How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Villa Rancho Bernardo Care Center
15720 Bernardo Center Drive, San Diego, CA 92127 (opens Google Maps) · San Diego County · (858) 672-3900· 299 certified beds · avg 286 residents/day · certified since Oct 12, 1988 · 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: DAVID JOHNSON (48 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 7, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.21
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 37 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The 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 F-0609
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. F-0641
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
View all 37 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0609 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 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. · F-0755 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 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. · F-0842 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 7, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 7, 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 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0805 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 11, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint · F-0655 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Nov 18, 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 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | 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 |
| Nov 18, 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 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | 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 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0805 |
| Nov 18, 2021 | 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. · F-0842 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 6).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
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 | 15 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 14 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 7 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 1 | 0 | D |
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: 4.21
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.96
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.95
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) | 4.21 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 44% in California; top 32% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.96 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 12% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.95 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 36% in California; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.77 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 12% in California; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 33.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 40% in California; top 20% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 27.3 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 31% in California; top 24% in the U.S. |
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 4.05, RN 0.92, weekend 3.80.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.05 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 4/5 · 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 Villa Rancho Bernardo Care 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Villa Rancho Bernardo Health Care LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 11/07/1996 |
| Cibc Bank USA | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2021 |
| Davis, Maria | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/08/2014 |
| Davis, Maria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/08/2014 |
| Dawson, Kyle | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/05/2023 |
| Dawson, Kyle | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/05/2023 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Farrales, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/06/2003 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/06/2023 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Oxford, Micheal | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2022 |
| Oxford, Micheal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2022 |
| Singh, Teja | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2016 |
| Singh, Teja | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2016 |
| Sun Mar Management Services | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/12/1989 |
| Villa Rancho Bernardo Health Care LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/07/1996 |
| Villa Rancho Bernardo Health Care LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/07/1996 |
Showing 20 of 21 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 1 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 David Johnson — 48 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.
- Vineland Post Acute — North Hollywood, CA · overall 3/5
- Vista View Post Acute — Vista, CA · overall 4/5
- Las Vegas Post Acute & Rehabilitation — Las Vegas, NV · overall 4/5
- Torrey Pines Post Acute and Rehabilitation — Las Vegas, NV · overall 2/5abuse
- Alcott Rehabilitation Hospital — Los Angeles, CA · overall 5/5
- Anaheim Healthcare Center, LLC — Anaheim, CA · overall 3/5
- Bay View Rehabilitation Hospital, LLC — Alameda, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- Blythe Post Acute LLC — Blythe, CA · overall 2/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 47 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.
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
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?"
- "CMS reports 33% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 21 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 69 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carmel Mountain Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center | 1.1 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Villas at Poway | 1.8 mi | Poway, CA | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Poway Healthcare Center | 1.8 mi | Poway, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Boulder Creek Post Acute | 2.4 mi | Poway, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Casa de Las Campanas | 3.3 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ocean View Post Acute | 6.4 mi | Escondido, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Redwood Terrace Health Center | 7.1 mi | Escondido, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Valley Vista Post Acute | 7.5 mi | Escondido, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Palomar Vista Healthcare Center | 8.4 mi | Escondido, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Palomar Heights Post Acute | 8.7 mi | Escondido, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Escondido Post Acute | 8.8 mi | Escondido, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bayshire Torrey Pines Post-Acute | 8.8 mi | San Diego, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in San Diego, CA — 83 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Village Square Healthcare Center — San Marcos, CA · overall 4/5
- Vista Knoll Specialized Care Facility — Vista, CA · overall 5/5
- Vista View Post Acute — Vista, CA · overall 4/5
- Amaya Springs Health Care Center — Spring Valley, CA · overall 3/5
- Arbor Hills Nursing Center — La Mesa, CA · overall 5/5
- Arroyo Vista Nursing Center — San Diego, CA · overall 5/5
- Aviara Healthcare Center — Encinitas, CA · overall 4/5
- Balboa Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — San Diego, CA · overall 4/5
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 555318.