Driftwood Healthcare Center - Santa Cruz

675 24th Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95062 (opens Google Maps) · Santa Cruz County · (831) 475-6323· 92 certified beds · avg 85 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1969 · 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: MARINER HEALTH CARE (17 facilities, chain avg rating 3.6★)

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected Dec 12, 2025

Serious findings on record

most recent Mar 19, 2024

Fines, last 3 years

4.75

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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 · Mar 19, 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: Mar 27, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 4, 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.

Corrected: Mar 13, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 18, 2024 · F-0755 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.

Why it matters: Weak pharmacy services lead to medication mistakes, delays, and missed drug interactions that can seriously harm residents.

Corrected: Jan 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 51 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

Dec 12, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. F-0700
Dec 12, 2025E · 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
Dec 12, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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

View all 51 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
Dec 12, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700
Dec 12, 2025	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
Dec 12, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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
Dec 12, 2025	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
Dec 12, 2025	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
Dec 12, 2025	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
Aug 22, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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 · F-0609
Oct 2, 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
Jun 24, 2024	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
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · F-0745
Jun 24, 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. · F-0755
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Jun 24, 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
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814
Jun 24, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The 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. · F-0919
Jun 24, 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. · F-0921
Jun 24, 2024	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
Jun 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Jun 24, 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
Jun 24, 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. · F-0684
Jun 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Jun 24, 2024	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
Jun 24, 2024	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
Jun 24, 2024	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 24, 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 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Jun 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times. · F-0809
Jun 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · F-0909
Mar 19, 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
Mar 4, 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
Jan 18, 2024	▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint · F-0755
Oct 9, 2023	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. · from a complaint · F-0656
Oct 6, 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 19, 2022	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
Aug 19, 2022	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
Aug 19, 2022	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
Aug 19, 2022	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908
Aug 19, 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
Aug 19, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0561
Aug 19, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Aug 19, 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
Aug 19, 2022	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
Aug 19, 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
Aug 19, 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
Aug 19, 2022	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
Aug 19, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (25 → 6).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2022

2023

2024

2025

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2022	13	0	F
2023	2	0	D
2024	29	3	G ▲
2025	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)

How to file a complaint about care →

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

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

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

4.75

4.31

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.81

0.61

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

4.46

3.90

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)	4.75	4.31	3.95	top 20% in California; top 17% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.81	0.61	0.69	top 17% in California; top 27% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	4.46	3.90	3.50	top 15% in California; top 13% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.52	0.51	0.48	top 29% in California; top 30% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	46.2	36.7	45.8	bottom 22% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	50.0	38.1	42.9	bottom 29% in California; bottom 39% 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 3.98, RN 0.68, weekend 3.73.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.98 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: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Driftwood Healthcare Center - Santa Cruz. 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
Capital Funding LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	—	06/01/2015
GC Operating Company LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	99%	12/06/2011
Grancare LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	11/17/2010
Grunstein, Emily	Individual	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	02/06/2019
Mariner Health Care, INC.	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	11/17/2010
MHC Holding Company	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	11/17/2010
MHC West Holding Company	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	11/17/2010
National Senior Care, INC.	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	11/17/2010
Driftwood Santa Cruz Holding Company GP LLC	Organization	General Partnership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	08/27/2014
GC Operating Company LLC	Organization	Limited Partnership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	08/27/2014
Hadfield, Kevin	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	11/17/2025
Hadfield, Kevin	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	11/17/2025
Hadfield, Kevin	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/17/2025
Kaur, Navdeep	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	09/08/2025
Kaur, Navdeep	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	09/08/2025
Kaur, Navdeep	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	09/08/2025
Sabounchi, Saman	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/15/2021
Sabounchi, Saman	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	02/15/2021
Sarcauga, Dennis	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	02/06/2025
Sarcauga, Dennis	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/06/2025

Showing 20 of 21 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 1 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 Mariner Health Care — 17 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.

Fremont Healthcare Center — Fremont, CA · overall 4/5
Fruitvale Healthcare Center — Oakland, CA · overall 5/5
Hayward Hills Health Care Center — Hayward, CA · overall 3/5
Inglewood Health Care Center — Inglewood, CA · overall 2/5abuse
La Crescenta Healthcare Center — La Crescenta, CA · overall 5/5
Monterey Palms Health Care Center — Palm Desert, CA · overall 3/5
Palm Springs Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center — Palm Springs, CA · overall 4/5
Pine Ridge Care Center — San Rafael, CA · overall 5/5

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 16 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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?"
"How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
"What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
"Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
"How do you handle residents who need modified food textures, and how do you make those meals appetizing?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"

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 46% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
"The ownership record on file lists 21 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 13 within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection
Santa Cruz Post Acute	1.1 mi	Santa Cruz, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5
Pacific Coast Manor	1.4 mi	Capitola, CA	★★★★★	5/5
Redwood Grove Post Acute	1.5 mi	Santa Cruz, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Watsonville Nursing Center	12.0 mi	Watsonville, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Watsonville Post Acute Center	12.0 mi	Watsonville, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Manresa Healthcare Center	12.5 mi	Watsonville, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Vasona Creek Healthcare Center	18.3 mi	Los Gatos, CA	★★☆☆☆	3/5
The Terraces of Los Gatos	18.7 mi	Los Gatos, CA	★★★★★	5/5
Almaden Health and Rehabilitation Center	19.5 mi	San Jose, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
Stonebrook Health and Rehabilitation	19.5 mi	Los Gatos, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Woodlands Healthcare Center	19.9 mi	Los Gatos, CA	★★★★★	5/5
Saratoga Retirement Community Health Center	19.9 mi	Saratoga, CA	★★★★★	5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Santa Cruz →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055109.