Joyce Eisenberg Keefer Medical Center D/P SNF

Name: Joyce Eisenberg Keefer Medical Center D/P SNF
Address: 7150 TAMPA AVENUE, Reseda, CA, 91335, US
Telephone: 8187743000

7150 Tampa Avenue, Reseda, CA 91335 · Los Angeles County · 344 certified beds · avg 231 residents/day · certified since Nov 16, 2007

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

5.60

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 (44)

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
Mar 12, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman.
Mar 12, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Mar 12, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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 12, 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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Mar 12, 2026	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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Mar 12, 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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require.
Mar 12, 2026	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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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 12, 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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign.
Mar 12, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Jun 2, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint
Dec 20, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Dec 20, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Dec 20, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Dec 20, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Dec 20, 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.
Dec 20, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Dec 20, 2024	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.
Dec 20, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 27, 2024	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
Mar 27, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint
Jan 25, 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.
Jan 25, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Jan 25, 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.
Jan 25, 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.
Jan 25, 2024	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.
Jan 25, 2024	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.
Jan 25, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Jan 25, 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.
Jan 25, 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.
Jan 25, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 23).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2024	20	E
2025	1	D
2026	23	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)	5.60	4.31	3.95	top 7% in California; top 6% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.63	0.61	0.69	top 30% in California; top 44% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	5.25	3.90	3.50	top 5% in California; top 5% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.34	0.51	0.48	bottom 43% in California; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	11.8	36.7	45.8	top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	8.0	38.1	42.9	top 4% in California; top 3% 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 4.93, RN 0.55, weekend 4.62. 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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Grancell Village of the Los Angeles Jewish Home for the Aging	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	08/28/2007
Los Angeles Jewish Home for the Aging	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	08/28/2007
Anderson Health Information Systems, INC.	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/18/2019
Bloomgarden, Terri	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2012
Carlson, Timothy	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	02/08/2021
Carlson, Timothy	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	02/08/2021
Carlson, Timothy	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	02/08/2021
Citi National Bank	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	05/31/2011
Colt Steidl, Alyssa	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	07/14/2008
Colt Steidl, Alyssa	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	07/14/2008
Colt Steidl, Alyssa	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	07/14/2008
Fogel, Jacqueline	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2023
Frankie, Richard	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2023
Friedman Rudzki, Judith	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2012
Gaines, Fred	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2009
Grancell Village of the Los Angeles Jewish Home for the Aging	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	08/28/2007
Grancell Village of the Los Angeles Jewish Home for the Aging	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	08/28/2007
Green, William	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	08/29/2024
Grosser, Jeremy	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	07/31/2024
Grosser, Jeremy	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	07/31/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
"What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
"Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
"If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
"How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
"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
Woodland Care Center	0.6 mi	Reseda, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5	SFF
Park View Nursing and Subacute	0.6 mi	Reseda, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5
Northridge Care Center	1.1 mi	Reseda, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Eisenberg Village	1.1 mi	Reseda, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Tarzana Health and Rehabilitation Center	1.9 mi	Tarzana, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Holiday Manor Care Center	2.2 mi	Canoga Park, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Lake Balboa Care Center	2.9 mi	Van Nuys, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
West Valley Post Acute	3.4 mi	West Hills, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Canyon Oaks Nursing and Rehabilitation Center	3.5 mi	Canoga Park, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
West Hills Health and Rehabilitation Center	3.6 mi	Canoga Park, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Topanga Terrace	3.7 mi	Canoga Park, CA	★★★★☆	3/5
The Gardens Healthcare Center	4.3 mi	Northridge, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Reseda →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555846.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Joyce Eisenberg Keefer Medical Center D/P SNF

7150 Tampa Avenue, Reseda, CA 91335 · 8187743000

Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $0

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
☐ "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
☐ "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
☐ "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
☐ "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
☐ "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 555846 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)