Kyakameena Care Center
2131 Carleton Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 · Alameda County · 60 certified beds · avg 56 residents/day · certified since Mar 20, 1967
Part of chain: PRATAP PODDATOORI (6 facilities, chain avg rating 3.5★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$38,848
Fines, last 3 years
4.71
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 · Sep 22, 2023 · 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: Nov 1, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (40)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2026 | 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 |
| May 20, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not honor residents' right to share a room with their spouse or a roommate of their choosing, or moved residents to a different room without written notice beforehand. · from a complaint |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. |
| Nov 21, 2025 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | 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. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
| Nov 1, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 22, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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 |
| Sep 21, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint |
| Jun 10, 2021 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 15).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 4 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 16 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | D |
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)
8 fines totaling $38,848.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2023 | Fine | $4,587 |
| Oct 10, 2023 | Fine | $4,587 |
| Oct 2, 2023 | Fine | $4,235 |
| Sep 25, 2023 | Fine | $3,882 |
| Sep 21, 2023 | Fine | $7,443 |
| Sep 18, 2023 | Fine | $3,529 |
| Sep 11, 2023 | Fine | $3,176 |
| Aug 21, 2023 | Fine | $7,409 |
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) | 4.71 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 21% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.65 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 28% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.33 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 19% in California; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.35 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 45% in California; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 57.4 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 4% in California; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 53.8 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 22% in California; bottom 30% 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 3.93, RN 0.55, weekend 3.61. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poddatoori, Pratap | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 04/01/2001 |
| Andres, Norma | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2004 |
| Andres, Norma | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2004 |
| Cable, Elaine | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/19/2025 |
| Cable, Elaine | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/19/2025 |
| Dhugga, Gurpreet | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2020 |
| Dhugga, Gurpreet | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2020 |
| Guerrero, Sylvia | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Guerrero, Sylvia | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Hycare INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/07/2006 |
| Hycare INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/10/2025 |
| Jayankura, Thida | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2014 |
| Jayankura, Thida | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2014 |
| McGrady, Melinda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/05/2024 |
| McGrady, Melinda | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/05/2024 |
| McGregor, Terrance | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2003 |
| McGregor, Terrance | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2003 |
| Padania, Hilda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/16/2025 |
| Padania, Hilda | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/16/2025 |
| Poddatoori, Pratap | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2001 |
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?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you handle room assignments and roommate requests, and do residents get advance written notice before any move?"
- "How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"
- "How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "How is routine foot care handled here, and does a podiatrist visit regularly?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elmwood Care Center | 0.3 mi | Berkeley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Ashby Care Center | 0.4 mi | Berkeley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Berkeley Pines Skilled Nursing Center | 0.7 mi | Berkeley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Chaparral House | 1.2 mi | Berkeley, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Rehabilitation Center of Oakland | 2.4 mi | Oakland, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Piedmont Gardens Health Facility | 2.6 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Oakland Healthcare & Wellness Center | 3.0 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| McClure Post Acute | 3.0 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Medical Hill Healthcare Center | 3.0 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Shields Nursing Center | 3.2 mi | El Cerrito, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lake Merritt Healthcare Center LLC | 3.4 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| St Paul's Towers | 3.5 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055715.