Home / California / Los Angeles
573 S. Boyle Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90033 · Los Angeles County · (213) 263-6195
106 certified beds, about 54 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 055115 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on December 12, 2025, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the California average is 15.6, the national average 9.2).
Of 39 health citations since November 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.59 hours per resident per day, against 4.52 across California and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.77 of those hours.
28.1% 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 39 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide supervision (the act of overseeing, managing, or directing a person, group, or process to ensure tasks are completed correctly and safely) or touching assistance (helper provides verbal cues and/or touching/steadying and/or contact guard assistance [when a caregiver keeps one or two hands on the patient's body at all times to steady the patient's balance) as indicated in the Minimum Data Set (MDS, resident assessment tool) for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident 1), who had a prior history of falls. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a resident centered fall care plan (document that outlines the facility's plan to provide personalized care to a resident based on the resident's needs) for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident 1), who had a prior history of falls. This deficient practice resulted to Resident 1 falling on the floor and transfer to General Acute Care Hospital (GACH) on 5/21/2026 and undergoing a left knee open reduction internal fixation (ORIF, a major surgery used to repair severe bone fractures that cannot be properly healed with a simple cast or splint) on 5/26/2026.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician that a medication was not given as ordered for one (1) of two (2) sampled residents (Resident 1) as indicated in the facility's Policy and Procedure (P&P), titled Medication and Treatment Administration Records, when:Registered Nurse 1 (RN 1) did not notify the physician when bisoprolol fumarate (medication used to treat hypertension [high blood pressure -BP]) was not given on 10/18/2025 at 8 PM.RN 1 did not notify the physician of Resident 1's low blood pressure and heart rate (HR) readings on 10/18/2025 at 7:03 PM. This deficient practice had the potential to result in delays in the necessary care and treatment of Resident 1, which could affect the resident's overall wellbeing.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility (Facility 1) failed to clarify and continue the therapeutic diet (a specially prescribed meal plan that modifies normal eating to treat a medical condition, managing nutrients, calories, textures, or allergies for health improvement, often prescribed by doctors and planned by dietitians for things like diabetes, heart disease, kidney issues, or post-surgery recovery) for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident 1) upon admission to the facility on 9/19/2025. This failure resulted in Resident 1 receiving the incorrect diet for three (3) days (9/19/2025 to 9/23/2025) upon admission to the facility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Low Air Loss mattress (LAL mattress, designed to prevent and treat pressure ulcer [localized damage to the skin and underlying soft tissue caused by prolonged pressure]) was set at the correct setting for two (2) of four (4) sampled residents (Residents 9 and 28) under pressure ulcer care area. This failure had the potential to result in the deterioration of Resident 9's pressure ulcer and development of Resident 28's pressure ulcer.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper food handling and the food service area was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) by failing to ensure:1. One dented saltshaker was free of food residue and was not crusted.2. One pepper shaker did not contain red food residue and had a dirty label.3. 3 burgundy plate covers were not peeling, chipped, and scratched. 4. 27 black food trays were not peeling and chipped. These deficient practices have the potential to result in pathogen (germ) exposure to residents, which could place the residents at risk for developing foodborne illness ([food poisoning] with symptoms including upset stomach, stomach cramps, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and fever) and can lead to other serious medical complications and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two (2) of four (4) sampled residents (Residents 65 and 6) under the environment care area, had their call light within reach in accordance with the care plan. This failure had the potential to put Residents 65 and 6 at risk for experiencing a delay in receiving assistance from facility staff which could lead to a fall or accident.1. During a review of Resident 65's admission Record, the admission Record indicated the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] with diagnoses of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (when the heart muscle thickens abnormally making it hard for it to pump blood out to the body, essentially blocking the outflow) and generalized muscle weakness (a widespread lack of strength affecting many muscles throughout the body). