wage-related benefits — benchmarked to the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher payroll relative to peers often signals better staffing and less reliance on contract labor. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 51% of homes | Above CA median Higher payroll than 51% of CA homes. Payroll in dollars mostly follows how big a home is, so this compares size, not staffing levels. |
| Payroll share of revenue Payroll divided by revenue. Higher usually means more staff per resident. | 111.8% | +2.1 pts | Trend 20172024 | CA median 53.8% | Rank in CA Rank #16 / 289Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 16th out of 289 nursing homes we track in California for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 95% of homes | 50.2 pts over CA average The CA average is 61.6% of revenue. Within 3 points of it reads as near the average. |
Charts, 2017–2024 2 charts · CA benchmark drawn as a dashed line
Revenue, expenses and income
What the home earned from resident care (net patient revenue), what it cost to run (operating expenses) and the difference between the two (net patient income), for each fiscal year it filed a CMS cost report.
USD, millions
Net patient revenue Operating expenses Net patient income
Where revenue goes
Both lines are a share of net patient revenue. Payroll share is what goes to salaries and wage-related benefits; operating margin is what is left after every operating cost (below 0%, resident care lost money). The dashed line is the California payroll average.
% of net patient revenue
Payroll share Operating margin CA payroll average
Year-by-year data, 2017–2024 every reported year · latest first, scroll sideways
| Metric | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue | $25.3M | $27.8M | $28.6M | $28.2M | $29.7M | $31.0M | $7.5M | $7.9M |
| Operating expenses | $27.4M | $28.6M | $28.9M | $30.9M | $29.8M | $29.7M | $32.6M | $37.5M |
| Net patient income | −$2.1M | −$0.8M | −$0.3M | −$2.6M | −$0.1M | $1.2M | −$25.1M | −$29.6M |
| Operating margin | −8.1% | −2.9% | −1.2% | −9.4% | −0.5% | 3.9% | −334.8% | −372.7% |
| Net income | −$0.1M | $0.9M | $1.0M | $0.2M | $0.4M | $1.7M | $0.7M | −$1.8M |
| Payroll costs | $12.7M | $13.2M | $13.7M | $14.9M | $12.6M | $13.8M | $8.2M | $8.9M |
| Payroll share of revenue | 49.9% | 47.6% | 48.0% | 52.8% | 42.6% | 44.5% | 109.7% | 111.8% |
| Beds | 43 | 43 | 86 | 285 | 285 | 87 | 86 | 86 |
| Gross revenue | $25.2M | $27.6M | $28.6M | $28.5M | $29.6M | $32.2M | $7.3M | $7.7M |
| Salaries | $9.3M | $10.0M | $10.5M | $11.2M | $10.8M | $12.5M | $6.7M | $7.3M |
| Wage-related costs | $3.4M | $3.3M | $3.2M | $3.8M | $1.9M | $1.3M | $1.5M | $1.6M |
| Contract labor | $0.8M | — | $1.0M | $1.0M | $0.8M | $0.8M | $1.0M | $0.9M |
| Other operating costs | $14.7M | $15.4M | $15.2M | $16.0M | $17.2M | $16.0M | $24.4M | $28.7M |
| Net patient revenue per day | $2,110 | $246 | $1,158 | $221 | $1,527 | $1,396 | $335 | $328 |
| Cost per day | $2,281 | $253 | $1,172 | $242 | $1,534 | $1,341 | $1,455 | $1,550 |
| Average length of stay | 61.6 days | 41.2 days | 42.9 days | 90.4 days | 39.7 days | 62.7 days | 61.7 days | 75.7 days |
Showing 2024–2022 · scroll sideways for 5 earlier years
Earlier and partial years are in the download. Download CSV
Who this home usually serves
Residents split by who pays for their care: Medicare, Medicaid, or private pay and other sources.
Over a year: CMS SNF Cost Report, FY2024
Arriving
145 admissions · FY2024
Residents admitted during the year.
Medicare
102 · 70%
Medicaid
0 · 0%
Private pay & other
43 · 30%
Leaving
140 discharges · FY2024
Residents discharged during the year.
Medicare
86 · 61%
Medicaid
0 · 0%
Private pay & other
54 · 39%
Mostly short-term rehab stays
Most residents typically stay for a few weeks or months before returning home or moving on.
Places of interest near The Sequoias Portola Valley
1.3 miles from city center
Estimated distance in miles from Portola Valley's city center to The Sequoias Portola Valley's address, calculated via Google Maps.
