Deficiency Index

Smith Ranch Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cente

San Rafael, California · CCN 555595

29 surveys since 2011. The first finding at harm level was recorded in 2017.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
140
Surveys
29
Harm or worse
9
Immediate jeopardy
0
The record, 2011–2026
’11’15’20’25’26
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Harm or worse9

Findings where a surveyor recorded actual harm to a resident.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file22/29

Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.

The facility

Certified beds
80
Ownership
For profit - Limited Liability company
Chain
GENERATIONS HEALTHCARE
County
Marin
Medicare-certified since
1994

CMS ratings

Overall
3
Health inspection
2
Staffing
3
Quality measures
5

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Since 2021, this facility recorded somewhat more weighted findings than its peer group.

Weighted by harm level, against 423 for-profit facilities of 66–99 beds in California.

Last survey on record

Jun 9, 2026

153 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Staffing

MeasureThis facilityPeer median
Nurse hours per resident day4.194.16
Registered-nurse hours per resident day0.42—
Annual nurse turnover32.5%37.5%

As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.

Enforcement

No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ—K—L—
Actual harmG23.9%H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD2549.0%E2039.2%F47.8%
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 51 of the 140 citations on record.

Most frequently cited here

In CMS’s current monthly file.

  • F6584×

    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.

  • F6413×

    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.

  • F6863×

    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.

  • F8123×

    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.

  • F5842×

    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Smith Ranch Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cente, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • Actual harm, patternF686Aug 22, 2023

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to accurately assess and provide necessary services to prevent the development of a facility-acquired pressure ulcers (injuries to skin and underlying tissue resulting from prolonged pressure on the skin) and worsening of the pressure ulcer, for three out of five sampled residents, Resident 20, Resident 110, and Resident 29 when: 1. The facility did not identify the presence of a pressure ulcer timely for Resident 20, which resulted in the development of an Unstageable (Full thickness tissue loss in which the ulcer is covered with by slough - Slough is necrotic (dead) tissue that needs to be removed from the wound for healing to take place) and/or eschar (Eschar, pronounced es-CAR, is dead tissue that sheds or falls… […]

  • Actual harm, patternF697Aug 22, 2023

    Based on observation, interviews and records review, the facility did not ensure a pain management program was provided to relieve pain and discomfort for one of three sampled residents (Resident 29), when staff did not administer pain medication to Resident 29 before wound treatment, as ordered by a physician. This failure resulted in Resident 29 experiencing pain and discomfort during wound treatment. (Reference F686) Findings: During a record review for Resident 29, the Face sheet (A one-page summary of important information about a resident) indicated Resident 29 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including but not limited to Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL- is a rare type of cancer that begins in white blood cells[responsible for protecting your body from infection]); Malignant… […]

  • Actual harm, isolatedF686Jul 5, 2023

    Based on observation, interviews, and records review, the facility failed to ensure one of two sampled residents (Resident 1) with a pressure ulcer (localized damage to the skin and/or underlying soft tissue, usually over a bony area, or related to a medical or other device) received necessary interventions and services to promote healing and pain control when: 1. The facility did not provide pain medication to Resident 1 prior to wound treatment. This failure resulted to Resident 1 to experience pain and discomfort. 2. The facility did not complete the Nutritional Comprehensive Assessment for Resident 1 upon admission. This failure had the potential for further wound deterioration and delayed wound healing. (Reference F692) 3. […]

  • Actual harm, isolatedF692Jul 5, 2023

    Based on interview, and records review, the facility failed to ensure that nutritional care and services were provided to one of two sampled Residents (Resident 1) when: a. The facility did not obtain Resident 1 ' s weight on admission and did not monitor Resident 1 ' s weekly weights. b. The facility did not complete the Nutritional Comprehensive Assessment for Resident upon admission. This failure resulted to a twenty (20) lbs. (pounds - any of various units of mass and weight) which yielded to 16 percent (%) weight loss for a period of seven days. Findings: a. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF575May 16, 2025

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to publicly post California Department of Public Health (CDPH) contact information for residents residing in facility. This failure resulted in residents not being afforded the right to make a complaint to CDPH regarding concerns with their care or the facility. Findings: During an interview on 5/13/25 at 2:04 p.m. with Resident Council members, eight out of eight residents stated they did not know how or where to file complaints to CDPH and could not recall if information was publicly available in the facility. During a concurrent observation and interview on 5/13/25 at 2:56 p.m. with the Activities Director (AD), CDPH contact information was not posted on the first or second floor of the facility. […]

Read 27 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 27 of 140 on record.

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Jun 9, 2026Complaint2 findings
  • Apr 15, 2026Complaint5 findings
  • Feb 12, 2026Standard9 findings
  • May 16, 2025Standard14 findings
  • Apr 22, 2025Complaint1 finding
  • Aug 22, 2023Standard and complaint23 findings · 4 harm
  • Jul 5, 2023Complaint6 findings · 2 harm
  • Dec 2, 2022Complaint1 finding
Show the 21 earlier surveys
  • Nov 30, 2022Complaint1 finding
  • Jul 6, 2021Complaint1 finding
  • Dec 17, 2020Infection control1 finding
  • Jun 25, 2020Infection control1 finding
  • Mar 13, 2020Complaint1 finding
  • Nov 19, 2019Standard and complaint8 findings
  • Nov 10, 2018Standard13 findings
  • Nov 6, 2018Complaint1 finding
  • Mar 28, 2018Complaint2 findings
  • Jan 9, 2018Complaint2 findings · 2 harm
  • Nov 17, 2017Standard and complaint8 findings
  • Aug 8, 2017Complaint1 finding
  • Jul 6, 2017Complaint1 finding
  • Apr 19, 2017Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
  • Nov 21, 2016Standard and complaint8 findings
  • Nov 4, 2016Complaint4 findings
  • Nov 6, 2015Standard6 findings
  • Oct 17, 2014Standard3 findings
  • Sep 13, 2013—5 findings
  • Aug 23, 2012—3 findings
  • Jun 20, 2011—8 findings

Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.

Comparable facilities

The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.

Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction