CaliforniaTemple City

Baldwin Gardens Nursing Center

10786 Live Oak Avenue, Temple City, CA 91780 · Los Angeles County · 59 certified beds · avg 55 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1977

Part of chain: ABRAHAM BAK & MENACHEM GASTWIRTH (18 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.01
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

All citations in the current public record (38)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 24, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 24, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 24, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 30, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jan 30, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 30, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Jan 30, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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).
Jan 30, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 30, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jan 30, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Jan 30, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Dec 18, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Nov 22, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Nov 22, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Nov 22, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them.
Nov 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Nov 22, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 3, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Dec 3, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 3, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (13 → 8).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023120E
2024140E
202510D
2026110E

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.014.313.95top 14% in California; top 13% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.390.610.69bottom 31% in California; bottom 21% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.573.903.50top 12% in California; top 11% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.350.510.48bottom 46% in California; bottom 42% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)24.336.745.8top 16% in California; top 6% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)40.038.142.9bottom 47% in California; top 46% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

Government - Federal

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Lehmann, KennethIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest24%03/13/2020
Abak Consulting LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021
Bak, AbrahamIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE03/13/2020
Bak, AbrahamIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021
Bastomski Living Trust Dated April 18, 1997OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2007
Bastomski, IsraelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2007
Gastwirth, MenachemIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE03/13/2020
Gastwirth, MenachemIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021
Gewirtz, ChonochIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/13/2020
Gewirtz, ChonochIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021
Horowicz, AviIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/27/2024
Horowicz, AviIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/21/2025
Lehmann, KennethIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE03/13/2020
Lehmann, KennethIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021
Live Oak TC 1, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2007
Live Oak TC 2, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2007
Mayer 2005 Revocable TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2007
Mayer, HeleneIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2007
Mayer, RonaldIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2007
Mgaz Consulting LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Santa Anita Convalescent Hospital0.2 miTemple City, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Temple City Healthcare1.2 miTemple City, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Arcadia Care Center1.3 miArcadia, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Rosemead Healthcare Center1.6 miEl Monte, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
San Marino Healthcare Center1.7 miSan Gabriel, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Huntington Drive Health and Rehabilitation Center1.8 miArcadia, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Fidelity Health Care1.9 miEl Monte, CA★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Pine Grove Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP2.3 miSan Gabriel, CA★★★★☆3/5
Santa Fe Lodge2.3 miEl Monte, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Mayflower Care Center2.3 miEl Monte, CA★★★☆☆3/5
The Gardens of el Monte2.4 miEl Monte, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Mission Care Center2.5 miRosemead, CA★★★★☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Temple City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555055.