Fidelity Health Care

Name: Fidelity Health Care
Address: 11210 LOWER AZUSA RD., El Monte, CA, 91731, US
Telephone: 6264426863

11210 Lower Azusa Rd., El Monte, CA 91731 · Los Angeles County · 90 certified beds · avg 77 residents/day · certified since May 4, 1978

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

Part of chain: IL & JOAN LEE (4 facilities, chain avg rating 2.0★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

5.40

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

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 (35)

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

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Jun 29, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
Jun 29, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Jun 5, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Jun 5, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jun 5, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Jun 5, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jun 5, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Jun 5, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Jun 5, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 20, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Feb 27, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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). · from a complaint
Sep 11, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Apr 4, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Apr 4, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Apr 4, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Apr 4, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Apr 4, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Apr 4, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Apr 4, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Mar 7, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Mar 7, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Apr 26, 2024	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records.
Apr 26, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Apr 26, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Apr 26, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Apr 26, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Apr 26, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Apr 26, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Apr 26, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Apr 26, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Apr 26, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Apr 26, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Apr 26, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Apr 26, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 7).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2024	13	F
2025	11	E
2026	11	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)

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

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

Measure	This facility	California avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	5.40	4.31	3.95	top 9% in California; top 8% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.55	0.61	0.69	top 38% in California; bottom 46% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	5.02	3.90	3.50	top 7% in California; top 6% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.28	0.51	0.48	bottom 30% in California; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	14.3	36.7	45.8	top 2% in California; top 1% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	25.0	38.1	42.9	top 26% in California; top 20% 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 4.19, RN 0.43, weekend 3.90. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Lee, Il	Individual	Direct Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2001
Lee, Joan	Individual	Direct Ownership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2001
Chua, Alex	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2019
Chua, Alex	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2019
Gupta, Anil	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2014
Gupta, Anil	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2014
JPH Consulting INC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/1997
JPH Consulting INC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/20/2025
Lee, Il	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2001
Lee, Il	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2001
Lee, Il	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2001
Lee, Joan	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2001
Lee, Joan	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2001
Lee, Joan	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/16/2001

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 we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
"Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
"Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
"Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
"Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
The Gardens of el Monte	0.6 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Temple City Healthcare	0.7 mi	Temple City, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Santa Fe Lodge	1.1 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Mayflower Care Center	1.1 mi	El Monte, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Madera Post Acute Center	1.2 mi	El Monte, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Penn Mar Healthcare Center	1.3 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Eastland Subacute and Rehabilitation Center	1.6 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Santa Anita Convalescent Hospital	1.9 mi	Temple City, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	SFF
Baldwin Gardens Nursing Center	1.9 mi	Temple City, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Valley View Post Acute	2.2 mi	El Monte, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in El Monte →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555088.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Fidelity Health Care

11210 Lower Azusa Rd., El Monte, CA 91731 · 6264426863

Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 3/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
☐ "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
☐ "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
☐ "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 555088 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)