CaliforniaSanta Cruz

Driftwood Healthcare Center - Santa Cruz

675 24th Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95062 · Santa Cruz County · 92 certified beds · avg 85 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1969

Part of chain: MARINER HEALTH CARE (17 facilities, chain avg rating 3.6★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
3
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.75
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

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

▲ Actual harm, one-off · 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.

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

▲ Actual harm, one-off · 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.

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

All citations in the current public record (51)

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
Dec 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 12, 2025E · 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.
Dec 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 12, 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.
Dec 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Aug 22, 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
Oct 2, 2024D · Potential for 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
Jun 24, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Jun 24, 2024E · 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 19, 2024▲ 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
Mar 4, 2024▲ 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
Jan 18, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 6, 2023D · Potential for 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
Aug 19, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
Aug 19, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Aug 19, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Aug 19, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Aug 19, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 19, 2022D · 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.
Aug 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Aug 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Aug 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Aug 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 19, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.

Inspection trend by year

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022130F
202320D
2024293G ▲
202570E

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)4.754.313.95top 20% in California; top 17% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.810.610.69top 17% in California; top 27% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.463.903.50top 15% in California; top 13% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.520.510.48top 29% in California; top 30% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)46.236.745.8bottom 22% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.038.142.9bottom 29% in California; bottom 39% 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 3.98, RN 0.68, weekend 3.73. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Capital Funding LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest06/01/2015
GC Operating Company LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest99%12/06/2011
Grancare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest11/17/2010
Grunstein, EmilyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest02/06/2019
Mariner Health Care, INC.Organization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest11/17/2010
MHC Holding CompanyOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest11/17/2010
MHC West Holding CompanyOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest11/17/2010
National Senior Care, INC.Organization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest11/17/2010
Driftwood Santa Cruz Holding Company GP LLCOrganizationGeneral Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/27/2014
GC Operating Company LLCOrganizationLimited Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/27/2014
Hadfield, KevinIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2025
Hadfield, KevinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2025
Hadfield, KevinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2025
Kaur, NavdeepIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2025
Kaur, NavdeepIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2025
Kaur, NavdeepIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2025
Sabounchi, SamanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/15/2021
Sabounchi, SamanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/15/2021
Sarcauga, DennisIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/06/2025
Sarcauga, DennisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/06/2025

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
Santa Cruz Post Acute1.0 miSanta Cruz, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Pacific Coast Manor1.4 miCapitola, CA★★★★★5/5
Redwood Grove Post Acute1.5 miSanta Cruz, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Watsonville Nursing Center12.0 miWatsonville, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Watsonville Post Acute Center12.0 miWatsonville, CA★★★★★4/5
Manresa Healthcare Center12.5 miWatsonville, CA★★★★☆4/5
Vasona Creek Healthcare Center18.3 miLos Gatos, CA★★☆☆☆3/5
The Terraces of Los Gatos18.7 miLos Gatos, CA★★★★★5/5
Almaden Health and Rehabilitation Center19.5 miSan Jose, CA★★★★☆3/5
Stonebrook Health and Rehabilitation19.5 miLos Gatos, CA★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Santa Cruz →

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