San Leandro Healthcare Center

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

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.

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.

45.4% 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 150 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 71.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 69 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.34 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 57% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 62 beds and averages 54.1 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.14 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.69 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 3.77 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.29 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

28 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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 one of three sample selected residents (Resident 1) was treated with respect and dignity, when the facility's staff talked to Resident 1 disrespectfully on two separate occasions as a reaction towards Resident 1's difficult behaviors towards direct care staff. This deficient practice resulted in Resident 1 feeling bad, disrespected and threatened.Findings: During a review of Resident 1's admission Record, the record indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in October 2021. During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment to plan and guide care) assessment dated [DATE], Section C - Cognitive Patterns indicated Resident 1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, screening tool used by healthcare professionals to evaluate a person's memory, attention, and orientation) score was 15 of 15 (cognitive response and short-term memory are entirely intact). During an interview on 6/8/26 at 10:08 am., with Resident…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-26 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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 interview and record review, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1), the facility failed to ensure Resident 1 was treated with respect and dignity when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 1 loudly argued with Resident 1.This failure had resulted in Resident 1's emotional distress. During a review of Resident 1's admission Record (AR) dated 11/18/25, the AR indicated Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in August 2025 with diagnoses that included major depressive disorder (a mental health condition causing persistent sadness, hopelessness, and loss of interest in activities, significantly impacting daily life) and post-traumatic stress disorder (a mental health condition that can develop after experiencing or witnessing a traumatic event, such as combat, assault, or a natural disaster).During a review of Resident 1's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) assessment dated [DATE], the MDS indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, a scoring system used to…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-26 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
  Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
  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 interview and record review, for one of two sampled residents (Resident 2), the facility failed to ensure Resident 2 was afforded the right to participate in the care planning process when care conference meeting was not scheduled despite repeated requests from Resident 2's representative.This failure had the potential to result in Resident 2 being uninformed about treatment objectives and care plan.During a review of Resident 2's admission Record (AR), the AR indicated Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in March 2025 with diagnoses that included cognitive communication deficit (a difficulty with communication caused by impairments in cognitive functions like memory, attention, and problem-solving, rather than by problems with speech or language), age-related cognitive decline (a natural slowdown in thinking and memory that occurs with aging), and epilepsy (a brain disorder characterized by recurrent seizures, which are temporary disruptions in brain activity). The AR also indicated Resident…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-11-07 · tag F0847 — pattern
  Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
  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 verify that residents understood binding arbitration agreements (a formal method of dispute resolution where a third party makes a decision instead of the dispute going to court) and/or that they were aware they could rescind the agreement within 30 days for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 18, Resident 13, and Resident 49). This failure had the potential for residents to enter into an agreement without understanding their rights. Findings: During a review of the arbitration agreement made between the facility and three randomly selected residents (Resident 18, Resident 13, and Resident 49), the arbitration agreements included three boxes stating prior to signing this agreement the resident reviewed the voluntary arbitration program guide, the resident received a copy of this agreement after it's execution, and the resident is aware that he/she may rescind the agreement in writing at any time within thirty (30) days of the date of its…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-11-07 · tag F0848 — pattern
  Provide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
