Marina Garden Nursing Center
3201 Fernside Blvd., Alameda, CA 94501 · For profit - Corporation · 32 certified beds · (510) 523-2363 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (27% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- about 28% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 24.2% | 10.2% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.2% | 4.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.5% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.8% | 1.2% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 7.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 31.4% | 9.8% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 0.0% | 13.7% | 18.9% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.3% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 8.2% | 10.2% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.6% | 12.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 30.7% | 23.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.3% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.41 | 2.25 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 4.14 | 1.57 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
66.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 26 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 55% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 66.4%CMS range 48.0–83.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.6%CMS range 6.2–13.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 20.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 5.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.17 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 32 beds and averages 31.7 residents a day — about 99% occupied, or roughly 0 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.71 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.65 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.78 on weekdays — 3% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.62 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 27% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-21 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — isolatedHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was Registered Nurse (RN) coverage eight hours a day, seven days a week for five days. This failure had the potential to endanger the health and safety of residents. Findings: During a concurrent interview and record review on 11/20/2024 at 10:36 a.m. with the Administrator (ADM), Licensed Nurse Work Hours Spread Sheet, dated June 2023, was reviewed. ADM confirmed, there was no RN coverage 8 hours a day 7 days a week on 6/23/23, 6/26/23, 6/27/23, 6/28/23 and 6/29/23. During an interview on 11/20/2024, at 10:55 a.m. with the Director Of Nursing (DON), DON stated, it was important to have an RN available in the facility because, RNs are responsible for critical decision making. DON further added, RNs have a broader scope of practice like intravenous (IV- a device inserted into a vein to give fluids, medicine, or nutrients directly into the bloodstream) insertion in an emergency situation. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Staffing, Sufficient and Competent Nursing, undated, the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medication was available to administer or given according to the physician's order for one of nine sampled residents (Resident 13) when Resident 13's Jardiance (medication used to help lower blood sugar levels) was not available for administration. This deficient practice had the potential for worsening of Resident 13's clinical condition. Findings: During a medication pass observation on 11/19/24 at 7:59 a.m. with Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) 1, LVN 1 was observed preparing and administering six medications to Resident 13. These medications included one capsule of duloxetine (medication used to treat depression and anxiety), one tablet of hydrochlorothiazide (medication used to treat high blood pressure and used to reduce edema (fluid retention)), one tablet of valsartan (medication used to treat high blood pressure), one tablet of metformin (medication used to help lower blood sugar levels), one tablet of Eliquis (blood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute food in a safe and sanitary manner when: 1. There was no air gap (a gap of air between the floor and a drainpipe to prevent backflow of sewage into the equipment) for food preparation sink. 2. Pop-up toaster was not cleaned regularly and had buildup of black and brown debris inside the bottom surface. 3. Scoop was stored inside the rice grain container. 4. Open carton of powdered potatoes was not sealed. 5. Two chest freezers had crystallization (freezer burn) inside the compartment. These failures had the potential to cause food borne illnesses for 28 residents who received food from the kitchen for a facility census of 29. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/18/24 at 9:20 a.m. with the Dietary Manager (DM), DM indicated the two-compartment sink was used for both food preparation and dishwashing sink. DM stated, there was no air gap for the sink. DM further stated, it was important to have an airgap so that food being prepared in the sink does not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain and observe infection control practices when: 1. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1 and Laundry Staff (LS) 1 were wearing face masks below their nose. 2. Laundry staff 1 did not perform hand hygiene prior to putting on gloves and after removing gloves during linen handling. These failures had the potential for cross contamination and spread of infections among residents and staff at the facility. Findings: 1(a). During an observation on 11/18/24 at 10:53 a.m. in the facility hallway, CNA 1 was wearing a face mask below the nose. During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/20/24 at 10:39 a.m. with CNA 1 in the facility hallway, CNA 1 was wearing a face mask below the nose covering the mouth. CNA 1 stated the face mask should cover the nose and the lips. CNA 1 stated wearing the face mask was protection for patients, staff, and visitors from getting a respiratory infection and contamination. 1(b). During an observation on 11/20/24 at 9:06 a.m. in the facility hallway, LS 1 was wearing a face…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food under sanitary conditions when: 1. a stainless-steel pasta tong had rust on its surface. 2. the ice machine had six wet black spots inside ice compartment and white build up residue on the right corner rim inside opening. 