CaliforniaVallejo

Heartwood Avenue Healthcare

1044 Heartwood Ave., Vallejo, CA 94591 · Solano County · 60 certified beds · avg 56 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1985

Part of chain: BVHC, LLC (12 facilities, chain avg rating 3.3★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
4
Serious findings on record
$16,988
Fines, last 3 years
4.15
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: 3/5

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 · Apr 14, 2026 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

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: Apr 23, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 3, 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: May 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 9, 2024 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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 22, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 9, 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: Jan 22, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (35)

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
Jun 18, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
May 7, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint
May 7, 2026E · 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. · from a complaint
May 7, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
May 7, 2026E · 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.
May 7, 2026E · 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.
May 7, 2026D · 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.
Apr 14, 2026▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint
Feb 25, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint
Oct 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Aug 8, 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
Feb 27, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 27, 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.
Feb 27, 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. · from a complaint
Feb 27, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 27, 2025D · 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.
Feb 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jun 4, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
May 3, 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 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jan 9, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jan 9, 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 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint
Jan 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint
Jan 9, 2024E · 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. · from a complaint
Feb 9, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Feb 9, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Feb 9, 2023E · 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.
Feb 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Feb 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Feb 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.
Feb 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Feb 9, 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.
Feb 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (5 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023100F
202483G ▲
202580E
202691G ▲

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)

2 fines totaling $16,988.

DateTypeAmount / length
May 3, 2024Fine$8,970
Jan 9, 2024Fine$8,018

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)4.154.313.95top 48% in California; top 34% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.460.610.69bottom 45% in California; bottom 31% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.873.903.50top 41% in California; top 27% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.390.510.48top 47% in California; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)55.736.745.8bottom 6% in California; bottom 24% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)71.438.142.9bottom 7% in California; bottom 11% 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 3.83, RN 0.42, weekend 3.57. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Basconcillo, LoisangelicaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/08/2024
Basconcillo, LoisangelicaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/08/2024
Boehrer, BryanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Boehrer, BryanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Calabazaron, RedentorIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/14/2022
Calabazaron, RedentorIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Dhugga, GurpreetIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Dhugga, GurpreetIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Dizon, Ma. ThereseIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/08/2024
Dizon, Ma. ThereseIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/08/2024
Martin, RichardIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Martin, RichardIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Taylor, RyanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/08/2023
Taylor, RyanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/08/2023
Thapa, NischalIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/06/2024
Thapa, NischalIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/06/2024

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
Springs Road Healthcare1.1 miVallejo, CA★★★★★4/5
Solano Post Acute2.4 miVallejo, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Alhambra Post Acute8.0 miMartinez, CA★★★★★4/5
Legacy Post Acute Care10.3 miMartinez, CA★★★★★4/5
Greenridge Post Acute11.1 miEl Sobrante, CA★★★★★5/5
Dept of State Hospitals - Napa D/P SNF11.8 miNapa, CA★★★☆☆2/5
San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center12.3 miSan Pablo, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Creekside Healthcare Center12.4 miSan Pablo, CA★★★★★4/5
Vale Healthcare Center12.5 miSan Pablo, CA★★★☆☆2/5
The Meadows of Napa Valley12.8 miNapa, CA★★★★★5/5
Bayberry Skilled Nursing & Healthcare Center12.8 miConcord, CA★★★★☆3/5
Richmond Post Acute Care13.4 miRichmond, CA★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Vallejo →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555184.