How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Bellflower Post Acute
9710 E. Artesia Ave, Bellflower, CA 90706 (opens Google Maps) · Los Angeles County · (562) 925-2274· 59 certified beds · avg 53 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1973 · 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: THE MANDELBAUM FAMILY (18 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 16, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.96
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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 45 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. F-0867
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
View all 45 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 16, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Apr 16, 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 |
| Apr 16, 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. · F-0656 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Apr 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887 |
| Oct 22, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · F-0553 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
| Feb 25, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Feb 25, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Feb 25, 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 |
| Feb 25, 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 |
| Feb 25, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (23 → 13).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 24
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 13
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 24 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 13 | 0 | F |
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: 3.96
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.46
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.48
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) | 3.96 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 38% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.46 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 45% in California; bottom 31% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.48 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 29% in California; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.44 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 40% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 25.4 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 18% in California; top 8% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 20.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 19% in California; top 13% 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 5.18, RN 0.60, weekend 4.56.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.18 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Bellflower Post Acute. 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bellflower Investment Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 12/19/2019 |
| Simcha and Janet Mandelbaum Family Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 20% | 01/01/2023 |
| Stock, Mordechai | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 50% | 12/01/2021 |
| The Bentzion Mandelbaum 2021 Irrevocable Gift Trust No. 2 | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 11/22/2021 |
| The Janet Mandelbaum 2021 Irrevocable Gift Trust No 2 | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 16% | 11/22/2021 |
| The Simcha Mandelbaum 2021 Irrevocable Gift Trust No. 2 | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 11/22/2021 |
| 9710 Artesia LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Aguilos, Robert | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/15/2024 |
| Aguilos, Robert | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/15/2024 |
| Anselmo, Clarence | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/29/2022 |
| Anselmo, Clarence | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/29/2022 |
| Castro-Garcia, Maria | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/06/2019 |
| Castro-Garcia, Maria | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/06/2019 |
| Coronell, Gino | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/14/2024 |
| Coronell, Gino | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/14/2024 |
| Guerrero, Vincente | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/02/2022 |
| Guerrero, Vincente | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/02/2022 |
| Hansen | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Kabbany, Victor | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Kabbany, Victor | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
Showing 20 of 34 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 14 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 The Mandelbaum Family — 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.
- Buena Park Nursing Center — Buena Park, CA · overall 2/5
- Chapman Care Center — Garden Grove, CA · overall 4/5
- Coastal View Healthcare Center — Ventura, CA · overall 5/5
- Community Extended Care Hospital of Montclair — Montclair, CA · overall 5/5
- Garden Grove Post Acute — Garden Grove, CA · overall 4/5
- Grand Valley Health Care Center — Van Nuys, CA · overall 1/5
- Guardian Rehabilitation Hospital — Los Angeles, CA · overall 3/5
- La Palma Nursing Center — Anaheim, CA · overall 5/5
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.
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
- "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 25% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 34 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 304 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cerritos Vista Healthcare Center | 0.6 mi | Bellflower, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Rose Villa Health Care Center | 0.7 mi | Bellflower, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Villa Del Sol Post Acute | 0.7 mi | Bellflower, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| La Paz Geropsychiatric Center | 1.3 mi | Paramount, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Bay Vista Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP | 1.4 mi | Long Beach, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sunset Villa Post Acute | 1.7 mi | Long Beach, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Paramount Convalescent Hosp. | 2.3 mi | Paramount, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Springs Post-Acute | 2.4 mi | Norwalk, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Artesia Christian Home INC. | 2.4 mi | Artesia, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Artesia Palms Care Center | 2.9 mi | Artesia, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Meadow Creek Post-Acute | 3.0 mi | Paramount, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Studebaker Healthcare Center | 3.1 mi | Norwalk, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
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.
- Berkley East Healthcare Center — Santa Monica, CA · overall 2/5
- Berkley Post-Acute — Van Nuys, CA · overall 3/5
- Berkley West Healthcare Center — Santa Monica, CA · overall 3/5
- Beverly Hills Rehabilitation Centre — Los Angeles, CA · overall 3/5
- Bixby Towers Post-Acute Rehab — Long Beach, CA · overall 2/5SFF
- Bonnie Brae Skilled Nursing — Los Angeles, CA · overall 5/5
- Brentwood Health Care Center — Santa Monica, CA · overall 3/5
- Briarcrest Nursing Center — Bell Gardens, CA · overall 1/5
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 055408.