CaliforniaOakland

Redwood Healthcare Center LLC

3145 High Street, Oakland, CA 94619 · Alameda County · 44 certified beds · avg 44 residents/day · certified since Mar 11, 1992

Part of chain: CRYSTAL SOLORZANO (9 facilities, chain avg rating 2.0★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.20
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (30)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · from a complaint
Apr 21, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Apr 21, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 16, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Aug 23, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
Aug 23, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 23, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 23, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Aug 11, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Aug 11, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Aug 11, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 11, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 11, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 11, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Aug 11, 2022B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Feb 13, 2020F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
Feb 13, 2020E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Feb 13, 2020D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 13, 2020B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 4).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2020140F
202270F
202440F
202650E

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.204.313.95top 44% in California; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.320.610.69bottom 15% in California; bottom 11% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.743.903.50bottom 49% in California; top 32% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.170.510.48bottom 4% in California; bottom 7% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)25.636.745.8top 18% in California; top 8% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.038.142.9

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 4.08, RN 0.31, weekend 3.63. 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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Cohen, RachelIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest51%08/15/2024
Dionisio, PaolaIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest24%08/15/2024
RHCST LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest24%08/15/2024
Rust, JadenIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/15/2024
Chavarria, EvaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2024
Chavarria, EvaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2024
Chavarria, EvaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2024
Cohen, RachelIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE08/15/2024
Cohen, RachelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2026
Gateways Rehabilitation Center II LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/17/2023
Kaur, AmandeepIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/23/2023
Kaur, AmandeepIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/23/2023
NG, AndrewIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/28/2019
NG, AndrewIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/28/2019
Renew Health Consulting Services LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/17/2023
Renew Health Consulting Services LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/17/2023
Sharma, VatsalaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/17/2023
Sharma, VatsalaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/17/2023

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Excell Health Care Center0.1 miOakland, CA★★★★★5/5
Princeton Manor Healthcare Center, LLC1.0 miOakland, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Mercy Retirement & Care Center1.1 miOakland, CA★★★★☆4/5
Bellaken Skilled Nursing Center1.2 miOakland, CA★★★★★5/5
Bay Marina Post Acute1.2 miOakland, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Garfield Neurobehavioral Center1.7 miOakland, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Fruitvale Healthcare Center1.7 miOakland, CA★★★★★5/5
Oakland Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation1.8 miOakland, CA★★★★★4/5
Marina Garden Nursing Center2.2 miAlameda, CA★★★★★5/5
Bay Area Healthcare Center2.8 miOakland, CA★★★★★5/5
Alameda Hospital D/P SNF3.1 miAlameda, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Bay View Rehabilitation Hospital, LLC3.3 miAlameda, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Oakland →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555499.