3580 Payne Avenue, San Jose, CA 95117 (opens Google Maps) · Santa Clara County · (408) 248-7100· 130 certified beds · avg 123 residents/day · certified since Mar 12, 1968 · 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: LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 9, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
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: Sep 4, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 42 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · from a complaint F-0678
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 23, 2025 | 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 23, 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 |
| Jun 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · from a complaint · F-0678 |
| Apr 15, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Dec 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. · F-0689 |
| Nov 8, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · from a complaint · F-0640 |
| Nov 8, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 8, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Sep 6, 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 |
| Aug 30, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 9, 2024 | ▲ 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Aug 9, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Jul 18, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 23, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Feb 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| Feb 22, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Feb 22, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 8, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint · F-0558 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | 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 10, 2022 | 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 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Jan 10, 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 |
| Jan 10, 2022 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost. · F-0572 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | 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 6, 2019 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 3).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 15 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 4 | 0 | D |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $20,248.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 18, 2024 | Fine | $20,248 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.30 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 38% in California; top 29% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.80 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 17% in California; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.97 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 35% in California; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.57 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 24% in California; top 26% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 57.2 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 5% in California; bottom 21% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 61.1 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 14% in California; bottom 20% 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 4.15, RN 0.77, weekend 3.83.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.15 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Creekside Post-Acute. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beardsley, Mary | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Beardsley, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Bernholz, Victoria | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Bernholz, Victoria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Carter, Melissa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Carter, Melissa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Eide Bailly LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Forbright Bank | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Frojelin, Antonette | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Frojelin, Antonette | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Links Healthcare Group LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Links Healthcare Group LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2025 |
| Links Support Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Links Support Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/27/2025 |
| Reichert, Josie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Reichert, Josie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Rodriguez, Curtis | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Rodriguez, Curtis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Rodriguez, Curtis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Romney, Gunner | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/03/2024 |
Showing 20 of 26 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 6 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Links Healthcare Group — 32 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 31 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A Grace Sub Acute & Skilled Care | 0.6 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Baywood Post Acute | 1.2 mi | Campbell, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Courtyard Care Center | 1.5 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Empress Care Center, LLC | 1.6 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★☆ | 2/5 | |
| White Blossom Care Center | 1.8 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Camden Postacute Care, INC | 2.1 mi | Campbell, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Skyline Healthcare Center - San Jose | 2.1 mi | San Jose, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| O'Connor Hospital D/P SNF | 2.1 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Westwood Post Acute | 2.2 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Win Post-Acute | 2.4 mi | Santa Clara, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Redwoods Post-Acute | 2.8 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Childrens HC Org No Ca -Pediatric Hospital D/P SNF | 2.9 mi | Campbell, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Santa Clara, CA — 50 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
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 055884.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details