Home / California / La Mesa
5555 Grossmont Center Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941 · San Diego County · (619) 740-6000
30 certified beds, about 19 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1993
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 555572 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 20, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the California average is 15.6, the national average 9.2).
None of its 14 health citations since May 2023 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 6.71 hours per resident per day, against 4.52 across California and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 1.94 of those hours.
15.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (California average 36.7%).
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 14 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food safety and practices were maintained in the kitchen according to standards of practice and policy when food items were not labeled and dated. These failures had the potential to expose the residents to contaminated food and unsanitary practices and place them at risk of developing foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to offer a bedhold (the practice of reserving a resident's bed when they are hospitalized ) for one of three sampled residents (Resident 17). This failure had the potential for Resident 17 to not receive continuity of care. According to the admission Record, Resident 17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included severe asthma (a condition in which the airways become narrow, making it difficult to breathe), and immune deficiency disorder (a disorder which affects the body's ability to fight infections). The admission Record indicated Resident 17 was transferred to acute care (short-term care for severe injuries, illnesses or other urgent medical conditions) on 3/22/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement its policy on specimen collection for one of two sampled residents (Resident 69) when Resident 69 was instructed to provide a sputum specimen. As a result, staff did not follow-up on what to do with the specimen. This failure resulted in the resident feeling bothered and not cared for when the sputum specimen was left at his bedside and not picked up by staff who instructed him to provide the sputum specimen.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate care and services for one of two sampled residents (Resident 72) when Resident 72 had a delay in straight urinary catheterization (SUC -tube to drain the bladder). This failure had the potential to result in discomfort and/or health complications for Resident 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to implement infection control procedures when visitors were not educated regarding the need to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE-gown, gloves, masks) or hand hygiene. This failure had the potential for the spread of infection to other residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and served in accordance with professional standards for food safety when: 1. Spoiled food was stored amongst non-spoiled food inside the walk-in refrigerators; Food was stored without being covered in the refrigeration units; Food was not consistently labeled and dated; The cool-down process (a time sensitive procedure to chill cooked food to a safe temperature range) was not initiated for two trays of cooked chicken. 2. Three dietary aids (DA 1, DA 2, and DA 3) with long facial hair were not wearing beard guards in the kitchen and during food service; One DA (DA 1) used contaminated gloves to touch ready-to-eat food. These failures had the potential for residents consume contaminated and/or hazardous food which put them at risk for foodborne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement an Antibiotic Stewardship Program to monitor antibiotic use. This failure had the potential to increase the risk of adverse events from unnecessary or inappropriate antibiotic use.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 8 residents (74) was reassessed after pain medications were administered. As a result, the resident's pain may not have been relieved.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of five residents (5, 124) were appropriately offered the pneumococcal vaccine and had the education regarding benefits and potential side effects of pneumococcal vaccine explained to them and documented in the medical record. In addition, the facility's infection prevention nurse (IPN) 1 did not have a process to readily identify the residents' vaccination status. As a result of this deficient practice, the facility missed opportunities to ensure pneumococcal vaccines had been offered to all residents which put residents at potential risk of contracting pneumonia.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of five residents (122, 11) were offered/re-offered the COVID-19 vaccination and had documentation that education regarding the vaccine had been provided. In addition, the facility's infection prevention nurse (IPN) 1 did not have a process to readily identify the residents' vaccination status. As a result of this deficient practice, the facility did not provide all residents the opportunity to accept or change their decision to accept a COVID-19 vaccine which put residents at potential risk of contracting COVID-19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen staff consistently documented accurate final rinse temperature of the dishwashing machine. As a result, there was a potential the final rinse temperatures were not in the required range.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order for oxygen therapy was in place before administration for one of three sampled residents (Resident 113) with respiratory issues. As a result, there was a potential Resident 113 did not receive the correct amount of oxygen.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to consistently monitor specific target behaviors and adverse side effects for the use psychotropic medications for two of three residents (3, 8) selected for unnecessary medication review. As a result, the residents were at increased risk for receiving unnecessary medication. 1. Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included left humerus (arm) fracture, per the resident's demographic sheet. On 5/17/23, Resident 3's clinical record reviewed. A physician's progress note, dated 4/28/23, indicated Resident 3 also had diagnoses that included bipolar disorder and adjustment disorder. According to the physician's orders, on 2/1/23 Resident 3 was prescribed quetiapine (antipsychotic) 150 mg at bedtime for bipolar disorder. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen staff were knowledgeable of the proper chemical sanitation range values. As a result, there was a potential for spread of food-borne illness.
4 fire safety citations on file: 1 on June 20, 2025, 2 on May 24, 2024, 1 on May 18, 2023.
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) | 6.71 | 4.52 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 1.94 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 6.08 | 4.09 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.47 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 2.30 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 15.2% | 36.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 22.2% | 38.1% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS expects 3.77 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 6.95 on weekdays and 6.08 on weekends, 13% 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 7.55 in April to June 2025 to 6.71 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 | 6.71 | 1.94 | 6.95 | 6.08 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 19 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 6.80 | 1.85 | 7.00 | 6.29 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 19 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 6.93 | 2.16 | 7.15 | 6.36 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 18 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 7.55 | 2.31 | 7.89 | 6.66 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 15 |
| 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 short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.3 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 6.4 | 11.2 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Grossmont Hospital D/P SNF's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (71.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
71.6% 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. 225 eligible stays.
10.9% 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. 229 eligible stays.
5.2% 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. 134 eligible stays.
33.3% 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. 135 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. 155 residents counted.
7.7% 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. 155 residents counted.
50.8% 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. 128 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: GROSSMONT HOSPITAL CORPORATION.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sharp Healthcare | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 05/29/1991 | |
| Allsing, Steven | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2021 | |
| Evans, William | Corporate director | Individual | 10/31/2022 | |
| Goldberg, Ann | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Hall, Virginia | Corporate director | Individual | 06/01/2025 | |
| Howard, Christopher | Corporate director | Individual | 01/31/2019 | |
| Keltner, Diane | Corporate director | Individual | 09/01/2017 | |
| Levenson, Howard | Corporate director | Individual | 06/01/2025 | |
| Moore, Brian | Corporate director | Individual | 12/01/2016 | |
| Oberndorfer, Ron | Corporate director | Individual | 06/01/2016 | |
| Potter, Brian | Corporate director | Individual | 06/01/2025 | |
| Watkins, Margaret | Corporate director | Individual | 06/01/2025 | |
| Ammon, Dee | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2020 | |
| Fonseca, John | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2019 | |
| Lenac, Randolph | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2020 | |
| Sharp Healthcare | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/29/1991 | |
| Benjalil, Fahd | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/01/2024 | |
| Evans, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2016 | |
| Paradis, Marguerite | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/23/2014 | |
| Villarta, Maria Darlene | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/28/1998 | |
| Sharp Healthcare | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/29/1991 | |
| Evans, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/03/2026 | |
| Kalmar, Franklin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/16/2025 | |
| Villarta, Maria Darlene | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/28/1998 |
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.