Calculate Travel Distance to The Sequoias Portola Valley
Add your location
Compare Nursing Homes around the area
Info below is compiled from CMS reports & the CA Dept. of Social Services (CDSS), senior community websites & trusted data sources such as Walk Score & BBB.
Communities are listed from highest-ranked to lowest-ranked based on our methodology.
The facility name. Click to view the full profile page on Assisted Living Magazine, including photos, services, and contact info.
|
CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that regulates nursing homes) Overall 5-star rating — a composite of Health Inspection, Staffing, and Quality Measures scores. 5 stars = top 10% nationally. 1 star = bottom 10%. The single most important number to start with when comparing facilities.
|
Care Types in This Table
AL (Assisted Living):
Housing with help for daily activities like bathing, dressing, and medication, without 24-hour skilled nursing.
NH (Nursing Home):
24/7 skilled nursing care for residents with complex, ongoing medical needs.
SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility):
Round-the-clock nursing care, often for recovery after surgery, injury, or illness.
MC (Memory Care):
Secured, specialized care for people living with Alzheimer's or dementia.
RC (Respite Care):
Short-term temporary care that gives family caregivers a break.
IL (Independent Living):
Community living with dining, activities, and transportation for active seniors who need little personal care.
HOS (Hospice Care):
Comfort-focused care for those with a terminal illness, prioritizing quality of life over treatment.
PC (Palliative Care):
Comfort-focused care for serious illness at any stage, including alongside curative treatment.
CCRC (Continuing Care Retirement Community):
A campus with multiple care levels so residents can age in place without moving.
|
Neighborhood or city area where the facility is located. Proximity to family, hospitals, and green space matters for both quality of life and ease of visitation. Consider drive time and transit access when evaluating location.
|
Licensed bed capacity. Larger facilities (300+ beds) often have more specialized programs but can feel institutional. Smaller homes (under 150 beds) tend to deliver more personalized care. Compare with Avg Res/Day to understand how full the facility typically runs.
|
A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. This is a proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade. It is not a government rating. A dash means we have no inspection data for that facility.
|
Percentage of licensed beds filled on an average day. Color indicates financial health: green (90%+) = operationally strong, typically profitable. Amber (80–89%) = stable but leaving revenue on the table. Orange (70–79%) = financial strain likely, may struggle with fixed costs. Red (<70%) = significant distress, closure or ownership change risk increases sharply.
|
This facility's occupancy rate compared to the statewide average for similar facilities. A positive number means above-average demand. Facilities running 5%+ above the state average are typically the most sought-after in their market — a strong proxy for reputation.
|
CMS-adjusted total nurse hours per resident per day (RN + LPN + CNA combined). The national average is approximately 3.5 hrs. Higher is better — more direct care time per resident. Below 3.0 is a red flag. CMS weights RN hours more heavily because RNs handle complex clinical decisions that CNAs cannot.
|
CMS Health Inspection star rating (1–5 stars), based on the 3 most recent annual state surveys plus any complaint investigations. This is the hardest rating to manipulate — it reflects real surveyor findings on-site. 5 stars = fewest deficiencies found. 1 star = most. It carries the heaviest weight in the Overall CMS rating.
|
CMS Staffing star rating (1–5 stars), based on daily nurse staffing hours submitted to CMS via verified payroll data. Compares RN, LPN, and CNA coverage relative to resident acuity level. 5 stars = well above expected staffing. Weekend staffing is evaluated separately, as that's where many facilities quietly reduce coverage.
|
CMS Quality Measures star rating (1–5 stars), based on 15 clinical outcome metrics including fall rates, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic drug use, and hospital readmissions. Captures actual resident health outcomes, not just compliance. High QM combined with low Health Inspection scores can indicate a facility with strong care but weak documentation practices.
|
Registered Nurse hours per resident/day compared to the statewide average. RNs are the highest-skilled nursing staff — they assess residents, manage medications, and respond to emergencies. A value of +50% means RN coverage is 50% above the state norm. Negative values are a concern for residents with complex or acute medical needs.
|
Total nursing staff hours (RN + LPN + CNA combined) per resident/day vs. the statewide average. A broader measure than RN vs State — it captures the entire care team. A facility can have high total staffing but low RN hours, meaning more aides and fewer nurses. Read both columns together for the full picture.
