California ›San Rafael

Professional Post Acute Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

81 Professional Center Parkway, San Rafael, CA 94903 (opens Google Maps) · Marin County · (415) 479-5161· 99 certified beds · avg 84 residents/day · certified since Dec 12, 1985 · 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: CAMBRIDGE HEALTHCARE SERVICES (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Sep 19, 2024
7
Serious findings on record
most recent Aug 13, 2025
$148,455
Fines, last 3 years
4.15
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 13, 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Sep 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 28, 2024 · F-0697 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.

Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Mar 28, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has plan of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 15, 2024 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Mar 28, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 15, 2024 · 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Mar 28, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, pattern · May 19, 2021 · F-0600

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.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Aug 23, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 19, 2021 · F-0607

The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.

Why it matters: Without working prevention policies, mistreatment is more likely to happen and less likely to be caught.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Aug 23, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 19, 2021 · F-0609

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.

Why it matters: When incidents aren't reported promptly, abusers may continue harming residents and outside authorities can't step in.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Aug 23, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 77 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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. · from a complaint F-0692

  2. 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

  3. 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

View all 77 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
May 8, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692
May 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Aug 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 8, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Apr 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 19, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 19, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921
Jun 11, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 28, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
Feb 28, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755
Feb 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · from a complaint · F-0732
Feb 15, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Feb 15, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · from a complaint · F-0553
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0657
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 14, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 4, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
Jan 4, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide timely, approved x-ray services or have an agreement with an approved provider to supply them. · from a complaint · F-0776
Nov 22, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0550
Nov 22, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Nov 22, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755
Nov 22, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Nov 22, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 18, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 19, 2021▲ H · Actual harm, patternThe 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. · F-0600
May 19, 2021▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607
May 19, 2021▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609
May 19, 2021F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
May 19, 2021F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0727
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost. · F-0572
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 19, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925
May 19, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 19, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679
May 19, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
May 19, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 1, 2019F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800
May 1, 2019F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
May 1, 2019F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
May 1, 2019F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
May 1, 2019F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
May 1, 2019F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · F-0691
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
May 1, 2019E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808
May 1, 2019D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
May 1, 2019D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · F-0636
May 1, 2019D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (23 → 2).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 19
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2021
All citations: 23
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2025
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2019190F
2021233H ▲
202360E
2024203G ▲
202551G ▲
202640D

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

4 fines totaling $148,455.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jul 8, 2025Fine$79,560
Jan 4, 2024Fine$61,204
Oct 17, 2023Fine$2,447
Sep 25, 2023Fine$5,244

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.15
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.59
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.88
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.154.313.95top 48% in California; top 34% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.590.610.69top 34% in California; top 49% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.883.903.50top 40% in California; top 26% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.430.510.48top 41% in California; top 43% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)38.136.745.8bottom 44% in California; top 31% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)46.238.142.9bottom 33% in California; bottom 42% 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 3.84, RN 0.54, weekend 3.59.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.84 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

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Professional Post Acute 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bering Properties LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest6%02/01/2007
BH AllianceOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2006
Crescent Facilities Operations LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%12/19/2006
Jenmax Enterprises LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest23%02/01/2007
JK-CSH JV LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest12%11/01/2006
Manhattan Five Partners LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%11/01/2006
The Jacob Wintner TrustOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2006
The Wintner Living Trust Dated 7/08/1992OrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
Win Win Enterprises, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest35%02/01/2007
Wintner, JacobIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
81 Professional Center LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/15/2006
Bretsch, GregoryIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/25/2019
Bretsch, GregoryIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/25/2019
Bretsch, GregoryIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/25/2019
Butenko, JulieIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/24/2023
Butenko, JulieIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/24/2023
Cambridge Healthcare Services LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2014
Cambridge Healthcare Services LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/05/2025
Capela, HeidiIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/03/2023
Capela, HeidiIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/03/2023

Showing 20 of 37 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 17 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 Cambridge Healthcare Services — 32 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. Showing 8 of the 31 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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?"
  • "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
  • "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"

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 38% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 37 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)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Pine Ridge Care Center0.0 miSan Rafael, CA★★★★★3/5
Northgate Postacute Care0.0 miSan Rafael, CA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Smith Ranch Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cente0.8 miSan Rafael, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Villa Marin0.8 miSan Rafael, CA★★★★★4/5
Marin Post Acute1.2 miSan Rafael, CA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
San Rafael Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP2.5 miSan Rafael, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
The Tamalpais4.5 miGreenbrae, CA★★★★★4/5
South Marin Health & Wellness Center4.7 miGreenbrae, CA★★★★☆3/5
Novato Healthcare Center6.3 miNovato, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
The Redwoods, a Community of Seniors8.1 miMill Valley, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Richmond Post Acute Care11.3 miRichmond, CA★★★★☆4/5
Creekside Healthcare Center11.5 miSan Pablo, CA★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in San Rafael →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555214.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details