Home / California / National City
902 South Euclid Avenue, National City, CA 91950 · San Diego County · (619) 791-7700
104 certified beds, about 88 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1968
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 055964 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 24, 2025, inspectors cited 2 health deficiencies (the California average is 15.6, the national average 9.2).
None of its 30 health citations since March 2019 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists 4 fines totaling $297,367 in the last three years; the largest was $285,130, and the latest is dated April 25, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.21 hours per resident per day, against 4.52 across California and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.63 of those hours.
33.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (California average 36.7%).
CMS links it to Generations Healthcare, an affiliated group of 27 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and functioning elopement prevention measures for one resident (Resident 1). As a result, Resident 1 exited the facility without staff knowledge and was later located outside the facility, placing Resident 1 at risk for serious injury or death.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to implement measures to prevent pressure injury (damage to the skin and underlying tissue caused by prolonged pressure on a specific area of the body) when there was no monitoring for the use of a protective head gear (helmet) for one of the two residents reviewed for pressure injury. (Resident 2). This failure had the potential to cause the development of pressure injury. Resident 2's record was reviewed. Resident 2 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included right hemiparesis and hemiplegia (weakness or the inability to move on one side of the body, making it hard to perform everyday activities like eating or dressing) and epilepsy (a condition where a person's brain activity becomes abnormal, causing seizures), per the facility's admission Record. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess and change a peripherally inserted central catheter line (PICC - a long, thin, flexible tube inserted into a vein in the arm and threaded into a large vein near the heart) dressing for one of 18 sampled resident (Resident 40). This failure had the potential for medical complications related to Resident 40's intravenous (IV - delivery of fluids, medications, or nutrients into the body's bloodstream, usually through a needle or catheter inserted into a vein) therapy. According to the facility's admission Record, Resident 40 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic osteomyelitis (bone infection) of the left ankle and foot. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the pharmacy consultant identified irregularities during a medication regimen review for one of three residents (Resident 1) reviewed for medications. In addition, the facility failed to ensure a pharmacy recommendation for labs was acted upon for Resident 1. These failures placed resident 1 at risk for adverse consequences due to receiving an excessive dose of a medication, and lack of laboratory tests to monitor drug levels.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three residents reviewed for medications (Resident 1) was free from significant medication errors when the prescribed dose of tacrolimus (a medication given to organ transplant recipients designed to prevent organ rejection) was not given per physician ' s orders. This failure placed Resident 1 at risk for adverse effects and health decline.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure one of four nursing staff reviewed had the required continuing education and state certifications for working with the facilty resident population. This failure placed up to 11 residents at risk for harm due to a lack of required education related to patient care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff completed annual Federal mandatory abuse training for one of one employee (licensed nurse 1 {LN 1}, reviewed for abuse. As a result, all residents were at risk for possible staff to resident abuse (verbal, physical, financial, sexual, neglect and isolation).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the licensed nurse (LN) re-checked the resident's blood pressure (BP - a measure of the heart pumping blood around the body) after administering the medication as ordered by the physician for 1 of 4 sampled residents (1). This failure could delay Resident 1's care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure sanitary conditions were maintained when one can of condensed milk was dented, and two cans of white hominy (a type of corn from white corn kernels) had rusted lid and were not removed from the storage. These failures had the potential to cause widespread food borne illnesses among residents who consume food from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to observe infection control measures when: 1. Nursing staff failed to properly disinfect resident's glucometer for four randomly selected residents (Residents 241, 46, 67, 34) according to manufacturer's specifications. 2. Nursing staff failed to remove personal protective equipment gown after resident care prior to leaving resident room. 3. Tube feed formula was not discarded upon completion. 4. Tube feed tubing was not labeled. 5. An indwelling catheter bag was in contact with the floor. These deficient practices have the potential for the development and the spread of infection to all residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were followed for one of 21 sampled residents (48) when the physician's orders were not clarified and transcribed correctly. This failure resulted in the physician's order not being followed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the manufacturer's setting for air loss mattress was followed for one of 21 sampled residents (Resident 339). This failure had the potential to affect Resident 339's skin integrity and comfort.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that fall prevention interventions were implemented for one Resident (64). In addition, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision to residents when an exit door was propped open. This failure caused Resident 64 to experience a fall and the potential for residents to go outside the facility without staff supervision.