California ›San Pablo

San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center

13328 San Pablo Avenue, San Pablo, CA 94806 · Contra Costa County · 108 certified beds · avg 98 residents/day · certified since Sep 29, 1972

Part of chain: SOL HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$10,036
Fines, last 3 years
3.98
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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Feb 2, 2024 · F-0689

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 (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Feb 23, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (43)

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
Mar 30, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Feb 19, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 19, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Feb 2, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility hired someone with an official finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft against them. Facilities are not allowed to employ people with such findings. · from a complaint
Dec 30, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 26, 2025F · 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.
Jun 26, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Jun 26, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Jun 26, 2025D · 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.
Jun 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 26, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes.
Jun 26, 2025C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Jun 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 1, 2025D · 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
Jan 2, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jan 2, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 2, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Oct 9, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint
Oct 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Oct 4, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jul 3, 2024E · 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. · from a complaint
Jun 20, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · from a complaint
Apr 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint
Apr 24, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 2, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Feb 2, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Feb 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 2, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 2, 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 16, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Jun 4, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving.
Jun 4, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Jun 4, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jun 4, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Jun 4, 2021D · 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.
Jun 4, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jun 4, 2021D · 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.
Jun 4, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jun 4, 2021B · 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 stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 7).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202190E
202310E
2024151J ▲
2025140F
202640E

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)

1 fine totaling $10,036.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 2, 2024Fine$10,036

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)3.984.313.95bottom 40% in California; top 40% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.680.610.69top 26% in California; top 39% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.643.903.50bottom 42% in California; top 36% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.470.510.48top 35% in California; top 37% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)0.036.745.8—
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 4.16, RN 0.71, weekend 3.81. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Majer, SolIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/04/2010
Sol Healthcare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest99%02/04/2010
Cooper, DustinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/15/2023
Cooper, DustinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/15/2023
Eretz San Pablo Properties LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/29/2019
Rechnitz, ShlomoIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2020
Rechnitz, ShlomoIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2020
Rijhwani, MarviIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2024
Rijhwani, MarviIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2024
Rockport Administrative Services, LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/04/2010
Rockport Administrative Services, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/16/2025

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Vale Healthcare Center0.6 miSan Pablo, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Creekside Healthcare Center0.6 miSan Pablo, CA★★★★★4/5
Richmond Post Acute Care1.2 miRichmond, CA★★★★☆4/5
Greenridge Post Acute1.7 miEl Sobrante, CA★★★★★5/5
Shields Richmond Nursing Center2.3 miRichmond, CA★★★★☆2/5
Shields Nursing Center4.0 miEl Cerrito, CA★★★★☆3/5
Chaparral House6.4 miBerkeley, CA★★★★★4/5
Kyakameena Care Center7.2 miBerkeley, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Elmwood Care Center7.5 miBerkeley, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Ashby Care Center7.6 miBerkeley, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Berkeley Pines Skilled Nursing Center7.8 miBerkeley, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
The Rehabilitation Center of Oakland9.6 miOakland, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in San Pablo →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 056359.