|
Total dollar amount of federal monetary fines (civil money penalties) issued by CMS in the past 3 years. Fines are only levied for serious violations — typically actual harm to residents, repeated uncorrected deficiencies, or systemic non-compliance. Even a single fine is noteworthy. Multiple fines strongly suggest a pattern, not isolated incidents.
|
Total health deficiency citations from the most recent standard inspection cycle. Minor citations (scope A–C) are common and often administrative in nature. Higher counts aren't always disqualifying, but should be read alongside Severe Citations to understand actual harm levels. Under 10 is strong for a large facility; 30+ warrants a closer look.
|
Average deficiency citations per CMS inspection (survey) in the reporting window — total citations divided by the number of inspections. Lower is better; compare alongside total Citations and Severe Citations for context.
|
Citations at CMS scope/severity level G or higher — G–I means actual harm occurred; J–L means residents were placed in immediate jeopardy. (D–F is potential for harm only). Examples include unaddressed falls, medication errors causing injury, neglect, or abuse.
|
Average number of residents in the building on any given day, derived from annual census data. Reflects true operating scale — a 400-bed facility running 200 residents/day operates very differently from one at 390. Higher resident counts generally mean more funded staffing hours.
|
Better Business Bureau rating (A+ to F). Reflects complaint history, business transparency, and how family disputes were resolved. A+ means no significant unresolved complaints. A blank (—) means the facility isn't BBB-accredited, which is common for healthcare providers and not necessarily a negative signal.
|
Walk Score® (0–100). Measures walkability of the surrounding area. 90–100 = Walker's Paradise. 70–89 = Very Walkable. 50–69 = Somewhat Walkable. Below 50 = Car-Dependent. Higher scores benefit family visitors, resident outings, and staff commuting.
|
The licensed owner or operator of record filed with CMS — the individual or organization legally accountable for the facility. Searching the operator name across other facilities can reveal chain or multi-site ownership, which matters: chain-operated homes tend to have more variable quality outcomes than independently run facilities.
|
What the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts — not gross billings. Taken from the latest complete annual cost report, so it is comparable across homes reporting the same period. Revenue alone doesn't indicate care quality, but it funds staffing and capital reinvestment. Pair with Payroll %. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Staff salaries plus wage-related benefits from the latest complete annual cost report. Contract and agency labour is counted separately, under other operating costs, so a home leaning on agency staff can show a low figure here. Payroll is the cost most directly tied to care quality — compare with Payroll % for full context. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Payroll as a share of NET PATIENT REVENUE (not gross revenue). Both figures come from the same cost-report year. A higher figure means more of each revenue dollar goes to staff pay. Read with the Staffing star rating to judge whether spend translates into coverage — and note that homes whose patient revenue covers only part of their operation can read implausibly high. The California average is: 61.6% Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
CMS Certification Number: the unique federal identifier for this skilled nursing provider.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canterbury Woods | NH AL IL SNF | Pacific Grove | 214
Facility
214
CA AVG
178
Rank
#74 / 344 | A- |
72.6%
Facility
72.6%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#235 / 302 | -12% | 5.93
Facility
5.93
CA AVG
4.36
Rank
#8 / 291 | +6% | +36% | $0
Facility
$0
CA AVG
$60.0k
Rank
#1 / 296 | 26
Facility
26
CA AVG
49.7
Rank
#77 / 294 | 6.5
Facility
6.5
CA AVG
4.8
Rank
#250 / 294 | - | 138 | A+ |
81
Facility
81
CA AVG
60
Rank
#64 / 343 | Front Porch Communities And Services | $3.6MFiscal year ending 03/2025
Facility
$3.6MFiscal year ending 03/2025
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#288 / 289 | $6.6MFiscal year ending 03/2025
Facility
$6.6MFiscal year ending 03/2025
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#213 / 289 | 183.7%Fiscal year ending 03/2025
Facility
183.7%Fiscal year ending 03/2025
CA AVG
61.6%
Rank
#5 / 289 | 055303 | ||||
| The Sequoias Portola Valley | NH AL CCRC HOS MC RC SNF | Portola Valley | 371
Facility
371
CA AVG
178
Rank
#39 / 344 | B- |
79.3%
Facility