3. the mounted can opener had rust on the blade and surrounding parts. These failures had the potential to cause food contamination and food borne illness. Findings: 1. During the initial tour of the kitchen and concurrent interview on 10/2/23 at 9:45 a.m. with the Dietary Service Supervisor (DSS), a stainless-steel rusty tong was stored in the clean kitchen utensil storage bin. The DSS stated the tong was actively being used. The DSSacknowledged the tong was rusty then disposed the tong in the trash. During an interview on 10/4/23 at 10:23 a.m. with the Registered Dietitian (RD), RD stated, there should not have been any utensils with rust in the kitchen due to risk for botulism (serious illness caused by toxin that attacks the body's nerves) toxin if rust…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-05 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow the correct serving sizes to seven Residents for a census of 32 residents (Resident 21, 10, 11, 25, 5, 30 and 2). This deficient practice resulted in residents not receiving the appropriate diet portions to meet each individual needs. Findings: During a concurrent interview and tray line observation on 10/2/23, at 11:45 a.m., with [NAME] (CK) 1, in the presence of Dietary Service Supervisor (DSS), CK 1 was observed using a number 8 scoop to trays of puree and regular texture cabbage, country fried steak, and mashed potatoes, to serve seven residents. CK 1 stated, he was aware of portion sizes but used number 8 scoop for all serving regardless of what was on the meal cards. During a concurrent interview and record review on 10/3/23, at 12:20 p.m., with DSS, showed facility's color-coded portion control chart. DSS confirmed CK 1 did not follow scoop size for residents as indicated on the chart which showed, gray scoop number 8 is a large portion scoop equivalent to 4 fl-oz (fluid ounce - unit of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-04-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement their infection prevention policy and procedures when: 1. CNA 1 did not perform hand hygiene when donning and doffing gloves. 2. CNA 2 improperly transported soiled linens. 3. RNA 1 did not perform hand hygiene when assisting multiple residents and handling food. These failures had the potential to spread infection among facility residents. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview on 4/21/21, at 9:27 a.m., with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1, CNA 1 was observed transporting Resident 22 via wheelchair into their room. CNA 1 donned gloves and assisted Resident 22 from wheelchair into bed. CNA 1 removed gloves and pushed wheelchair out of the room, into outside storage area. CNA 1 stated hand hygiene needs to be performed, Every time we touch the resident and after. CNA 1 further states, I just forgot to perform hand hygiene when assisting residents and before donning and doffing gloves. During a review of the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled, Handwashing/Hand…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-04-22 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility had 15 resident (Rt) rooms (Rooms 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17) with multiple beds that provided less than 80 square feet (sq. ft) per resident who occupied these rooms. This deficient practice had the potential to result in inadequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in each room, or for storage of the residents belongings. Findings: During an observation on 4/19/21, at 9:42 a.m., the following rooms and corresponding square footage (sq. ft) per bed were identified. Room Activity Room Size Floor Area (sq. ft. per Resident) 1 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'3x 11'4.5 69.67 sq. ft/bed 2 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'4x 12'4.5 70.13 sq. ft/bed 3 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'2x 11'5 69.45 sq. ft/bed 4 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'3x 12'5 69.84 sq. ft/bed 5 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'6x 12'3 70.44 sq. ft/bed 6 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'5x 11'6 71.40 sq. ft/bed 7 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'6x 12'2.5 70.20 sq. ft/bed 8 Rt room [ROOM NUMBER]'3x 11'5.5 70.18 sq. ft/bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-11-21 · tag F0912 — patternProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility had fifteen resident's rooms (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17) with multiple beds that provided less than 80 square feet (sq. ft) per resident who occupied these rooms. This deficient practice had the potential to result in inadequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in each room, or for storage of the residents' belongings. Findings: During an observation on 11/21/24, at 10:30 a.m., the following rooms and corresponding square footage (SQF) per bed were identified: room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 139.34 and SQF per bed is 69.67. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 140.26 and SQF per bed is 70.13. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 138.90 and SQF per bed is 69.45. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 139.68 and SQF per bed is 69.84. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 140.88 and SQF per bed is 70.44. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 142.80 and SQF per bed is 71.40.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Ccited before2023-10-05 · tag F0912 — widespreadProvide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility had fifteen resident's rooms (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17) with multiple beds that provided less than 80 square feet (sq. ft) per resident who occupied these rooms. This deficient practice had the potential to result in adequate space for the delivery of care to each of the residents in each room, or for storage of the residents' belongings. Findings: During an observation on 10/2/23, at 10:30 a.m., the following rooms and corresponding square footage (SQF) per bed were identified: room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 139.34 and SQF per bed is 69.67. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 140.26 and SQF per bed is 70.13. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 138.90 and SQF per bed is 69.45. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 139.68 and SQF per bed is 69.84. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 140.88 and SQF per bed is 70.44. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 2 beds, total SQF is 142.80 and SQF per bed is 71.40.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| LEUNG, BELINDA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2004 |
| LEUNG, KENNETH | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2004 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 28% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the California Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 555461. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-11-21, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.