California ›Westminster

Extended Care Hospital of Westminster

206 Hospital Circle, Westminster, CA 92683 · Orange County · 99 certified beds · avg 96 residents/day · certified since Sep 5, 1985

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.87
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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 (55)

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
May 22, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
May 22, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
May 22, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
May 22, 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.
May 22, 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.
May 22, 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.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
May 22, 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.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
May 22, 2026D · 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.
May 22, 2026D · 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.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
May 22, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
May 22, 2026B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies.
Nov 5, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 1, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
Jul 1, 2025D · 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
Jul 1, 2025D · 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.
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jul 1, 2025D · 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.
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Jul 1, 2025D · 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.
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jul 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
Jul 1, 2025D · 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.
Jul 1, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · from a complaint
Aug 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint
Aug 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
May 23, 2024E · 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.
May 23, 2024E · 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.
May 23, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
May 23, 2024D · 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.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
May 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life.
May 23, 2024C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
May 23, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
May 23, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Sep 28, 2023B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 19).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202310B
2024190E
2025160D
2026190E

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)4.874.313.95top 18% in California; top 15% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.400.610.69bottom 34% in California; bottom 23% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.463.903.50top 16% in California; top 13% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.260.510.48bottom 24% in California; bottom 24% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)23.536.745.8top 14% in California; top 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)33.338.142.9top 40% in California; top 33% 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 3.76, RN 0.31, weekend 3.44. 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Landry, MarcIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—03/01/1996
Lockhart, RalphIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—03/01/1996
Mark & Fred EnterprisesOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—03/01/1996
Riverside Magnolia CorpOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest—03/01/1996
Meyer, DonnaIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE03/01/1996
Rodes, GeorgeIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE03/01/1996
Rodes, GeorgeIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/01/1996

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
Mission Palms Healthcare Center0.6 miWestminster, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Garden Grove Post Acute1.4 miGarden Grove, CA★★★★☆3/5
Rowntree Gardens1.7 miStanton, CA★★★★☆3/5
Stanley Healthcare Center1.8 miWestminster, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Park Anaheim Healthcare Center3.9 miAnaheim, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Anaheim Point3.9 miAnaheim, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Pacific Haven Subacute and Healthcare Center4.0 miGarden Grove, CA★★★★☆3/5
Huntington Valley Healthcare Center4.1 miHuntington Beach, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Coventry Court Health Center4.1 miAnaheim, CA★★★★☆3/5
The Grove Post Acute4.1 miGarden Grove, CA★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Westminster →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555211.