How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Pine Ridge Care Center
45 Professional Center Pkwy, San Rafael, CA 94903 (opens Google Maps) · Marin County · (415) 479-3610· 101 certified beds · avg 87 residents/day · certified since Nov 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: MARINER HEALTH CARE (17 facilities, chain avg rating 3.6★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 5, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.09
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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 43 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint F-0600
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint F-0641
The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint F-0557
View all 43 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 12, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint · F-0557 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Dec 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 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0657 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated. · F-0807 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627 |
| Dec 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 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | 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. · F-0676 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| Dec 5, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Aug 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 4, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0655 |
| Aug 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Jul 16, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · from a complaint · F-0678 |
| Apr 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 12, 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. · F-0676 |
| Dec 12, 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. · F-0689 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0912 |
| May 28, 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 |
| Mar 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Sep 11, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. · F-0576 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0585 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not designate a physician to serve as medical director — the doctor responsible for overseeing resident care policies and coordinating medical care across the facility. · F-0841 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 11).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 3
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 | 15 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 18 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 3 | 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: 5.09
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.31
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.63
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) | 5.09 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 13% in California; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.31 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 5% in California; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.63 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 11% in California; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.85 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 10% in California; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 42.9 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 30% in California; top 44% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 36.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 48% in California; top 40% 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 4.48, RN 1.15, weekend 4.08.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.48 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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 Pine Ridge 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 - Partnership
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GC Holding Company 3, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 99% | 08/01/2022 |
| Grancare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 12/21/2005 |
| Grunstein, Emily | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/06/2019 |
| Mariner Health Care, INC. | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 12/21/2015 |
| MHC Holding Company | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 12/21/2005 |
| MHC West Holding Company | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 12/21/2005 |
| National Senior Care, INC. | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 12/21/2005 |
| Capital Funding Group, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2021 |
| GC Holding Company 3, LLC | Organization | Limited Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Melijoy, Adan | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/27/2012 |
| Melijoy, Adan | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/27/2012 |
| Melijoy, Adan | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/27/2012 |
| Monroe, Michael | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/24/2022 |
| Monroe, Michael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/24/2022 |
| Monroe, Michael | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/24/2022 |
| San Rafael Operating Company GP, LLC | Organization | General Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/21/2005 |
| Sarcauga, Dennis | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/06/2025 |
| Sarcauga, Dennis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/06/2025 |
| Sarcauga, Dennis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/06/2025 |
| Serrano, Noel | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2021 |
Showing 20 of 21 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 1 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 Mariner Health Care — 17 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.
- Santa Monica Health Care Center — Santa Monica, CA · overall 3/5
- Skyline Healthcare Center - San Jose — San Jose, CA · overall 1/5
- Vale Healthcare Center — San Pablo, CA · overall 3/5
- Village Square Healthcare Center — San Marcos, CA · overall 4/5
- Almaden Health and Rehabilitation Center — San Jose, CA · overall 4/5
- Autumn Hills Health Care Center — Glendale, CA · overall 3/5
- Creekside Healthcare Center — San Pablo, CA · overall 5/5
- Driftwood Healthcare Center - Hayward — Hayward, CA · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 16 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.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "How do you train staff to treat residents with dignity, and how do you protect residents' personal belongings?"
- "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 43% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 21 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 52 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Northgate Postacute Care | 0.0 mi | San Rafael, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Professional Post Acute Center | 0.0 mi | San Rafael, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Villa Marin | 0.8 mi | San Rafael, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Smith Ranch Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cente | 0.8 mi | San Rafael, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Marin Post Acute | 1.2 mi | San Rafael, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| San Rafael Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP | 2.5 mi | San Rafael, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Tamalpais | 4.5 mi | Greenbrae, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| South Marin Health & Wellness Center | 4.6 mi | Greenbrae, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Novato Healthcare Center | 6.3 mi | Novato, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| The Redwoods, a Community of Seniors | 8.1 mi | Mill Valley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Richmond Post Acute Care | 11.3 mi | Richmond, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Creekside Healthcare Center | 11.5 mi | San Pablo, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055850.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).