79.3%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#210 / 302 | -4% | 4.93
Facility
4.93
CA AVG
4.36
Rank
#50 / 291 | -51% | +13% | $12.7k
Facility
$12.7k
CA AVG
$60.0k
Rank
#211 / 296 | 20
Facility
20
CA AVG
49.7
Rank
#34 / 294 | 6.7
Facility
6.7
CA AVG
4.8
Rank
#256 / 294 | - | 260 | - |
12
Facility
12
CA AVG
60
Rank
#324 / 343 | Sequoia Living, Inc | $7.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$7.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#263 / 289 | $8.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$8.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#141 / 289 | 111.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
111.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.6%
Rank
#16 / 289 | 055466 | ||||
| Windsor Skyline Care Center | NH HOS RC SNF | Salinas (Laurel West) | 80
Facility
80
CA AVG
178
Rank
#264 / 344 | C- |
87.8%
Facility
87.8%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#154 / 302 | +7% | 4.44
Facility
4.44
CA AVG
4.36
Rank
#106 / 291 | -51% | +2% | $63.9k
Facility
$63.9k
CA AVG
$60.0k
Rank
#262 / 296 | 39
Facility
39
CA AVG
49.7
Rank
#143 / 294 | 6.5
Facility
6.5
CA AVG
4.8
Rank
#250 / 294 | 1 | 70 | A+ |
63
Facility
63
CA AVG
60
Rank
#174 / 343 | - | $11.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$11.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#211 / 289 | $5.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$5.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#249 / 289 | 46.4%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
46.4%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.6%
Rank
#244 / 289 | 055871 | ||||
| Brookside Rehabilitation Center | NH HOS PC RC SNF | Redlands | 97
Facility
97
CA AVG
178
Rank
#236 / 344 | B+ |
85.8%
Facility
85.8%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#169 / 302 | +4% | 4.64
Facility
4.64
CA AVG
4.36
Rank
#83 / 291 | +3% | +6% | $0
Facility
$0
CA AVG
$60.0k
Rank
#1 / 296 | 35
Facility
35
CA AVG
49.7
Rank
#109 / 294 | 4.4
Facility
4.4
CA AVG
4.8
Rank
#137 / 294 | - | 83 | A+ | - | Michelle Mora | $15.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$15.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#146 / 289 | $8.5MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$8.5MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#152 / 289 | 56.3%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
56.3%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.6%
Rank
#113 / 289 | 056372 | ||||
| Westgate Gardens Care Center | NH HOS SNF | Visalia | 140
Facility
140
CA AVG
178
Rank
#146 / 344 | B- |
95.7%
Facility
95.7%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#29 / 302 | +16% | 3.69
Facility
3.69
CA AVG
4.36
Rank
#220 / 291 | -51% | -15% | $10.3k
Facility
$10.3k
CA AVG
$60.0k
Rank
#207 / 296 | 51
Facility
51
CA AVG
49.7
Rank
#209 / 294 | 2.3
Facility
2.3
CA AVG
4.8
Rank
#18 / 294 | 1 | 134 | - |
36
Facility
36
CA AVG
60
Rank
#280 / 343 | Jonathan Walker | $22.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$22.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#70 / 289 | $12.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$12.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#70 / 289 | 54.6%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
54.6%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.6%
Rank
#133 / 289 | 555208 |
Rank badges are statewide and care-type specific: each nursing home is ranked against every other CA nursing home we track that reports that metric, not just the 5 on this page. See how we rank facilities
Know before you visit
Frequently Asked Questions about The Sequoias Portola Valley
Quick answers from public records and the community's own listing.01 Who is the owner of The Sequoias Portola Valley?
The Sequoias Portola Valley is legally operated by Sequoia Living, Inc., and administered by Suzanne Wasley-Fairley.
02 Is The Sequoias Portola Valley in a walkable area?
The Sequoias Portola Valley has a walk score of 12. Car-dependent. Most errands require a car, with limited nearby walkable options.
03 What is the license number of The Sequoias Portola Valley?
The Sequoias Portola Valley's license number is 410500567.
04 What is the occupancy rate at The Sequoias Portola Valley?
The Sequoias Portola Valley's occupancy is 79.3%.
05 How long has The Sequoias Portola Valley been in business?
The Sequoias Portola Valley has been operating for approximately 41 years, based on available licensing and registration records.
06 Are pets allowed at The Sequoias Portola Valley?
Yes, The Sequoias Portola Valley allows residents to bring their pets.
07 Who is the administrator of The Sequoias Portola Valley?
Suzanne Wasley-Fairley is the administrator of The Sequoias Portola Valley.
Updated on