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to promote respect and dignity for one (1) of 1 sampled resident (Residents 19) under the dignity care area by failing to ensure that Resident 19 was free from visible food stains on her clothing and dry, crusted discharge on her left eye. This deficient practice had the potential to negatively impact Resident 19's self-esteem and psychosocial well-being (state of mental, emotional, and social health of an individual).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of five (5) sampled residents (Resident 17) under unnecessary medication care area was free from unnecessary use of psychotropic drug (any medication capable of affecting the mind, emotions, and behavior) by failing to ensure Resident 17's hours of sleep was monitored for the use of Trazodone (a medicine used to improve mood, energy, and focus), in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure (P&P). This deficient practice had the potential to place Resident 17 at risk for significant adverse consequences (unwanted, uncomfortable, or dangerous effects that a drug may have) from the use of unnecessary psychotropic drug, which could result to impairment or decline in the resident's mental, physical condition, functional, and psychosocial status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to revise the care plan (a formal process that correctly identifies existing needs and recognizes a resident's potential needs or risks to achieve healthcare outcomes) for one (1) of 1 sampled resident (Resident 17) under care planning care area to manage the resident's behavioral problems with manifestations of striking at staff and others, crying, and danger to self and others. This deficient practice had the potential to prevent Resident 17 from receiving care that addressed the resident's specific needs, which could negatively affect the residents' overall wellbeing.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide grooming services for one (1) of seven (7) sampled residents (Resident 48) under activities of daily living (ADLs- are activities related to personal care that include bathing or showering, dressing, getting in and out of bed or a chair, walking, using the toilet, and eating) care area, in accordance with the facility's policy and procedures (P&P) titled Grooming and Personal Hygiene . This deficient practice resulted in Resident 48's unkempt and dirty fingernails potentially leading to skin injury, infection, and scarring.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to measure the external catheter length (insertion site to hub) for Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC, a thin, flexible tube inserted into a small arm vein and guided to a large central vein near the heart) line for one of 28 sampled residents (Resident 24), in accordance with Facility's policy and procedure (P&P) titled PICC Dressing Change. This failure had the potential to put Resident 28 at risk for PICC line dislodgement (the act of being forced or moved from a secure, fixed) and developing complications like thrombosis (the formation of a blood clot [clump of blood] inside a blood vessel [vein or artery] that blocks or slows blood flow), and infection (when harmful germs invade the body).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure facility staff donned (put on) proper personal protective equipment (PPE; clothing and equipment that is worn or used to protect against hazardous substances and/or environments) prior to entering a contact isolation (a transmission based precaution used to stop germs from spreading through direct touch with a resident or indirect touch with contaminated objects in their environment) room for two (2) of nine (9) sampled residents (Residents 28 and 45) in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure (P&P) This failure had the potential to result in the spread of infection to other residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to observe infection control measures as indicated on the facility policy when facility failed to: 1. Ensure staff wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE, protective clothing such as gown, gloves, goggles, mask) before administering medication to Resident 35 via gastrostomy tube (G-tube, a surgically inserted tube that provides a way to deliver nutrition, fluids, and medications directly to the stomach) on 10/24/2024. This deficient practice had the potential to result in Resident 35 developing an infection and spread of infection among staff and residents. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure three of six sampled resident's (Resident 37, 6, and 10) environment was free from accidental hazards (a source of danger that has the potential to cause harm) when hot water temperatures inside the resident's bathrooms were measured to be above 120 degrees Fahrenheit (F- unit of measurement for temperature). This deficient practice placed Residents 37, 6 and 10 at risk for scalding (very hot) and burns (injury related to exposure to heat or flame) related to hot water temperatures.
