San Jose Healthcare & Wellness Center
75 N. 13th Street, San Jose, CA 95112 · Santa Clara County · 58 certified beds · avg 52 residents/day · certified since Dec 31, 1975
Part of chain: SOL HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.42
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 11, 2023 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
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 1, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (42)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 7, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | 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. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | 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. |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. |
| Mar 7, 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 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 13, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint |
| Jul 29, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 11, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint |
| Jun 11, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 20, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 20, 2023 | 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, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Oct 20, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Oct 20, 2023 | 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. |
| Oct 20, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. |
| Oct 20, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 11, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Dec 10, 2021 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 12).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 14 | 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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
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) | 4.42 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 32% in California; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.68 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 26% in California; top 38% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.93 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 37% in California; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.55 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 26% in California; top 28% 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 4.52, RN 0.69, weekend 4.02. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5
Who owns this facility
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 |
| Dasari, Gopika | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/15/2025 |
| Dasari, Gopika | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/15/2025 |
| Davis, Alexandria | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| Davis, Alexandria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2022 |
| East Terrace-Let LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Rechnitz, Shlomo | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/04/2010 |
| Rockport Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/16/2025 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
- "How is your kitchen staffed, and have meals ever been delayed because of staffing?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
- "If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vista Manor Nursing Center | 2.0 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Canyon Springs Post-Acute | 2.1 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mission de la Casa | 3.2 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Redwoods Post-Acute | 3.3 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Skyline Healthcare Center - San Jose | 3.5 mi | San Jose, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| O'Connor Hospital D/P SNF | 3.5 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| White Blossom Care Center | 3.5 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Inspire Behavioral Health | 3.6 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Win Post-Acute | 3.9 mi | Santa Clara, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Ridge Post Acute | 4.0 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055388.