How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Hayward Healthcare & Wellness Center
1805 West Street, Hayward, CA 94545 (opens Google Maps) · Alameda County · (510) 783-4811· 99 certified beds · avg 94 residents/day · certified since Jan 22, 1968 · 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: SOL HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 21, 2023
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 14, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.92
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: 2/5 · how star ratings work →
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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 · Apr 14, 2026 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 14, 2026 · 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: May 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 24 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. F-0802
View all 24 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 14, 2026 | ▲ 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 |
| Feb 19, 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. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Jul 21, 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. · F-0656 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure care was delivered by qualified people following each resident's written care plan — the individualized document that spells out exactly what care that resident is supposed to receive. · F-0659 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Jul 21, 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. · F-0689 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · F-0790 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
| Jul 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814 |
| Oct 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Oct 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Oct 10, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| Nov 29, 2018 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| Nov 29, 2018 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Nov 29, 2018 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 16).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2018
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2019
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2019 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 16 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
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: 3.92
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.50
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.57
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) | 3.92 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 36% in California; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.50 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 46% in California; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.57 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 35% in California; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.45 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 37% in California; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 36.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.06, RN 0.52, weekend 3.69.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.06 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Hayward Healthcare & Wellness Center. 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 - Individual
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Majer, Sol | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Sol Healthcare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 99% | 02/04/2010 |
| Datt, Laleen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/18/2023 |
| Datt, Laleen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/18/2023 |
| Eretz Hayward Properties LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| NG, Andrew | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| NG, Andrew | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2025 |
All 11 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Sol Healthcare — 8 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.
- Oakland Healthcare & Wellness Center — Oakland, CA · overall 5/5
- Roseville Point Health & Wellness Center — Roseville, CA · overall 2/5abuse
- San Jose Healthcare & Wellness Center — San Jose, CA · overall 3/5
- San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center — San Pablo, CA · overall 3/5
- The Rehabilitation Center of Oakland — Oakland, CA · overall 1/5
- Alameda Healthcare & Wellness Center — Alameda, CA · overall 2/5
- Cupertino Healthcare & Wellness Center — Cupertino, CA · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Questions to ask on your visit
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?"
- "How is your kitchen staffed, and have meals ever been delayed because of staffing?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What are your rules for bringing in my family member's favorite foods, and how are they stored?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 111 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Driftwood Healthcare Center - Hayward | 1.6 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| St Francis Healthcare Center | 1.7 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Hayward Post Acute | 2.2 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Serenethos Care Center, LLC | 2.2 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Emmanuel Post Acute Care - Hayward | 2.2 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Eden Healthcare Center | 2.3 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Golden Harbor Healthcare Center | 2.3 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| St Anthony Care Center | 2.5 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Bethesda Home | 2.5 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Morton Bakar Center | 2.6 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| We Care Skilled Nursing Facility | 2.8 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Baywood Court Health Center | 3.6 mi | Castro Valley, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Alameda, CA — 69 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Hayward Hills Health Care Center — Hayward, CA · overall 3/5
- Jones Convalescent Hospital — San Leandro, CA · overall 4/5
- Kyakameena Care Center — Berkeley, CA · overall 3/5
- Lake Merritt Healthcare Center LLC — Oakland, CA · overall 2/5
- Lake Park Healthcare Center — Oakland, CA · overall 3/5
- Marina Garden Nursing Center — Alameda, CA · overall 5/5
- Masonic Home — Union City, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055874.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).