Inspectors wroteCross reference: F755 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rate was less than five (5) percent (%). Nine (9) medication errors out of 27 total opportunities for error, to yield an overall medication error rate of 33.3 % for one (1) of five (5) residents observed for medication administration (Residents 35). Licensed Vocational Nurse 1 (LVN 1) failed to administer Resident 35's medications within 60 minutes of scheduled time of 8 AM on 10/24/2024. This deficient practice had the potential to result in Resident 35 to experience medication adverse effects (unwanted, uncomfortable, or dangerous effects that a medication may have) and the potential to result in Resident 35'ss health and well-being to be negatively impacted.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food were handled, prepared, and stored in a manner that prevents foodborne illness (food poisoning) for 56 of 56 residents receiving food from the facility's kitchen, by failing to ensure: 1. Food items stored in the kitchen refrigerators and freezer (thirty-eight [38] food items), walk-in freezer (eleven [11] food items), dry storage area 1 (where breads and vegetables are stored) (three [3] food items) were labeled with open date and/or use by date (last date recommended for use of the product while at peak quality), and/or expiration date and sealed after opening. 2. Two (2) dented canned products were discarded and one (1) cracked and leaking peanut butter jar was discarded from the dry storage area 2 (where canned products, sugars and jars are stored). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to dispose garbage (mostly decomposable food waste or yard waste) and keep 11 of 11 garbage bin/plastic dumpster/refuse (dry material such as glass, paper, cloth, or wood that does not readily decompose) containers covered and/or not overfilled with trash as indicated on the facility policy. These deficient practices had the potential to attract vermin (animals that are believed to be harmful, carry diseases such as rodents, parasitic worms, or insects), pests (any living thing that has a negative effect on humans), and wildlife (undomesticated animal species) that could potentially infiltrate the facility, affect the resident care areas and pose a disease threat to the residents and staff of the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care in a manner that maintained or enhanced a resident's dignity and respect for one of one sampled resident (Resident 1) by failing to ensure facility staff did not stand above Resident 1's eye level while assisting the resident to eat. This deficient practice had the potential to affect Resident 1's self-esteem and self-worth and violates Resident 1's right to be treated with dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a copy of the advance directive (a written statement of a person's wishes regarding medical treatment, often including a living will, made to ensure those wishes are carried out should the person be unable to communicate them) was readily available in the residents' medical chart for two of 10 sampled residents (Residents 6 and 108) in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure titled Advance Directives. This failure had the potential to result in nursing staff not knowing if Residents 6 and 108 had specific resident wishes to follow in case of an emergency.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two sampled resident (Resident 19) was free from physical restraints (any manual method, physical or mechanical device, equipment, or material that is attached or adjacent to the resident's body; cannot be removed easily by the resident; and restricts the resident's freedom of movement or normal access to his/her body) when the facility failed to conduct an assessment for the use of geriatric chair (Geri chair, a large, padded, and mobile reclining chair that prevents a resident from rising). This deficient practice had the potential to result in limiting Resident 19's mobility and cause injury. This also had the potential for Resident 19 not to be treated with respect and dignity with the use of restraints.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide incontinent care and keep the resident free of foul odors to one of ?? sampled residents (Resident 108) who is dependent (helper does all the effort to complete an activity) on assistant from staff for personal, toileting hygiene, and showers. These deficient practices resulted in the residents feeling frustrated and embarrassed, due to lack of or delay in receiving sufficient services to maintain personal hygiene and incontinent care and had the potential to lead to skin breakdown, social isolation and to negatively impact Resident 108's self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two sampled residents (Resident 51) who was on continuous oxygen (colorless, odorless, and tasteless gas) therapy received oxygen as ordered in accordance with the facility policy. This deficient practice had the potential to cause complications associated with oxygen therapy and could result in the resident not receiving proper treatment.
