Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, LLC

Name: Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, LLC
Address: 2124 57TH AVENUE, Oakland, CA, 94621, US
Telephone: 5102612628

2124 57th Avenue, Oakland, CA 94621 · Alameda County · 82 certified beds · avg 80 residents/day · certified since Jan 18, 1968

Part of chain: CORPORATE INTERFACE SERVICES (40 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

4.03

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 · Oct 20, 2025 · 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 25, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (34)

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
Feb 10, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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
Feb 10, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint
Oct 20, 2025	▲ 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
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings.
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
Oct 20, 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.
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Oct 20, 2025	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.
Oct 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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 13, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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.
Jun 13, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
Jun 13, 2024	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.
Apr 11, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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. · from a complaint
Jan 11, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint
Sep 26, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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. · from a complaint
Aug 1, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Aug 1, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint
May 20, 2022	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
May 20, 2022	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
May 20, 2022	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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.
May 20, 2022	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
May 20, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
May 20, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
May 20, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
May 20, 2022	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.
May 20, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
May 20, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate.
May 20, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time.
May 20, 2022	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.
May 20, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make sure its staff were vaccinated for COVID-19 in accordance with the federal requirements in effect at the time.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 11).

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2022	13	0	F
2023	3	0	D
2024	5	0	F
2025	11	1	G ▲
2026	2	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)

0 fines totaling $0, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

Date	Type	Amount / length
Oct 20, 2025	Payment Denial	13 days from Nov 12, 2025

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)	4.03	4.31	3.95	bottom 44% in California; top 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.38	0.61	0.69	bottom 27% in California; bottom 19% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.70	3.90	3.50	bottom 46% in California; top 33% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.23	0.51	0.48	bottom 17% in California; bottom 18% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	0.0	36.7	45.8	—
RN turnover (%)	0.0	38.1	42.9	—

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 3.86, RN 0.36, weekend 3.54. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 2/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Silver, David	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	99%	06/09/2016
Silver, Michelle	Individual	Direct Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	06/09/2016
Aldridge, Theartis	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2025
Aldridge, Theartis	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2025
Eretz Lion Creek Properties LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	08/01/2016
Manoharan, Arun	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2023
Manoharan, Arun	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2023
Rockport Administrative Services, LLC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	08/01/2016
Rockport Administrative Services, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/04/2025

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?"
"Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
"If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
"How do you train staff to treat residents with dignity, and how do you protect residents' personal belongings?"
"What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
"How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
"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
Excell Health Care Center	1.0 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★★★	5/5
Redwood Healthcare Center LLC	1.0 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Mercy Retirement & Care Center	1.4 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Marina Garden Nursing Center	1.7 mi	Alameda, CA	★★★★★	5/5
Fruitvale Healthcare Center	1.8 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★★★	5/5
Garfield Neurobehavioral Center	1.8 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Bellaken Skilled Nursing Center	1.9 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★★★	5/5
Bay Marina Post Acute	2.0 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Oakland Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation	2.4 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Alameda Hospital D/P SNF	2.8 mi	Alameda, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Bay View Rehabilitation Hospital, LLC	2.8 mi	Alameda, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Bay Area Healthcare Center	3.2 mi	Oakland, CA	★★★★★	5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Oakland →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055876.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, LLC

2124 57th Avenue, Oakland, CA 94621 · 5102612628

Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 3/5· Fines (3y): $0

Most serious findings on record:

▲ Oct 20, 2025 (F-0689, 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.

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
☐ "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
☐ "How do you train staff to treat residents with dignity, and how do you protect residents' personal belongings?"
☐ "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
☐ "How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
☐ "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?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 055876 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)