How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
San Jose Healthcare & Wellness Center
75 N. 13th Street, San Jose, CA 95112 (opens Google Maps) · Santa Clara County · (408) 295-2665· 58 certified beds · avg 52 residents/day · certified since Dec 31, 1975 · 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: SOL HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 7, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Oct 11, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.42
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: 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 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Nov 1, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 42 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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. F-0700
The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. F-0802
View all 42 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0700 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0550 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0554 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0847 |
| Mar 7, 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 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0755 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Jul 29, 2024 | 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 |
| Jun 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0623 |
| Jun 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0695 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | 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. · F-0557 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | 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. · F-0658 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 11, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 2, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Dec 10, 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 |
| Dec 10, 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 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0645 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | 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 10, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 10, 2021 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 10, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0759 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Dec 10, 2021 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 12).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 14
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 | 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)
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: 4.42
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.68
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.93
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) | 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 (%) | — | 36.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.52, RN 0.69, weekend 4.02.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.52 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for San Jose Healthcare & Wellness 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 / 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 |
All 11 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Sol Healthcare — 8 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.
- San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center — San Pablo, CA · overall 3/5
- The Rehabilitation Center of Oakland — Oakland, CA · overall 1/5
- Alameda Healthcare & Wellness Center — Alameda, CA · overall 2/5
- Cupertino Healthcare & Wellness Center — Cupertino, CA · overall 3/5
- Hayward Healthcare & Wellness Center — Hayward, CA · overall 2/5
- Oakland Healthcare & Wellness Center — Oakland, CA · overall 5/5
- Roseville Point Health & Wellness Center — Roseville, CA · overall 2/5abuse
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
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?"
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?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 58 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 | |
| Empress Care Center, LLC | 4.0 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★☆ | 2/5 | |
| Herman Health Care Center | 4.3 mi | San Jose, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Santa Clara, CA — 50 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Santa Clara Post Acute — Santa Clara, CA · overall 3/5
- Saratoga Retirement Community Health Center — Saratoga, CA · overall 5/5
- Stonebrook Health and Rehabilitation — Los Gatos, CA · overall 5/5
- Sunny View Manor — Cupertino, CA · overall 5/5
- Sunnyvale Gardens Post Acute — Sunnyvale, CA · overall 3/5
- Sunnyvale Post-Acute Center — Sunnyvale, CA · overall 1/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055388.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).