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate care and treatment to a Gastrostomy Tube (GT, a tube placed surgically directly into to the stomach to deliver liquid food) for one of one sampled resident (Resident 82) when the LN did not verify GT placement prior to administering medication. This failure increased the risk for Resident 82 to develop complications related to improper GT placement.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain and follow physician's order for residents receiving oxygen therapy for two of four sampled residents (Resident 25,340). This deficient practice had the potential to result in complications from lack of or excessive oxygen therapy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a fluid restriction order for a resident (390) having dialysis was followed. This failure had the potential to cause fluid overload for the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement its pharmaceutical policies and procedures when nursing staff did not ensure accurate controlled substance (CS, medications that can be easily abused and are under strict government control) accountability for two of two CS records reviewed (for Residents 40 and 88). This failure had the potential for diversion (used illegally) of controlled substance medications (a drug that can be abused or cause addiction).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of four sampled residents (Resident 25) was free from an unnecessary psychotropic (drugs that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior) medication when licensed nurses did not attempt non-pharmacological interventions prior to the use of Quetiapine (medication for mental illness), administered multiple medications (Quetiapine and Duloxetine-medication for depression) for the same indication, and administered Quetiapine without appropriate behavioral monitoring. These failures increased the potential for medication interactions, adverse reactions, and unidentified risks associated with the use of psychotropic medications that included but not limited to sedation, respiratory depression, constipation, anxiety, agitation, and memory loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility medication error rate did not exceed five percent or greater when observation of 25 opportunities during the medication pass resulted in two errors. The calculated medication error rate was 8 percent. These failures placed Residents 65 and 289 at risk for irritation, sensitivity, and infection at site of application and injection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a facility significant medication error when Valproic Acid (medication for seizures and mental disorders) was ordered and administered to Resident 82 for a seizure diagnosis. Resident 82 did not have a history or diagnosis of seizures. During a review of Resident 82's admission Record (AR, document with resident information), dated 8/9/22, the AR indicated Resident 82 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis including diabetes, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), and dementia (memory loss) . During a review of Resident 82's Order Summary Report, dated 8/9/22, the Order Summary Report, indicated a physician's order for Valproic Acid 250 milligrams (mg- unit of measure) per 5 milliliters (ml- unit of measure) twice daily for seizures. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications had proper storage and labeling when: a. For Resident 390, two inhalers and for Resident 11, one inhaler that that required to be dated when opened, did not have patient identifiers or expiration date/date open stickers, and were found in a medication cart, and an inhaler was found to have been discontinued b. For Resident 58, an expired eye drop was found in a medication cart c. For Resident 79, a discontinued psychotropic (drugs that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior) medication was found in a medication cart. These failures had the potential to be incorrectly administered and decrease medication potency that could compromise the therapeutic effectiveness of stored medications, medications for Residents 390, 11, 58, and 79.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure: 1. Accurate and timely pharmaceutical services for delivery of a physician ordered pain medication for one of four residents reviewed for pain (Resident 204), and, 2. A system of records that enabled accurate reconciliation and accountability of schedule medications was established, when 68 tablets of schedule II medications were not accounted for, for 3 randomly sampled residents (68, 27, and 70). The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) classifies medications with abuse potentials into schedules, from schedule II to schedule V. Schedule II has the highest potential for abuse, and schedule V has the lowest potential for abuse. These failures had the potential to cause Resident 204 to endure unnecessary pain, and the facility to not be aware if controlled drugs were being diverted (misused or abused).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure fresh produce was labeled with a use-by date. This failure had the potential to expose a vulnerable population to food-borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement the infection control program when: 1. A nurse practitioner did not implement hand hygiene during a dressing change. 2. A staff member did not don (put on articles of clothing) appropriate personal protective equipment before entering an isolation room. 3. A staff member did not sanitize (to clean and make free of disease causing elements) a blood pressure cuff after resident use. 4. A staff did not follow safe hand washing/hand hygiene practices while handling a gastronomy tube (GT- tube surgically inserted into stomach through abdominal wall to deliver food and medications) bag and during the administration of medication for one resident observed (303). These failures had the potential to transmit communicable diseases to other residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, a physician's order to assess and document pain level each shift was not followed for one of four residents reviewed for pain (204). This failure caused the potential for Resident 204 to suffer unnecessary pain.