How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Fidelity Health Care
11210 Lower Azusa Rd., El Monte, CA 91731 (opens Google Maps) · Los Angeles County · (626) 442-6863· 90 certified beds · avg 77 residents/day · certified since May 4, 1978 · 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 →
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)
inspected Jun 5, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.40
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: 3/5 · 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 35 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint F-0584
The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint F-0921
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 35 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 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Jun 5, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 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 |
| Jun 5, 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 |
| Mar 20, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0689 |
| Feb 27, 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). · from a complaint · F-0628 |
| Sep 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0600 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 4, 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 |
| Apr 4, 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 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | 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 4, 2025 | 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 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0849 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 · F-0607 |
| Mar 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0600 |
| Mar 7, 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 |
| Apr 26, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851 |
| Apr 26, 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 |
| Apr 26, 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 |
| Apr 26, 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 |
| Apr 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 26, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 26, 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 |
| Apr 26, 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 |
| Apr 26, 2024 | 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 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 26, 2024 | 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 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 26, 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 11
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 13 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 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: 5.40
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.55
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.02
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) | 5.40 | 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 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 4.19, RN 0.43, weekend 3.90.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.19 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Fidelity Health Care. 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 - 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 |
All 14 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Il & Joan Lee — 4 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.
- Good Shepherd Health Care Center of Santa Monica — Santa Monica, CA · overall 2/5
- Huntington Healthcare Center — Los Angeles, CA · overall 2/5
- Royal Springs Healthcare and Rehab — Las Vegas, NV · overall 1/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
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?"
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 14% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 14 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 250 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 | |
| Rosemead Healthcare Center | 2.4 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sunset Manor Conv Hosp | 2.4 mi | El Monte, 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.
- Fireside Health Care Center — Santa Monica, CA · overall 4/5
- Flower Villa, INC — Los Angeles, CA · overall 3/5
- Foothill Heights Care Center — Pasadena, CA · overall 3/5
- Fountain View Subacute and Nursing Center — Los Angeles, CA · overall 2/5
- Four Seasons Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP — North Hollywood, CA · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Garden Crest Rehabilitation Center — Los Angeles, CA · overall 2/5
- Garden View Post Acute Rehabilitation — Baldwin Park, CA · overall 4/5
- Gardena Convalescent Center — Gardena, CA · overall 3/5
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 555088.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).