How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
38650 Mission Boulevard, Fremont, CA 94536 (opens Google Maps) · Alameda County · (510) 793-3000· 73 certified beds · avg 65 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1978 · 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: WEST HARBOR HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 3.3★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★★5/5 · 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.
Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · from a complaint F-0635
The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · from a complaint F-0710
The facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · from a complaint F-0711
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · from a complaint · F-0635 |
| Feb 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · from a complaint · F-0710 |
| Feb 23, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · from a complaint · F-0711 |
| Feb 9, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Feb 9, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0726 |
| Jan 5, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0658 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | 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 17, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 15, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 15, 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 |
| Apr 15, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919 |
| Apr 15, 2022 | 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. · F-0655 |
| Apr 15, 2022 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · F-0577 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (1 → 1).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 8 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 6 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.37 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 35% in California; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.53 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 42% in California; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.96 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 35% in California; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.48 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 33% in California; top 36% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 21.0 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 9% in California; top 3% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 20.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 19% in California; top 13% 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 4.25, RN 0.51, weekend 3.85.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.25 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Niles Canyon Post Acute. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Galbasini, Kevin | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 40% | 10/01/2019 |
| Gill, Daniel | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 40% | 10/01/2019 |
| Rosenhan, Cameron | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 10% | 10/01/2019 |
| West Harbor Healthcare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 10/01/2019 |
| Galbasini, Kevin | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
| Galbasini, Kevin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
| Gill, Daniel | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
| Gill, Daniel | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
| Rosenhan, Cameron | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
| Rosenhan, Cameron | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
All 10 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain West Harbor Healthcare — 8 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mission Valley Post Acute | 0.9 mi | Fremont, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| We Care Skilled Nursing - Fremont | 1.0 mi | Fremont, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Country Drive Post Acute | 1.0 mi | Fremont, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Crestwood Treatment Center | 1.1 mi | Fremont, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Fremont Healthcare Center | 2.1 mi | Fremont, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Crestwood Manor - Fremont | 2.4 mi | Fremont, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Masonic Home | 3.0 mi | Union City, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Eden Healthcare Center | 7.5 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Emmanuel Post Acute Care - Hayward | 7.7 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hayward Post Acute | 8.0 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Pleasanton Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 8.2 mi | Pleasanton, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Vista Post Acute | 8.8 mi | Hayward, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Alameda, CA — 69 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
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 055562.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details