How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Amaya Springs Health Care Center
8625 Lamar Street, Spring Valley, CA 91977 (opens Google Maps) · San Diego County · (619) 461-3222· 50 certified beds · avg 47 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1974 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: PACIFIC HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS (15 facilities, chain avg rating 1.9★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 29, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.32
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint F-0655
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint F-0677
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. F-0761
View all 33 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint · F-0655 |
| Jun 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jan 29, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Jan 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730 |
| Jan 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough staff with the right skills to meet the mental and behavioral health needs of its residents, such as those living with dementia or depression. · F-0741 |
| Jan 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Jan 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Apr 15, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Jan 28, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Oct 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882 |
| Jun 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint · F-0660 |
| Apr 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Dec 18, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Aug 22, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. · F-0576 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · F-0661 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Feb 18, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have firmly secured handrails on both sides of its hallways. · F-0924 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 5).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 9 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 7 | 0 | E |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.32
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.35
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.95
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.32 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 5% in California; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.35 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 20% in California; bottom 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.95 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 3% in California; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.36 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 47% in California; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 36.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.29, RN 0.45, weekend 3.81.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.29 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Amaya Springs Health Care Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Katz Healthcare Investment Partnership | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 5% | 11/10/2006 |
| Pacific Healthcare Holdings, INC. | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 80% | 11/10/2006 |
| Bruce, Trevor | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Bruce, Trevor | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/2023 |
| Eretz Be Properties LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/04/2008 |
| Jalil, Anmar | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/27/2021 |
| Jalil, Anmar | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/27/2021 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/10/2006 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/10/2006 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/10/2006 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2006 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/06/2025 |
All 12 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Pacific Healthcare Holdings — 15 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Brighton Place San Diego — San Diego, CA · overall 1/5
- Brighton Place Spring Valley — Spring Valley, CA · overall 2/5
- California Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — Palm Springs, CA · overall 1/5
- Centinela Skilled Nursing & Wellness Centre West — Inglewood, CA · overall 5/5
- Highland Park Skilled Nursing and Wellness Center — Los Angeles, CA · overall 2/5
- Lakewood Healthcare Center — Downey, CA · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Las Flores Convalescent Hospital — Gardena, CA · overall 1/5
- Lighthouse Healthcare Center — Los Angeles, CA · overall 1/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 14 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How often do you evaluate your nurse aides and what ongoing training do they receive?"
- "What training does your staff have in dementia and behavioral health, and how many residents with these needs do you serve?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 61 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lemon Grove Care and Rehabilitation Center | 0.8 mi | Lemon Grove, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Brighton Place Spring Valley | 1.1 mi | Spring Valley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bella Vista Health Center | 1.2 mi | Lemon Grove, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| La Mesa Healthcare Center | 1.8 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Community Care Center | 2.1 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Mount Miguel Covenant Village | 2.5 mi | Spring Valley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Parkway Hills Nursing & Rehabilitation | 2.7 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Arbor Hills Nursing Center | 2.7 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Grossmont Hospital D/P SNF | 2.8 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Grossmont Gardens Healthcare Center | 2.8 mi | La Mesa, CA | —/5 | ||
| Grossmont Post Acute Care | 3.0 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Country Manor la Mesa Healthcare Center | 3.3 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in San Diego, CA — 83 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Arroyo Vista Nursing Center — San Diego, CA · overall 5/5
- Aviara Healthcare Center — Encinitas, CA · overall 4/5
- Balboa Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — San Diego, CA · overall 4/5
- Bayshire Carlsbad — Carlsbad, CA · overall 4/5
- Bayshire Torrey Pines Post-Acute — San Diego, CA · overall 5/5
- Boulder Creek Post Acute — Poway, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 056062.