How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
La Casa via Transitional Care Center
1449 Ygnacio Valley Road, Walnut Creek, CA 94598 (opens Google Maps) · Contra Costa County · (925) 939-5820· 99 certified beds · avg 77 residents/day · certified since May 31, 1974 · 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 Jun 5, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.63
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 25 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The 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. F-0550
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
View all 25 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 5, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0550 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 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 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · from a complaint · F-0757 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0760 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Apr 9, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 9, 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. · from a complaint · F-0676 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | 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 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | 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 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | 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 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0758 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0638 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0640 |
| Nov 4, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0550 |
| Nov 4, 2021 | 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 |
| Nov 4, 2021 | 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 |
| Nov 4, 2021 | 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 |
| Nov 4, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0756 |
| Nov 4, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 9
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 9 | 0 | F |
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: 3.63
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.76
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.53
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) | 3.63 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 17% in California; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.76 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 20% in California; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.53 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 33% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.68 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 16% in California; top 17% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 30.8 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 32% in California; top 16% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 29.4 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 37% in California; top 28% 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 3.96, RN 0.83, weekend 3.85.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.96 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for La Casa via Transitional Care 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aspen Skilled Healthcare INC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Awcy LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Bradshaw, Jeffrey | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Bradshaw, Peter | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2023 |
| Elsner, Eric | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Kirkwood, Jared | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Orgill, Craig | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Parti, Rajesh | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Parti, Shruty | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Paxman, Marcus | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Sequoia Healthcare Group LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| SKBM LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Aspen Healthcare Services LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Awcy LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Awcy LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2019 |
| Bradshaw, Jeffrey | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Brady, Vern | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Case, Ryan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Davis, James | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2017 |
| Davis, James | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2017 |
Showing 20 of 34 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 14 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.
- 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
- Oakland Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation — Oakland, CA · overall 5/5
- Ocean Pointe Healthcare Center — Santa Monica, CA · overall 2/5
- Pacific Heights Transitional Care Center — San Francisco, CA · overall 5/5
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 did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
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?"
- "CMS reports 31% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 34 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 89 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tampico Healthcare Center | 0.1 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Pleasant Hill Post Acute | 1.5 mi | Pleasant Hill, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Rosewood Post Acute | 1.8 mi | Pleasant Hill, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Shadelands Post Acute | 2.1 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Walnut Creek Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cent | 2.6 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Rossmoor Post Acute | 2.6 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Tice Valley Post Acute | 2.7 mi | Walnut Creek, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Concord Post Acute | 3.3 mi | Concord, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Diablo Valley Post Acute | 4.5 mi | Concord, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Bayberry Skilled Nursing & Healthcare Center | 4.5 mi | Concord, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Willow Pass Healthcare Center | 5.1 mi | Concord, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Moraga Post Acute | 5.6 mi | Moraga, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Contra Costa, CA — 30 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Legacy Post Acute Care — Martinez, CA · overall 5/5
- Lone Tree Post Acute — Antioch, CA · overall 4/5
- Orinda Care Center, LLC — Orinda, CA · overall 2/5
- Pittsburg Skilled Nursing Center — Pittsburg, CA · overall 1/5
- Richmond Post Acute Care — Richmond, 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 056399.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).