California ›Watsonville

Watsonville Post Acute Center

525 Auto Center Drive, Watsonville, CA 95076 · Santa Cruz County · 95 certified beds · avg 87 residents/day · certified since Aug 9, 1968

Part of chain: CAMBRIDGE HEALTHCARE SERVICES (32 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$8,018
Fines, last 3 years
4.20
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5

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)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Mar 8, 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Apr 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (35)

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
Aug 29, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Aug 29, 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.
Aug 29, 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.
Aug 29, 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.
Aug 29, 2025D · 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.
Aug 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 8, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Mar 8, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 8, 2024E · 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.
Mar 8, 2024E · 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.
Mar 8, 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.
Mar 8, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 8, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Mar 8, 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.
Dec 13, 2021F · 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 13, 2021F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Dec 13, 2021F · 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 13, 2021F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Dec 13, 2021F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Dec 13, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 13, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.
Dec 13, 2021E · 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.
Dec 13, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Dec 13, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Dec 13, 2021E · 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 13, 2021E · 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.
Dec 13, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.
Dec 13, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Dec 13, 2021D · 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.
Dec 13, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 13, 2021D · 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.
Dec 13, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Dec 13, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 13, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Dec 13, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2021210F
202481G ▲
202560F

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 $8,018.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 8, 2024Fine$8,018

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)4.204.313.95top 44% in California; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.630.610.69top 30% in California; top 44% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.823.903.50top 45% in California; top 29% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.530.510.48top 29% in California; top 30% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)41.336.745.8bottom 34% in California; top 40% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.038.142.9bottom 29% in California; bottom 39% 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 4.11, RN 0.62, weekend 3.73. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bering Properties LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—02/01/2007
BH AllianceOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2006
Crescent Facilities Operations LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%01/20/2026
Crescent Facilities Operations LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—12/19/2006
Jenmax Enterprises LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—02/01/2007
JK-CSH JV LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—11/01/2006
Manhattan Five Partners LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—11/01/2006
The Jacob Wintner TrustOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2006
The Wintner Living Trust Dated 7/08/1992OrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
Win Win Enterprises, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—02/01/2007
Wintner, JacobIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
525 Auto Center LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/15/2006
Bretsch, GregoryIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/25/2019
Bretsch, GregoryIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/25/2019
Bretsch, GregoryIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/25/2019
Butenko, JulieIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/24/2023
Butenko, JulieIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/24/2023
Cambridge Healthcare Services LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2014
Cambridge Healthcare Services LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/11/2025
Capela, HeidiIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/03/2023

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
Watsonville Nursing Center0.0 miWatsonville, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Manresa Healthcare Center0.6 miWatsonville, CA★★★★☆4/5
Pacific Coast Manor11.2 miCapitola, CA★★★★★5/5
Driftwood Healthcare Center - Santa Cruz12.0 miSanta Cruz, CA★★★★☆3/5
Redwood Grove Post Acute12.5 miSanta Cruz, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Santa Cruz Post Acute12.8 miSanta Cruz, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Gilroy Healthcare Center13.0 miGilroy, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Morgan Hill Healthcare Center15.3 miMorgan Hill, CA★★★★☆3/5
Pacific Hills Post Acute15.4 miMorgan Hill, CA★★★★☆3/5
Coastal Post Acute16.7 miSalinas, CA★★★★☆3/5
Windsor the Ridge Rehabilitation Center16.7 miSalinas, CA★★★★★4/5
Katherine Healthcare18.9 miSalinas, CA★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Watsonville →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055959.