Inspectors wroteCross reference: F759 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of one of five sampled residents (Resident 35) in accordance with the facility policy by failing to administer Resident 35's 8 AM due medications on 10/24/2024 as indicated on the physician's order. This deficient practice had the potential for Resident 35 to experience tachycardia (a fast heartbeat of more than 100 times per minute), high blood pressure (when your blood pressure is consistently higher than normal), and decline in overall health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of five (5) sampled residents (Resident 35) was free from significant medication error (the observed or identified preparation or administration of medications or biologicals which is not in accordance with the prescriber's order; manufacturer's specifications [not recommendations] regarding the preparation and administration of the medication or biological; or accepted professional standards and principles which apply to professionals providing services) by administering Amlodipine (a medication used to treat high blood pressure), Carvedilol (a medication that slows down the heart rate making it easier for the heart to pump blood around the body) and Losartan (a medication used to treat high blood pressure) to Resident 35 outside of physician ordered parameters. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow its policy by failing to: 1. Post the nurse staffing information in a prominent location (accessible to residents and visitors). 2. Ensure the Daily Report of Nursing Staff (nurse staffing information) posted on 10/22/24 and 10/23/24 was accurate to reflect the correct date and total number of projected hours and the actual hours of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift. This deficient practice had the potential to inaccurately reflect the actual nurses providing direct care to the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent multiple fall (unintentional descent that results in a coming to a rest on the floor, on or against another surface, on another person, or an object) of one of two sampled residents (Resident 1) by: 1. Failing to develop and implement a fall care plan (a document that outlines the facility's plan to provide personalized care to a resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs) for Resident 1's actual fall on 6/30/2024, 7/24/2024, and 8/2/2024 per facility policy. 2. Failing to ensure that care plan for Impaired cognition and High risk for falls dated 7/8/2024 and 7/30/2024 included interventions unique (resident specific) to Resident 1's needs. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of two (2) sampled residents (Resident 1) was free from an unnecessary psychotropic drug (any medication capable of affecting the mind, emotions, and behavior) in accordance with the facility policy and procedure by failing to ensure Resident 1 had a specific target behavior for the use of Lorazepam ( medication used to treat anxiety [persistent and excessive worry that interferes with daily activities]). This deficient practice had the potential to place Resident 1 at risk for significant adverse (harmful) consequences from the use of unnecessary psychotropic drug, which could result to impairment or decline in the residents' mental, physical condition, functional, and psychosocial status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two (2) sampled residents (Resident 1) was free from physical restraints (any manual method, physical or mechanical device, equipment, or material that is attached or adjacent to the resident's body; cannot be removed easily by the resident; and restricts the resident's freedom of movement or normal access to his/her body) by failing to conduct an assessment for the use of seatbelt (an arrangement of straps designed to hold a person steady in a seat). This deficient practice had the potential to negatively affect Resident 1's physical and psychological wellbeing and quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, facility failed to develop a comprehensive resident-centered fall care plan (a document that outlines the facility's plan to provide personalized care to a resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs) for one of two sampled residents (Resident 1) per facility policy. This deficient practice had a potential for Resident 1's increased risk for further falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two (2) of 2 sampled residents (Residents 19 and 31) had their low air loss (LAL, operates using a blower based pump that is designed to circulate a constant flow of air through the mattress, commonly used to heal pressure ulcers [wound that occurs as a result of prolonged pressure on a specific area of the body]) mattresses set according to the resident's in accordance to the manual for Med-Aire Essential 8-inch Alternating Pressure and Low Air Loss Mattress System. 1. Resident 19, who weighed 82 pounds (lbs.), was observed with the LAL mattress set at 440 lbs. 2. Resident 31, who weighed 137 lbs., was observed with LAL mattress set at the highest setting at 350 lbs. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety and as indicated in the facility policy by failing to: 1) Label multiple food items in the kitchen refrigerator and dry food storage with the opened and prepared date, food item names, and received date and expiration date. 2) Discard expired food. 3) Follow infection control measures in the kitchen when an empty water bottle and soda can were found on the storage rack in the dry storage room. These deficient practices have a potential to contaminate food items and can place the residents at risk for infection. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two (2) of three (3) sampled residents (Residents 19 and 29) under hospice care (provides medical services, emotional support, and spiritual resources for people who are in the last stages of a terminal illness) services had coordinated care between the facility and the hospice agency. Resident 19 did not have a certification of illness documented in the active records to receive hospice services. This deficient practice had the potential for Residents 19 and 29 to not receive the appropriate care and/or services from the facility and the hospice agency.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure standard infection prevention control practices (a set of practices that prevent or stop the spread of infections and or diseases in the healthcare setting) were followed in accordance with the facility's policy and procedure when: 1. Resident 15's double lumen (a small soft tubing) peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC, used to give medications, fluid and nutrition directly to the vein near the heart) access dressing was not changed every seven (7) days as indicated on the PICC dressing change policy. 2. Licensed Vocational Nurse 3 (LVN 3) failed to practice hand hygiene after administering: a. Resident 50's gastrostomy tube (G-tube, a tube inserted through the belly that brings nutrition directly to the stomach) medication and nasal spray b. Resident 30's G-tube medication and eye drops c. