How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Oakland Healthcare & Wellness Center
3030 Webster Street, Oakland, CA 94609 (opens Google Maps) · Alameda County · (510) 250-8000· 98 certified beds · avg 95 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967 · 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: SOL HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 15, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.82
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 27 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
View all 27 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 15, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 15, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 15, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0637 |
| Jan 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Jan 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility was not properly licensed, or did not operate in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and accepted professional standards. · F-0836 |
| Dec 3, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 27, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Jul 25, 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0759 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Apr 22, 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 |
| Apr 22, 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 22, 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 |
| Apr 22, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 22, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| Apr 22, 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 |
| Apr 22, 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 |
| Apr 22, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 22, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have policies on smoking. · F-0926 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 6).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 6
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 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 6 | 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: 3.82
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.61
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.51
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) | 3.82 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 28% in California; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.61 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 31% in California; top 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.51 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 32% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.54 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 27% in California; top 29% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 36.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.16, RN 0.67, weekend 3.82.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.16 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Oakland Healthcare & Wellness 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Majer, Sol | Individual | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Sol Healthcare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 99% | 02/04/2010 |
| Dhugga, Gurpreet | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2019 |
| Dhugga, Gurpreet | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2019 |
| Eretz Oakland Properties LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/15/2014 |
| Majer, Sol | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Majer, Sol | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Singh, Ruby | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/02/2023 |
| Singh, Ruby | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/02/2023 |
All 11 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Sol 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.
- Roseville Point Health & Wellness Center — Roseville, CA · overall 2/5abuse
- San Jose Healthcare & Wellness Center — San Jose, CA · overall 3/5
- San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center — San Pablo, CA · overall 3/5
- The Rehabilitation Center of Oakland — Oakland, CA · overall 1/5
- Alameda Healthcare & Wellness Center — Alameda, CA · overall 2/5
- Cupertino Healthcare & Wellness Center — Cupertino, CA · overall 3/5
- Hayward Healthcare & Wellness Center — Hayward, CA · overall 2/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
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 do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "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?"
- "If my family member's health suddenly changes, how quickly do you reassess them and update their care?"
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "Can you tell me about this citation and confirm your license and compliance status today?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
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?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 114 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Paul's Towers | 0.5 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| McClure Post Acute | 0.6 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Medical Hill Healthcare Center | 0.6 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Rehabilitation Center of Oakland | 0.6 mi | Oakland, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lake Merritt Healthcare Center LLC | 0.6 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Piedmont Gardens Health Facility | 0.7 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Lake Park Healthcare Center | 0.9 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bay Area Healthcare Center | 1.8 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Oakland Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation | 2.3 mi | Oakland, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Berkeley Pines Skilled Nursing Center | 2.5 mi | Berkeley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ashby Care Center | 2.5 mi | Berkeley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Elmwood Care Center | 2.7 mi | Berkeley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
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.
- Pleasanton Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Pleasanton, CA · overall 5/5
- Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, LLC — Oakland, CA · overall 3/5
- Redwood Healthcare Center LLC — Oakland, CA · overall 4/5
- Sage Post Acute — Hayward, CA · overall 3/5
- San Leandro Healthcare Center — San Leandro, CA · overall 4/5
- Serenethos Care Center, LLC — Hayward, CA · overall 5/5
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 055215.