Glenbrook
1950 Calle Barcelona, Carlsbad, CA 92009 · San Diego County · 94 certified beds · avg 55 residents/day · certified since May 13, 2004
Part of chain: CONTINUING LIFE (6 facilities, chain avg rating 4.8★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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 · Aug 24, 2023 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
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: Oct 18, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (24)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 19, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. |
| Sep 19, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. |
| Sep 19, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). |
| Sep 19, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Oct 17, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Aug 24, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. |
| Aug 24, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Aug 24, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. |
| Aug 23, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jan 16, 2020 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| Jan 16, 2020 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 4).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 4 | 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)
1 fine totaling $9,311.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 23, 2023 | Fine | $9,311 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.38 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 9% in California; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.08 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 9% in California; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.92 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 7% in California; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.76 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 13% in California; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 30.9 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 32% in California; top 16% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 41.2 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 42% in California; top 49% 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 5.23, RN 1.05, weekend 4.78. 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aschenbrenner, Richard | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 25% | 09/29/1999 |
| Elwood Justin Wilson, III and Julie Frances Wilson, Trustee of the J. | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 10% | 09/29/1999 |
| Spieker Living Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 65% | 09/29/1999 |
| Aschenbrenner, Richard | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/29/1999 |
| Harness, Sarah | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/26/2020 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
- "Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "Can I see a sample menu, and how do you handle special diets like low-sodium or diabetic meals?"
- "How is your kitchen staffed, and have meals ever been delayed because of staffing?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Dorothy & Joseph Goldberg Healthcare Center | 2.3 mi | Encinitas, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Aviara Healthcare Center | 2.5 mi | Encinitas, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Encinitas Post-Acute | 2.6 mi | Encinitas, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Village Square Healthcare Center | 5.3 mi | San Marcos, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Bayshire Carlsbad | 7.7 mi | Carlsbad, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Carlsbad by the Sea | 7.9 mi | Carlsbad, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| La Paloma Healthcare Center | 8.1 mi | Oceanside, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Pacific Villas Post Acute | 8.1 mi | Oceanside, CA | —/5 | ||
| Bayshire Torrey Pines Post-Acute | 8.3 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Vista Knoll Specialized Care Facility | 8.3 mi | Vista, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555806.