How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Vista Manor Nursing Center
120 Jose Figueres Avenue, San Jose, CA 95116 (opens Google Maps) · Santa Clara County · (408) 272-1400· 99 certified beds · avg 88 residents/day · certified since Nov 10, 1991 · 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: GENERATIONS HEALTHCARE (27 facilities, chain avg rating 4.1★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Oct 11, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.92
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: ★★★★★5/5 · 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 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0880
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
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
View all 23 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 9, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | 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 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 11, 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 7, 2022 | 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 7, 2022 | 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 7, 2022 | 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 7, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 7, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 7, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607 |
| Oct 7, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 7, 2022 | 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 7, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 7, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0758 |
| Oct 7, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Dec 19, 2019 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2019 | 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 19, 2019 | 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 19, 2019 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2019 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2019 | 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 19, 2019 | 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 19, 2019 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 3).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 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: 3.92
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.42
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.41
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) | 3.92 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 35% in California; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.42 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 38% in California; bottom 25% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.41 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 23% in California; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.28 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 29% in California; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 36.5 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 49% in California; top 28% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 10.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 5% in California; top 4% 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 4.31, RN 0.46, weekend 3.75.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.31 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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 Vista Manor Nursing 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 9% | 02/01/1998 |
| Olds, Thomas | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 78% | 02/01/1998 |
| Bmo Bank National Association | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/20/2023 |
| Life Generations Healthcare, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/29/2019 |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/1998 |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/1998 |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/20/2023 |
| Olds, Thomas | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/1998 |
| Olds, Thomas | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/1998 |
All 9 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 Generations Healthcare — 27 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.
- Walnut Creek Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cent — Walnut Creek, CA · overall 2/5
- Coronado Ridge Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Ce — Henderson, NV · overall 4/5
- Anberry Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Atwater, CA · overall 5/5
- Arbor Hills Nursing Center — La Mesa, CA · overall 5/5
- Bayberry Skilled Nursing & Healthcare Center — Concord, CA · overall 4/5
- Bradley Court — El Cajon, CA · overall 5/5
- Canyon Oaks Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Canoga Park, CA · overall 3/5
- Castle Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — National City, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 26 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.
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
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 37% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 57 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canyon Springs Post-Acute | 0.2 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Inspire Behavioral Health | 1.7 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| San Jose Healthcare & Wellness Center | 2.0 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Ridge Post Acute | 2.2 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Mission de la Casa | 3.0 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Redwoods Post-Acute | 5.2 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Skyline Healthcare Center - San Jose | 5.4 mi | San Jose, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| O'Connor Hospital D/P SNF | 5.4 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| White Blossom Care Center | 5.5 mi | San Jose, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Milpitas Care Center | 5.5 mi | Milpitas, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Win Post-Acute | 5.8 mi | Santa Clara, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Santa Clara Post Acute | 5.9 mi | Santa Clara, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
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.
- Webster House — Palo Alto, CA · overall 5/5
- Westwood Post Acute — San Jose, CA · overall 2/5
- Woodlands Healthcare Center — Los Gatos, CA · overall 5/5
- A Grace Sub Acute & Skilled Care — San Jose, CA · overall 4/5
- Almaden Health and Rehabilitation Center — San Jose, CA · overall 4/5
- Baywood Post Acute — Campbell, CA · overall 3/5
- Camden Postacute Care, INC — Campbell, 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 555483.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).