CaliforniaSan Diego

Jacob Healthcare Center

4075 54th St., San Diego, CA 92105 · San Diego County · 128 certified beds · avg 120 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967

Part of chain: LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.21
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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.

All citations in the current public record (34)

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
Apr 1, 2026E · 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. · from a complaint
Jan 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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).
Jan 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way.
Jan 15, 2026D · 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.
Jan 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 15, 2026D · 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.
Jan 15, 2026D · 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.
Jan 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 15, 2026D · 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.
Nov 27, 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. · from a complaint
Sep 12, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Sep 12, 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 12, 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · 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.
Sep 12, 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Sep 12, 2024D · 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.
Sep 12, 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Sep 12, 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.
Jan 31, 2024D · Potential for 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 31, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint
Jun 11, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 11, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Jun 11, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jun 11, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 11, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Jun 11, 2021D · 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.
Jun 11, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (13 → 10).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202170D
2024160E
2026110E

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)3.214.313.95bottom 3% in California; bottom 22% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.660.610.69top 27% in California; top 40% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.103.903.50bottom 7% in California; bottom 37% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.850.510.48top 10% in California; top 10% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)58.936.745.8bottom 3% in California; bottom 18% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)64.938.142.9bottom 10% in California; bottom 16% 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 4.60, RN 0.95, weekend 4.45. 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Rodriguez, CurtisIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2023
Tilford, TobyIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2023
Tilford, TobyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2023

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
University Care Center0.2 miSan Diego, CA★★★★★4/5
Arroyo Vista Nursing Center1.5 miSan Diego, CA★★★★★4/5
Brighton Place San Diego2.1 miSan Diego, CA★☆☆☆☆2/5
La Mesa Healthcare Center2.3 miLa Mesa, CA★★★★★4/5
Bella Vista Health Center3.1 miLemon Grove, CA★★★★☆4/5
Golden Hill Post Acute3.2 miSan Diego, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Parkway Hills Nursing & Rehabilitation3.4 miLa Mesa, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Arbor Hills Nursing Center3.4 miLa Mesa, CA★★★★★4/5
Lemon Grove Care and Rehabilitation Center3.5 miLemon Grove, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Country Manor la Mesa Healthcare Center3.7 miLa Mesa, CA★★★★☆4/5
Grossmont Gardens Healthcare Center4.0 miLa Mesa, CA—/5
Amaya Springs Health Care Center4.1 miSpring Valley, CA★★★☆☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in San Diego →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055508.