CaliforniaFremont

Crestwood Manor - Fremont

4303 Stevenson Boulevard, Fremont, CA 94538 · Alameda County · 126 certified beds · avg 105 residents/day · certified since May 1, 2014

5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
6.76
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★★5/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 7, 2023 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Sep 27, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (17)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint
Apr 18, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Apr 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint
Sep 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away.
Sep 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Sep 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 29, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time.
Sep 29, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Sep 29, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Sep 7, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Oct 24, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Oct 24, 2019E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Oct 24, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Oct 24, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 4).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
201940E
202381G ▲
202550E

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)6.764.313.95top 3% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.220.610.69top 6% in California; top 9% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.973.903.50top 3% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.820.510.48top 11% in California; top 10% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)23.536.745.8top 14% in California; top 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)36.038.142.9top 48% in California; top 40% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 4.99, RN 0.90, weekend 4.41. Staffing rating: 5/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ownership Data Not Available

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Fremont Healthcare Center0.8 miFremont, CA★★★★☆3/5
Crestwood Treatment Center1.4 miFremont, CA★★★★★4/5
Country Drive Post Acute1.4 miFremont, CA★★★☆☆3/5
We Care Skilled Nursing - Fremont1.5 miFremont, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Mission Valley Post Acute1.6 miFremont, CA★★★★☆3/5
Niles Canyon Post Acute2.4 miFremont, CA★★★★★5/5
Masonic Home4.7 miUnion City, CA★★★★☆4/5
Milpitas Care Center8.7 miMilpitas, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Eden Healthcare Center8.7 miHayward, CA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Emmanuel Post Acute Care - Hayward9.0 miHayward, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Hayward Post Acute9.4 miHayward, CA★★★★☆4/5
Santa Clara Post Acute10.3 miSanta Clara, CA★★★☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Fremont →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 05A427.