How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Hillcrest Heights Healthcare Center
4033 Sixth Avenue Ext, San Diego, CA 92103 (opens Google Maps) · San Diego County · (619) 297-4086· 96 certified beds · avg 91 residents/day · certified since Mar 22, 1995 · 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: ASPEN SKILLED HEALTHCARE (35 facilities, chain avg rating 3.7★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 9, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.58
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 43 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 make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint F-0627
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). · from a complaint F-0628
View all 43 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2025 | 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 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627 |
| May 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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). · from a complaint · F-0628 |
| May 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint · F-0655 |
| May 21, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0803 |
| Nov 7, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Oct 17, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint · F-0585 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Feb 12, 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. · from a complaint · F-0552 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0600 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Feb 1, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Dec 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · from a complaint · F-0698 |
| Nov 15, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly. · from a complaint · F-0624 |
| Sep 26, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| May 19, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| May 19, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0803 |
| May 19, 2022 | 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 |
| May 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 |
| May 19, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0558 |
| May 19, 2022 | 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 |
| May 19, 2022 | 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 |
| May 19, 2022 | 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 |
| May 19, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| May 19, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (14 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 18 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 12 | 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)
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: 4.58
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.80
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.19
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) | 4.58 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 26% in California; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.80 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 17% in California; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.19 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 24% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.54 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 27% in California; top 28% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 30.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 30% in California; top 15% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 35.7 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 48% in California; top 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 4.09, RN 0.72, weekend 3.75.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.09 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · 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 Hillcrest Heights Healthcare 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 - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asd6, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 12/18/2019 |
| Bradshaw, Peter | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2023 |
| Elsner, Eric | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2019 |
| Jacaranda Healthcare Group LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Kirkwood, Jared | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2019 |
| Orgill, Craig | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2019 |
| Parti, Rajesh | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2019 |
| Parti, Shruty | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2019 |
| Paxman, Marcus | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Asd6, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2019 |
| Asd6, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2019 |
| Aspen Healthcare Services LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Birdjandi, Farschad | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/02/2022 |
| Birdjandi, Farschad | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/02/2022 |
| Bradshaw, Jeffrey | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/18/2025 |
| Bradshaw, Jeffrey | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Brady, Vern | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/17/2018 |
| Brady, Vern | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Case, Ryan | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/17/2018 |
| Case, Ryan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
Showing 20 of 33 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 13 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 Aspen Skilled Healthcare — 35 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.
- Kei-Ai Los Angeles Healthcare Center — Los Angeles, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- Kei-Ai South Bay Healthcare Center — Gardena, CA · overall 3/5
- La Casa via Transitional Care Center — Walnut Creek, CA · overall 5/5
- Lake Park Healthcare Center — Oakland, CA · overall 3/5
- Lodi Nursing & Rehabilitation — Lodi, CA · overall 4/5
- Marina Pointe Healthcare & Subacute — Culver City, CA · overall 3/5
- Mission Palms Healthcare Center — Westminster, CA · overall 3/5
- North Park Post-Acute — Tracy, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 34 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
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?"
- "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
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 30% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 33 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 61 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mission Hills Post Acute Care | 0.3 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Balboa Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 0.8 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| St. Pauls Health Care Center | 1.3 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| The Pavilion at Ocean Point | 2.9 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Shores Post-Acute | 3.3 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Kearny Mesa Convalescent and Nursing Home | 3.5 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Golden Hill Post Acute | 3.6 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Helen Bernardy Center D/P SNF | 3.7 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Villa Coronado D/P SNF | 3.8 mi | Coronado, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Arroyo Vista Nursing Center | 4.2 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| University Care Center | 5.2 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Jacob Healthcare Center | 5.2 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in San Diego, CA — 83 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Hillcrest Manor Sanitarium — National City, CA · overall 4/5
- La Jolla Post-Acute — La Jolla, CA · overall 4/5
- La Mesa Healthcare Center — La Mesa, CA · overall 5/5
- La Paloma Healthcare Center — Oceanside, CA · overall 5/5
- Lakeside Special Care Center — Lakeside, CA · overall 5/5
- Lemon Grove Care and Rehabilitation Center — Lemon Grove, CA · overall 3/5
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 555630.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).