Home / California / Pleasanton
300 Neal Street, Pleasanton, CA 94566 · Alameda County · (925) 462-2400
139 certified beds, about 126 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1973
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 056392 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 24, 2026, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the California average is 15.6, the national average 9.2).
None of its 13 health citations since April 2024 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.45 hours per resident per day, against 4.52 across California and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.69 of those hours.
42.9% 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 13 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food service safety and sanitation requirements were followed when:1. A 7-pound can of cherry pie filling was observed to have a dent near the top of the can and was stored alongside regular cans outside the designated dented can area.2. A cheese grater, hung up with clean food preparation items, was found with a broken red plastic rim.3. A green cutting board, stored with clean food preparation items, was found with yellow debris and was marred (surface with deep gouges) on one side. These failures had the potential to cause food borne illness among vulnerable residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow their policy and procedure for one of 34 sampled residents (Resident 44) when a comprehensive assessment for self-medication administration was not completed prior to Resident 44 self-administering medications. This failure resulted in unmonitored medication use and had the potential to result in medication overuse and errors.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) within 2 hours for two of 34 residents (Resident 5 and Resident 223). This failure had the potential to result in serious adverse physical, psychosocial, and emotional harm for Resident 5 and Resident 223.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a written bed hold notification to one of 34 sampled residents (Resident 142) and/or his representative upon Resident 142's transfer to an acute care hospital on 1/21/2026. This failure resulted in Resident 142 and/or his representative not informed of his rights to return to the facility following his hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to update the nursing care plan (an individualized plan that provides direction for a resident's medical care) for one of 34 sampled residents (Resident 95). This failure had the potential to affect the provision of care for Resident 95.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement physician orders for two of 34 sampled Residents (Resident 2 and Resident 135) when:1. A STAT (immediate) X-ray (medical imaging test to take pictures of the inside body) was not implemented timely per physician order, when the contract vendor did not show up to the facility and the facility failed to follow up with the vendor. This resulted in Resident 2 being transferred to an outside hospital for an X-ray, obtained approximately 28 hours later. 2. Resident 135' s PRN (as needed) pain medication was not administered according to physician's orders. These failures resulted in delayed treatment for Resident 2 and the potential to result in inadequate pain relief for Resident 135.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure: 1. A set of keys for a treatment cart (a cart with wound care medications and supplies), were left unattended, unsecured and not kept with the licensed nurses. This failure had the potential for unauthorized staff to have access to the treatment cart. 2. Self-administration medications, such as Vitamin D (essential nutrients that work together) were not stored in a locked compartment for one of 34 sample residents (Resident 44). In addition the following additional medications for Resident 44, Biotin (nutrient the body needs in small amounts), Vitamin K (essential nutrients that work together), Vitamin E (nutrient the body needs in small amounts), and Magnesium Glycinate (dietary supplement), were stored in an open shelf in Resident 44's shared room. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control practices for two of 34 sampled residents (Resident 150 and Resident 8) when:1. A Maintenance Assistant (MA 1) and a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA 1) did not wear personal protective equipment (PPE, specialized clothing or equipment worn by individuals to minimize exposure to hazards that cause serious workplace injuries or illnesses), in Resident 150's room, who was on contact precautions (series of procedures designed to minimize the transmission of infectious organisms by direct or indirect contact with an infected person or his/her surrounding environment).2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared in a clean environment, within standards for safety when: 1) Ice Machine floor drain was not maintained clean; 2) Food items stored in the refrigerator had expired with past use by dates; 3) Food items in the refrigerator did not have use by and expiration dates; 4) Food items in the pantry not labelled and stored properly; 5) Kitchenware (including pans, cutting boards, cooking utensils, ergo silverware, strainers, blender, food processor) were in poor condition; 6) The two-part sink, on the left side of sink, was being used for washing potatoes and the right side of the sink with a large cleaning bucket filled with rags, water and cleaning solution; 7) Drawers used to store cooking utensils were not maintained clean; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to verify gastrointestinal tube (GT - digestive tract and related organs) placement for one of five residents (Resident 10) prior to medication administration. This failure had the potential for medications not to be safely and effectively delivered into the stomach and may lead to serious complications such as aspiration pneumonia.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow the recipe when they prepared pureed chopped beef steak for 11 (Residents #10, #13, #41, #60, #67, #69, #74, #82, #84, #104, and #111) of 11 residents who received pureed diets from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's use/need for hearing aids were included on the baseline care plan for 1 (Resident # 180) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for communication/sensory.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a fall intervention was implemented as documented on the resident care plan for 1 (Resident #19) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for accidents.
18 fire safety citations on file: 3 on April 24, 2026, 5 on March 27, 2025, 10 on April 25, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 4.45 | 4.52 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 4.06 | 4.09 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.38 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.38 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 42.9% | 36.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 25.0% | 38.1% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.13 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 4.60 on weekdays and 4.06 on weekends, 12% 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 4.47 in April to June 2025 to 4.45 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 | 4.45 | 0.69 | 4.60 | 4.06 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 126 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.45 | 0.68 | 4.61 | 4.04 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 128 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.48 | 0.73 | 4.66 | 4.01 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 130 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.47 | 0.70 | 4.65 | 4.03 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 126 |
| 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| 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 | 4.4 | 10.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 1.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.6 | 9.8 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.3 | 12.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.3 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.5 | 11.2 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Pleasanton Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (63.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
63.1% 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. 396 eligible stays.
9.3% 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. 369 eligible stays.
6.8% 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. 240 eligible stays.
49.4% 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. 83 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. 249 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 249 residents counted.
99.1% this home
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. 108 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 PLEASANTON, LLC. CMS links this home to Generations Healthcare, a group of 27 nursing homes averaging 4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bmo Bank, N.a. | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 09/20/2023 | |
| Mastrocola, Lois | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 09/20/2023 | |
| 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 | 02/10/1998 |
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.
Licensed assisted living homes in the same town or within 5 miles, each with its California inspection record.
These are the official offices in California. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.