How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Baldwin Gardens Nursing Center
10786 Live Oak Avenue, Temple City, CA 91780 (opens Google Maps) · Los Angeles County · (626) 447-3553· 59 certified beds · avg 55 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1977 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: ABRAHAM BAK & MENACHEM GASTWIRTH (18 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 30, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.01
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 38 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint F-0656
The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · from a complaint F-0805
The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint F-0919
View all 38 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Jun 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · from a complaint · F-0805 |
| Jun 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Mar 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Dec 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
| Dec 3, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 8).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 14 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 11 | 0 | E |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.01
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.39
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.57
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.01 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 14% in California; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.39 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 31% in California; bottom 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.57 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 12% in California; top 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.35 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 46% in California; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 24.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 16% in California; top 6% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 40.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 47% in California; top 46% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 5.64, RN 0.44, weekend 5.14.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.64 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Baldwin Gardens Nursing Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
Government - Federal
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lehmann, Kenneth | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 24% | 03/13/2020 |
| Abak Consulting LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2021 |
| Bak, Abraham | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2020 |
| Bak, Abraham | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2021 |
| Bastomski Living Trust Dated April 18, 1997 | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2007 |
| Bastomski, Israel | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2007 |
| Gastwirth, Menachem | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2020 |
| Gastwirth, Menachem | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2021 |
| Gewirtz, Chonoch | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2020 |
| Gewirtz, Chonoch | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2021 |
| Horowicz, Avi | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/27/2024 |
| Horowicz, Avi | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/21/2025 |
| Lehmann, Kenneth | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/13/2020 |
| Lehmann, Kenneth | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2021 |
| Live Oak TC 1, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2007 |
| Live Oak TC 2, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2007 |
| Mayer 2005 Revocable Trust | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2007 |
| Mayer, Helene | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2007 |
| Mayer, Ronald | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/02/2007 |
| Mgaz Consulting LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/27/2021 |
Showing 20 of 22 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 2 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Abraham Bak & Menachem Gastwirth — 18 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Beachside Post Acute — Torrance, CA · overall 5/5
- Gem Tcu — Pasadena, CA · overall 1/5
- Glendora Canyon Transitional Care Unit — Glendora, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- Imperial Healthcare Center — La Mirada, CA · overall 3/5
- Leisure Glen Post Acute Care Center — Glendale, CA · overall 4/5
- Manresa Healthcare Center — Watsonville, CA · overall 4/5
- Marlora Post Acute Rehab Hosp — Long Beach, CA · overall 1/5
- Ocean Park Healthcare — Santa Monica, CA · overall 2/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 17 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you handle residents who need modified food textures, and how do you make those meals appetizing?"
- "Can you show me the call buttons in the bathrooms and bathing areas, and tell me your average response time when one is pressed?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "If my family member's health suddenly changes, how quickly do you reassess them and update their care?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 24% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 22 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 264 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Santa Anita Convalescent Hospital | 0.2 mi | Temple City, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Temple City Healthcare | 1.2 mi | Temple City, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Arcadia Care Center | 1.3 mi | Arcadia, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Rosemead Healthcare Center | 1.6 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| San Marino Healthcare Center | 1.7 mi | San Gabriel, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Huntington Drive Health and Rehabilitation Center | 1.8 mi | Arcadia, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Fidelity Health Care | 1.9 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Pine Grove Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP | 2.3 mi | San Gabriel, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Santa Fe Lodge | 2.3 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mayflower Care Center | 2.3 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Gardens of el Monte | 2.4 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mission Care Center | 2.5 mi | Rosemead, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Los Angeles, CA — 369 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Bay Crest Care Center — Torrance, CA · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Bay Vista Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP — Long Beach, CA · overall 2/5
- Bayshire San Dimas Post-Acute — San Dimas, CA · overall 4/5
- Beachside Post Acute — Long Beach, CA · overall 4/5
- Beachside Post Acute — Torrance, CA · overall 5/5
- Beachwood Post-Acute & Rehab — Santa Monica, CA · overall 1/5
- Beacon Healthcare Center — West Covina, CA · overall 5/5
- Bel Vista Healthcare Center — Long Beach, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555055.