How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Bayberry Skilled Nursing & Healthcare Center
1800 Adobe Street, Concord, CA 94520 (opens Google Maps) · Contra Costa County · (925) 825-1300· 99 certified beds · avg 83 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1976 · 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: GENERATIONS HEALTHCARE (27 facilities, chain avg rating 4.1★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 8, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jan 8, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.74
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 8, 2026 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 8, 2026 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Feb 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. F-0689
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. F-0641
The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. F-0800
View all 23 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Jun 28, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Jun 28, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813 |
| Jun 28, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Jun 28, 2024 | 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 |
| Jun 28, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805 |
| Jun 28, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Nov 19, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Nov 19, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Nov 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Nov 19, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| Nov 19, 2021 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 11).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
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: 4.74
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.57
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.09
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) | 4.74 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 20% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.57 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 35% in California; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.09 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 28% in California; top 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.22 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 15% in California; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 35.1 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 46% in California; top 24% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 27.3 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 31% in California; top 24% in the U.S. |
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 3.79, RN 0.46, weekend 3.27.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.79 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Bayberry Skilled Nursing & Healthcare 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Life Generations Healthcare, LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/21/2017 |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/21/2017 |
| Olds, Thomas | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/21/2017 |
| Smith, Fred | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/21/2017 |
| Barrerro, Augusto | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/06/2016 |
| Barrerro, Augusto | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/06/2016 |
| Bhambra, Preet | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2025 |
| Bhambra, Preet | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2025 |
| Bmo Bank National Association | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/06/2021 |
| Bmo Bank National Association | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/06/2021 |
| Bmo Bank National Association | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/22/2025 |
| Contra Costa Re, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2017 |
| Dhaddey, Prabjot | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2022 |
| Dhaddey, Prabjot | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2022 |
| Endriga, Chona | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/30/2020 |
| Endriga, Chona | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/30/2020 |
| Fetalino, Leigh Ann | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/28/2019 |
| Fetalino, Leigh Ann | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/28/2019 |
| Harrison, Dennis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/13/2018 |
| Harrison, Dennis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/13/2018 |
Showing 20 of 36 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 16 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Generations Healthcare — 27 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.
- Bradley Court — El Cajon, CA · overall 5/5
- Canyon Oaks Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Canoga Park, CA · overall 3/5
- Castle Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — National City, CA · overall 4/5
- Cedar Crest Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Sunnyvale, CA · overall 4/5
- English Oaks Convalescent & Rehabilitation Hospita — Modesto, CA · overall 3/5
- Friendship Manor Nursing & Rehab Center — National City, CA · overall 5/5
- Gramercy Court — Sacramento, CA · overall 4/5abuse
- Heritage Park Nursing Center — Upland, CA · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 26 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 is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Can I see a sample menu, and how do you handle special diets like low-sodium or diabetic meals?"
- "Who reviews your menus, and can I see this week's menu and join my family member for a meal?"
- "Who oversees residents' therapeutic diets, and how do the doctor and dietitian work together on them?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What are your rules for bringing in my family member's favorite foods, and how are they stored?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 35% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 36 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 73 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Willow Pass Healthcare Center | 1.1 mi | Concord, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Concord Post Acute | 1.5 mi | Concord, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Diablo Valley Post Acute | 1.7 mi | Concord, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Legacy Post Acute Care | 2.9 mi | Martinez, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Pleasant Hill Post Acute | 3.2 mi | Pleasant Hill, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Stonebrook Post Acute | 3.3 mi | Concord, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Shadelands Post Acute | 3.4 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Rosewood Post Acute | 3.4 mi | Pleasant Hill, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| La Casa via Transitional Care Center | 4.5 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Tampico Healthcare Center | 4.6 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Alhambra Post Acute | 5.3 mi | Martinez, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Walnut Creek Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cent | 7.0 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Contra Costa, CA — 30 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Creekside Healthcare Center — San Pablo, CA · overall 5/5
- Danville Post-Acute Rehab — Danville, CA · overall 4/5
- Delta View Post Acute — Antioch, CA · overall 4/5
- Diamond Ridge Healthcare Center — Pittsburg, CA · overall 2/5
- Greenridge Post Acute — El Sobrante, CA · overall 5/5
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 056260.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).