How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Dept of State Hospitals - Napa D/P SNF
2100 Napa-Vallejo Highway, Napa, CA 94558 (opens Google Maps) · Napa County · (707) 253-5000· 36 certified beds · avg 23 residents/day · certified since Jun 14, 1984 · Medicaid only — not Medicare certified
Certified for Medicaid only. It cannot bill Medicare, so a short post-hospital rehabilitation stay would not be covered the usual way here. Who pays for nursing home care →
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 15, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
9.93
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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 25 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. F-0812
The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. F-0838
View all 25 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| May 15, 2026 | 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 |
| May 15, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838 |
| May 15, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| May 15, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| May 15, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| May 15, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0640 |
| May 15, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 15, 2026 | 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 |
| May 15, 2026 | 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. · F-0558 |
| May 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| May 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · from a complaint · F-0637 |
| May 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| May 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| May 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 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 |
| Sep 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · from a complaint · F-0943 |
| May 22, 2025 | 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 |
| May 22, 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. · F-0880 |
| Dec 30, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| May 16, 2024 | 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 |
| May 16, 2024 | 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 |
| May 16, 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. · F-0842 |
| Dec 18, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have an agreement with an approved laboratory to provide lab services, even though it doesn't offer lab services on site. · from a complaint · F-0772 |
| Dec 18, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not designate a physician to serve as medical director — the doctor responsible for overseeing resident care policies and coordinating medical care across the facility. · from a complaint · F-0841 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 15).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 16
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 16 | 0 | F |
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: 9.93
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 5.62
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 9.52
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) | 9.93 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 5.62 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 9.52 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 5.72 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 31.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 34% in California; top 17% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.9 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 30% in California; top 23% 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 10.32, RN 5.84, weekend 9.89.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (10.32 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Dept of State Hospitals - Napa D/P SNF. 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 →
Government - State
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
All 1 owning or managing party CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you decide you have enough staff and resources for your resident population, including nights and weekends?"
- "How does your quality improvement program work, and can you share a recent example of a problem you found and fixed?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
- "How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
- "How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
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 31% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 19 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Meadows of Napa Valley | 1.7 mi | Napa, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Napa Community Health Center | 3.5 mi | Napa, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Napa Valley Care Center | 3.8 mi | Napa, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Napa Post Acute | 3.9 mi | Napa, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Solano Post Acute | 9.8 mi | Vallejo, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Veterans Home of California - Yountville - SNF | 9.9 mi | Yountville, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Broadway Villa Post Acute | 10.3 mi | Sonoma, CA | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Sonoma Post Acute | 10.4 mi | Sonoma, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Valley of the Moon Post Acute | 10.9 mi | Sonoma, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Springs Road Healthcare | 11.5 mi | Vallejo, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Heartwood Avenue Healthcare | 11.8 mi | Vallejo, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Greenfield Care Center of Fairfield | 12.0 mi | Fairfield, CA | —/5 | SFF |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 05A357.