  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 provide a binding arbitration agreement (a formal method of dispute resolution where a third party makes a decision instead of the dispute going to court) that met the regulations. This failure had the potential for residents to enter into an agreement that did not protect their rights. Findings: During a review of the arbitration agreement made between the facility and three randomly selected residents (Resident 18, Resident 13, and Resident 49), the arbitration agreement for all three residents did not provide for the selection of a neutral arbitrator agreed upon by both parties and/or provide for the selection of a venue that is convenient to both parties. During a concurrent interview and record review on 11/6/24 at 1:55 p.m. with Administrator (ADM), Resident 49's arbitration agreement, dated 9/28/24, Resident 18's arbitration agreement, dated 9/24/24, and Resident 13's arbitration agreement, dated 8/7/24, were reviewed. ADM stated the documents do not have a section that provides for the selection of a…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  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 failed to provide clean and comfortable home like environment for 4 residents residing in two of 25 rooms in the facility when the shared bathroom in these 2 rooms had a towel on the floor and the toilet seat was dirty with brown particles on the toilet seat. This failure placed all 4 residents residing in these rooms at increased risk for healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), which could result in longer recovery times, additional medical treatments, and even hospitalizations and negatively impact the residents' overall well-being and quality of life. Findings: During a concurrent observation and interview on 11/4/24 at 10:14 a.m. with the Social Worker (SW), the shared bathroom between room [ROOM NUMBER] and 21 was observed. A towel was on the floor and the toilet seat was dirty with brown particles on the toilet seat. SW confirmed the toilet seat was not clean, with brown particles and towel on the floor, and stated the bathroom should always kept clean to…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete and transmit Discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool to guide patient care) for one of one sampled resident (Resident 11) to Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for over 120 days. This failure resulted in reflecting Resident 11 as an active resident while he was already discharged from the facility. Findings: During a review of Resident 11's admission Record (a record with residents' basic information) printed on 11/6/24, the record indicated Resident 11 was admitted to the facility in June 2024. During a concurrent interview and record review on 11/6/24 at 12:53 p.m. with the MDS Coordinator (MDSC), Resident 11's progress notes dated 7/12/24 was reviewed. The MDSC stated Resident 11 was discharged from the facility on 7/12/24. MDSC stated facility was required to complete a Discharge MDS Assessment upon residents' discharge from the facility. The MDSC stated, Resident 11's discharge MDS was not completed and/or transmitted to CMS till date. A review of the CMS guide,Resident Assessment…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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 accurately assess and code active diagnosis for one of 21 sampled residents (Resident 31) in the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, a resident assessment instrument used to identify resident care problems to be addressed in an individualized care plan) assessment when Resident 31's admission MDS assessment was inaccurately coded with a Yes for diagnoses of Pneumonia (an infection of one or both lungs caused by bacteria, viruses or fungi causing difficulty in breathing, cough, fever, and chills) and Septicemia (a life-threatening blood infection) during the look back period). During this period, Resident 31 did not have active Pneumonia and Septicemia. This failure resulted in an outdated and inaccurate reflection of Resident 31's medical/clinical status. Findings: During a review of Resident 31's admission Record (a record with residents' basic information) printed on 11/6/24, the record indicated Resident 31 was admitted to the facility in…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  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 interview and record review, for one of five sampled residents (Resident 17) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive-centered ADL plan of care. This failure had the potential to result in delayed provision of care. Findings: During a review of Resident 17's admission Record, the admission Record indicated, Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in February 2024 with diagnoses that included morbid obesity, acute and chronic respiratory failure (acute or chronic impairment of gas exchange between the lungs and the blood), chronic pain syndrome, paraplegia (the loss of muscle function in the lower part of the body including both legs), and pain in left knee. During a review of Resident 17's Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool used to direct resident care) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident 17 had impairment on both lower extremities and totally dependent on staff for toileting hygiene (ability to maintain perineal hygiene, adjust…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and record review the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADL) for one of 17 sample selected residents (Resident 157), when Resident 157 was observed with long, broken finger nails and black particles under nails. This failure placed Resident 157 at risk for skin damage and infection and also affect his comfort and dignity, contributing to a lower quality of life and possible emotional distress. Findings: A review of Resident 157's admission Record indicated, Resident 157 was admitted to the facility with multiple disease including Cerebral Palsy (a group of neurological disorders that affect a person's ability to move, balance, and maintain posture). During an observation on 11/4/24 at 12:00 p.m. inside Resident 157's room, Resident 157 was observed with long finger nails, with broken and black particles under the nails. During an interview on 11/4/24 at 2:30 p.m. with Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) 2, CNA 2 confirmed the long , broken and black particles under Resident 157's finger nails and stated the licensed nurses did not ask him to cut…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRATAP PODDATOORI — 6 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

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 $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% 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