Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Health inspection

CREEKSIDE POST-ACUTECMS #0558842 citations on this visit
2 citations recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

This survey cited 2 deficiencies. The full statement and the facility’s plan of correction follow, verbatim from the federal record.

055884 09/23/2025 Creekside Post-Acute 3580 Payne Avenue San Jose, CA 95117
F 0684 Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals. Level of Harm - Minimal harm or potential for actual harm **NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents received the necessary care and services for one of three residents (1) when the wound doctor's order for Resident 1's venous ulcer (open sores that occur when the veins in the legs do not push blood back up to the heart as well as they should) on his right lower lateral leg was not carried out to the treatment administration record (TAR). This failure had the potential for Resident 1's wound did not receive the treatment, became deteriorated, and delayed wound healing.Findings:Review of Resident 1's admission Record indicated he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with chronic venous hypertension (increased pressure inside the veins) with ulcer of bilateral lower extremity diagnosis.Review of Resident 1's Skin Assessment and IDT - Skin Integrity, dated 8/5/25, indicated Resident 1 received a treatment order from the wound doctor for the licensed nurse to cleanse the venous ulcer on his right lower lateral leg with normal saline (0.9 grams [g, a metric unit of mass] of salt per 100 milliliters [ml, a metric unit of volume] of solution), apply Xeroform (a sterile, non-adhering protective dressing), and cover with dry dressing and Kerlix (soft gauze roll).However, review of Resident 1's 8/2025 TAR indicated the treatment order was not recorded.During an interview with treatment nurse A (TMN A) on 8/22/25, at 3:10 p.m., she reviewed Resident 1's Wound Docs Preliminary Wound Report, dated 8/5/25, and Resident 1's 8/2025 TAR and confirmed that the wound doctor's order for Resident 1's venous ulcer on his right lower lateral leg was not carried out to the TAR. TMN A confirmed that Resident 1 still had the venous ulcer on his right lower lateral leg and stated the wound might not receive the treatment as ordered if the order was not on the TAR for the licensed nurse to follow.Review of the facility's policy, Medication and Treatment Orders, dated 7/2016, indicated . 3. Drug and biological orders must be recorded on the physician's order sheet in the resident's chart. Residents Affected - Few Page 1 of 2 055884 055884 09/23/2025 Creekside Post-Acute 3580 Payne Avenue San Jose, CA 95117
F 0880 Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program. Level of Harm - Minimal harm or potential for actual harm **NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement infection control practices when certified nursing assistant B (CNA B) walked out of Resident 2's room and in the hallway without sanitizing her hands. This failure had the potential to spread infection in the facility.Findings:Review of Resident 2's admission Record indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of Resident 2's physician order, dated 8/4/25, indicated she had an order for ice the knee at least 4 times per day for 20 minutes each time to help reduce pain and swelling.During an observation on 8/21/25, at 3:05 p.m., CNA B entered Resident 2's room, put on gloves, and helped Resident 2; then CNA B removed her gloves, walked out of Resident 2's room and in the hallway without sanitizing her hands.During a concurrent interview with CNA B, she stated Resident 2 asked her to fix the ice wrap on her knee because it was sliding down, so she pulled the ice wrap up and repositioned it for Resident 2. CNA B stated she should sanitize her hands when walking out of Resident 2's room.During an interview with the infection preventionist (IP) on 9/23/25, at 1:05 p.m., she stated the staff should sanitize their hands when walking out of the residents' rooms.Review of the facility's policy, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, dated 8/2019, indicated . 7. Use an alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 62% alcohol; or, alternatively, soap and water for the following situations: . b. Before and after direct contact with residents; . m. After removing gloves; . 9. The use of gloves does not replace hand washing/hand hygiene . Residents Affected - Few 055884 Page 2 of 2

Reading this as a family member? Your long-term care ombudsman is a free advocate for residents and families.

Back to top

Citations

2 citations recorded*CMS

What do CMS severity letters mean?

Serious (G-L). Actual harm to a resident, or immediate jeopardy. Codes G through I indicate actual harm; J through L indicate immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety.

General (A-F). No actual harm found, or harm that is minimal. The facility must still submit a Plan of Correction. Most CMS citations land here.

Each letter combines severity with scope: how many residents the deficiency affected.

  • 0684GeneralS&S Dpotential for harm

    F684 - Quality of care

    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.

  • 0880GeneralS&S Dpotential for harm

    F880 - Infection Control

    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the September 23, 2025 survey of CREEKSIDE POST-ACUTE?

This was a inspection survey of CREEKSIDE POST-ACUTE on September 23, 2025. The surveyor cited 2 deficiencies, recorded on the federal Form 2567 statement of deficiencies.

Were any deficiencies cited at CREEKSIDE POST-ACUTE on September 23, 2025?

Yes, 2 deficiencies were cited, each with a CMS Scope and Severity grade. The first was: "Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals."

What type of survey was this?

This was a inspection survey conducted by state surveyors under federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) oversight. Findings are published on CMS Care Compare.

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

Concerned about a resident’s care?Find your local ombudsman through the Eldercare Locatoror file a complaint with your state survey agency.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CMS Care Compare public records. Dataset last refreshed . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.