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST, a portable medical order form that records patients' treatment wishes so that emergency personnel know what treatments the resident wants in the event of a medical emergency, taking the patient's current medical condition into consideration) coincides with the advance directives (written statement of a person's wishes regarding medical treatment which were made to ensure those wishes are carried out should the person be unable to communicate them to a doctor) for one (1) of 1 sampled resident (Resident 37) when the POLST indicating Do not Resuscitate (DNR, medical order that directs healthcare providers not to administer CPR in the event of cardiac or respiratory arrest) was placed in the residents chart without the signature of the attending physician. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the licensed nursing staff failed to notify the physician when there was a change in condition for one of 15 sampled residents (Resident 17) in accordance with the facility policy. This deficient practice had the potential to result in delayed provision of necessary care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility staff failed to implement their Abuse (the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish) Prevention, management, and Reporting Policies by not reporting and investigating an injury of unknown origin that may be a result abuse or neglect (the failure of the facility, its employees or service providers to provide goods and services to a resident that are necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish or emotional distress) for one out of 15 residents (Resident 16). This deficiency has resulted a delay of the delivery of care to Resident 16 who had suffered a fracture (a partial or complete break in the bone) of left shoulder.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of 1 sampled resident (Resident 17) was provided care and services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene in accordance with the facility policy. This deficient practice had the potential to result in a negative impact on Resident 17's quality of life and self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe provision of pharmaceutical services when one (1) of two (2) medication carts was left unlocked before licensed vocational nurse (LVN) entered a resident's room to administer medications. This deficient practice had the potential for non-authorized staff or residents to access the medication cart, which can result to drug diversion (prescription medications are obtained and or used illegally by healthcare providers) or may cause serious injury/harm in the event that the medications are ingested by the residents.
19 fire safety citations on file: 10 on December 12, 2025, 5 on October 25, 2024, 4 on November 19, 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) | 4.59 | 4.52 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.77 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 4.18 | 4.09 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.96 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.86 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 28.1% | 36.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 30.0% | 38.1% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.58 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 4.75 on weekdays and 4.18 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 4.60 in April to June 2025 to 4.59 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 | 4.59 | 0.77 | 4.75 | 4.18 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 54 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.65 | 0.85 | 4.84 | 4.19 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 57 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.59 | 0.76 | 4.82 | 4.01 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 57 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.60 | 0.72 | 4.81 | 4.08 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 56 |
| 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 | 36.4 | 10.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 25.8 | 9.8 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.8 | 12.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 14.5 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.8 | 11.2 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.6 | 2.3 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Hollenbeck Palms's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (58.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
58.7% this home
No different from 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. 66 eligible stays.
10.8% 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. 60 eligible stays.
6.6% 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. 51 eligible stays.
37.5% 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. 32 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. 38 residents counted.
5.6% 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. 38 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. 17 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: HOLLENBECK PALMS.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johnston, Carol | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2013 | |
| Kirchhoff, Katherine | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Kumagai, William | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Onishi, Kevin | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Rosenbloom, Linda | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Belle Home Care Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2021 | |
| Wipfli LLP | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2021 | |
| Johnston, Carol | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2013 | |
| Kanegae, Thomas | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/02/2009 | |
| Kirchhoff, Katherine | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Kumagai, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Onishi, Kevin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Ramirez, Ivania | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/04/2021 | |
| Rosenbloom, Linda | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Shockley, Morris | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/07/2012 | |
| Young, Johnny | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/17/1987 | |
| Belle Home Care Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/20/2025 | |
| Wipfli LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/20/2025 | |
| Johnston, Carol | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2013 | |
| Kanegae, Thomas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/02/2009 | |
| Kirchhoff, Katherine | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Kumagai, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Onishi, Kevin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Ramirez, Ivania | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/04/2021 | |
| Rosenbloom, Linda | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Shockley, Morris | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/07/2012 | |
| Young, Johnny | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/07/2012 |
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.