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to monitor and manage pain in one of four resident's reviewed for pain (204) in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and care plan. This failure had the potential to cause Resident 204 to endure unnecessary pain.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure fluid restriction was implemented for one of two residents (9) reviewed for dialysis. This failure had the potential to result in fluid overload for this resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure three residents reviewed for psychotropic medications (21, 90 and 97) received: 1. Clinical approval for a PRN psychotropic medication (lorazepam - a medication affecting mental state) to be used beyond fourteen days, and 2. Each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs. Resident 21 was prescribed and administered Nuplazid, an antipsychotic medication (treatment of psychosis - thought and emotions are so impaired that contact is lost with external reality), with inconsistent indication for use and lacked documented non-pharmacological intervention, and clinical justification to support the long term use. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was below 5 percent. The medication error rate was 7.69 percent. Two medication errors were observed, from a total of 26 opportunities, during the medication administration process for two randomly observed residents (44, 303). As a result, the facility could not ensure medications were correctly administered to the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two emergency kits (e-kit, emergency medications to be used in the case of an emergency) had a list of its contents, with expiration dates, readily available. This failure had the potential for the delay in locating and delivering necessary medications to residents in the event of an emergency.
19 fire safety citations on file: 6 on July 24, 2025, 7 on August 11, 2022, 6 on March 14, 2019.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| April 25, 2025 | Fine | $285,130 |
| November 6, 2023 | Fine | $3,147 |
| October 30, 2023 | Fine | $2,797 |
| October 10, 2023 | Fine | $6,293 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | California | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.21 | 4.52 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.63 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.52 | 4.09 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.06 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.51 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 33.3% | 36.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 38.1% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.14 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.48 on weekdays and 3.52 on weekends, 21% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 5.16 in April to June 2025 to 4.21 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.21 | 0.63 | 4.48 | 3.52 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 88 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.30 | 0.62 | 4.55 | 3.66 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 88 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.79 | 0.79 | 5.06 | 4.09 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 76 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 5.16 | 1.01 | 5.53 | 4.24 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 58 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| California, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.36 | 0.59 | 4.52 | 3.97 | 2.3% | 0.5% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| California, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.90 | $22.04 to $26.35 | 110,060 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $38.34 | $35.98 to $45.06 | 82,850 |
| Registered nurses | $67.44 | $58.87 to $83.25 | 338,940 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | California | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 10.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 9.8 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 34.0 | 12.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.1 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.4 | 11.2 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Friendship Manor Nursing & Rehab Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (61.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
61.4% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · California: 301 better, 190 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 137 eligible stays.
12.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · California: 10 better, 22 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 153 eligible stays.
9.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · California: 8 better, 48 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 94 eligible stays.
60.4% this home
Median of homes: California59.2% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 48 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: California0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 108 residents counted.
0.7% this home
Median of homes: California0.6% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 108 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: California96.2% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 15 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: GHC OF NATIONAL CITY I, LLC. CMS links this home to Generations Healthcare, a group of 27 nursing homes averaging 4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mastrocola, Lois | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 02/01/1998 | |
| Olds, Thomas | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 02/01/1998 | |
| Bmo Bank, N.a. | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 10/06/2021 | |
| Kevorkian, Michael | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 07/01/2019 | |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Corporate director | Individual | 02/01/1998 | |
| Olds, Thomas | Corporate director | Individual | 02/01/1998 | |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/01/1998 | |
| Olds, Thomas | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/01/1998 | |
| Life Generations Healthcare, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 02/01/1998 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in California. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.