How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
The Ridge Post Acute
1355 Clayton Road, San Jose, CA 95127 (opens Google Maps) · Santa Clara County · (408) 251-3070· 54 certified beds · avg 46 residents/day · certified since Sep 5, 2002 · 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: LINKS HEALTHCARE GROUP (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 12, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.53
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 41 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0550
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. F-0726
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. · from a complaint F-0656
View all 41 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 9, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0638 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jan 12, 2026 | 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 25, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | 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 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | 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 |
| May 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · from a complaint · F-0745 |
| May 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0610 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Apr 21, 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| Apr 21, 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Apr 21, 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 |
| Apr 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its staff were vaccinated for COVID-19 in accordance with the federal requirements in effect at the time. · F-0888 |
| Apr 21, 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 9).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 10
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 20 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 10 | 0 | F |
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: 3.53
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.25
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.30
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) | 3.53 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 12% in California; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.25 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 4% in California; bottom 5% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.30 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 16% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.24 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 20% in California; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 48.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 17% in California; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| 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 3.93, RN 0.27, weekend 3.67.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.93 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Ridge Post Acute. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clawson, Scott | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Earl, Steven | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Morales, James | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 24% | 10/07/2019 |
| Morales, Judith | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 24% | 10/07/2019 |
| Sanofsky, Jack | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Tilford, Toby | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Anderson, Chad | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Beardsley, Mary | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Beardsley, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Bernholz, Victoria | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Bernholz, Victoria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Deguzman, Myrna | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Deguzman, Myrna | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Eide Bailly LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Forbright Bank | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2019 |
| Frojelin, Antonette | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Frojelin, Antonette | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Heaton, Kolby | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Heaton, Kolby | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
| Kaur, Ishdeep | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2019 |
Showing 20 of 31 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 11 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Links Healthcare Group — 32 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.
- The Shores Post-Acute — San Diego, CA · overall 3/5
- The Springs Post-Acute — Norwalk, CA · overall 1/5
- The Vineyards Healthcare Center — Livermore, CA · overall 5/5
- Westwood Post Acute — San Jose, CA · overall 2/5
- Applingwood Post Acute — Cordova, TN · overall 2/5
- Covington Post Acute — Covington, TN · overall 4/5
- Cypress Grove Post Acute — Jackson, TN · overall 3/5
- Harborview Post Acute — Memphis, TN · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 31 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "Where do you post your daily staffing numbers, and can I see today's?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"
- "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 48% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 31 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 52 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inspire Behavioral Health | 1.8 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Vista Manor Nursing Center | 2.2 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Canyon Springs Post-Acute | 2.2 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mission de la Casa | 2.8 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| San Jose Healthcare & Wellness Center | 4.0 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Redwoods Post-Acute | 6.7 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Herman Health Care Center | 7.1 mi | San Jose, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Milpitas Care Center | 7.2 mi | Milpitas, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| White Blossom Care Center | 7.3 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Lincoln Glen Skilled Nursing | 7.4 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Skyline Healthcare Center - San Jose | 7.4 mi | San Jose, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| O'Connor Hospital D/P SNF | 7.4 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
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.
- The Terraces at Los Altos Health Facility — Los Altos, CA · overall 4/5
- The Terraces of Los Gatos — Los Gatos, CA · overall 5/5
- The Villas at Saratoga Skilled Nsg & Assisted LVG — Saratoga, CA · overall 1/5
- The Win Post-Acute — Santa Clara, CA · overall 5/5
- Vasona Creek Healthcare Center — Los Gatos, CA · overall 2/5
- VI at Palo Alto — Palo Alto, CA · overall 5/5
- Villa Siena — Mountain View, 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 555799.