California ›Richmond

Shields Richmond Nursing Center

1919 Cutting Blvd, Richmond, CA 94804 · Contra Costa County · 84 certified beds · avg 77 residents/day · certified since Sep 1, 1967

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.99
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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 (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 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint
Mar 10, 2026D · 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
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint
Apr 17, 2025E · 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.
Apr 17, 2025E · 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.
Apr 17, 2025E · 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.
Apr 17, 2025E · 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.
Apr 17, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
Apr 17, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Apr 17, 2025D · 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.
Apr 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Apr 17, 2025D · 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.
Apr 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.
Apr 17, 2025D · 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.
Apr 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 17, 2025B · 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.
Dec 11, 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. · from a complaint
Jul 18, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 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
Dec 8, 2023F · 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.
Dec 8, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Dec 8, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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 8, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Dec 8, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Dec 8, 2023F · 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.
Dec 8, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
Dec 8, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 8, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems.
Dec 8, 2023E · 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
Dec 8, 2023E · Potential for harm, 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.
Dec 8, 2023D · 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.
Dec 8, 2023D · 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.
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience.
Dec 8, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint
Dec 8, 2023D · 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
May 12, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition.
May 12, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 12, 2022D · 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.
May 12, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 12, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
May 12, 2022D · 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.
May 12, 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (15 → 13).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202270E
2023170F
202430D
2025130E
202630D

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)3.994.313.95bottom 40% in California; top 40% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.340.610.69top 5% in California; top 7% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.703.903.50bottom 47% in California; top 33% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)1.110.510.48top 7% in California; top 4% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)18.236.745.8top 5% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)27.838.142.9top 33% in California; top 25% in the U.S.

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 3.71, RN 1.25, weekend 3.44. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Shields, MoniqueIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest49%05/01/2001
Shields, WillieIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—11/01/1991
Abiad, RuelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Abiad, RuelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2019
Antigua, DarwinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/19/2020
Antigua, DarwinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/19/2020
Booker, WhitneyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/10/2008
Booker, WhitneyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/10/2008
Dela Cruz, RaphaelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/08/2022
Dela Cruz, RaphaelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/08/2022
Dhugga, GurpreetIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2017
Dhugga, GurpreetIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2017
Gabriel, AaronIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/26/2017
Gabriel, AaronIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/26/2017
Goward, AngelinaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/23/2003
Goward, AngelinaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/23/2003
Hutson, JaniceIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/15/2004
Hutson, JaniceIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/15/2004
Myers, ArkitaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/27/2010
Myers, ArkitaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/27/2010

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
Richmond Post Acute Care1.5 miRichmond, CA★★★★☆4/5
Vale Healthcare Center2.2 miSan Pablo, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Creekside Healthcare Center2.3 miSan Pablo, CA★★★★★4/5
San Pablo Healthcare & Wellness Center2.3 miSan Pablo, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Shields Nursing Center3.2 miEl Cerrito, CA★★★★☆3/5
Greenridge Post Acute3.7 miEl Sobrante, CA★★★★★5/5
Chaparral House5.2 miBerkeley, CA★★★★★4/5
Kyakameena Care Center6.2 miBerkeley, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Elmwood Care Center6.4 miBerkeley, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Ashby Care Center6.5 miBerkeley, CA★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Richmond →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055292.