Leisure Glen Post Acute Care Center

Name: Leisure Glen Post Acute Care Center
Address: 330 MISSION ROAD, Glendale, CA, 91205, US
Telephone: 8182474476

330 Mission Road, Glendale, CA 91205 · Los Angeles County · 108 certified beds · avg 112 residents/day · certified since Oct 20, 1967

Part of chain: ABRAHAM BAK & MENACHEM GASTWIRTH (18 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)

4/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

3.68

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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
Jul 2, 2026	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. · from a complaint
May 11, 2026	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. · from a complaint
May 11, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Jun 27, 2025	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 27, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Jun 27, 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.
Jun 27, 2025	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.
Jun 27, 2025	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.
Jun 27, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jun 27, 2025	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.
Jun 27, 2025	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.
Jun 27, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Jun 27, 2025	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.
Jun 13, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Jun 13, 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.
Jun 13, 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.
Jun 13, 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.
Jun 13, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time.
Jun 13, 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.
Jun 13, 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.
Jun 13, 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.
Jun 13, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own.
Jun 13, 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.
Jun 13, 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.
Apr 19, 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
Feb 2, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · from a complaint
Jan 18, 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. · from a complaint
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Nov 18, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 18, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 18, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Nov 18, 2021	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.
Nov 18, 2021	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (11 → 10).

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2021	17	E
2024	14	E
2025	10	E
2026	3	D

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)	3.68	4.31	3.95	bottom 19% in California; bottom 46% 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	3.46	3.90	3.50	bottom 27% in California; top 44% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.38	0.51	0.48	top 49% in California; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	28.1	36.7	45.8	top 24% in California; top 11% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	15.4	38.1	42.9	top 12% in California; top 9% 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 4.15, RN 0.52, weekend 3.90. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Lehmann, Kenneth	Individual	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	32%	06/28/2022
330 Mission Road, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022
Abak Consulting LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022
Abe and Rachel Bak Family Trust	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022
Arutyunyan, Mary	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	05/03/2018
Arutyunyan, Mary	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	04/22/2025
Bagz Holdings, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022
Bak, Abraham	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	08/01/2022
Bak, Abraham	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	06/28/2022
Bak, Abraham	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/10/2022
Bak, Rachel	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022
Gastwirth, Menachem	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	06/28/2022
Gastwirth, Menachem	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/28/2022
Gewirtz, Chonoch	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/28/2022
Glen Holdings, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022
Karakashian, Garo	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	07/05/2023
Karakashian, Garo	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	07/05/2023
Lehmann, Kenneth	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/28/2022
Mgaz Consulting LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022
Moas, Aaron	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	06/30/2022

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
"What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
"Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
"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
Glendale Healthcare Center	0.7 mi	Glendale, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Glenhaven Healthcare	0.7 mi	Glendale, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Ararat Post Acute	0.9 mi	Glendale, CA	★★★★★	4/5
Chestnut Ridge Post Acute LLC	1.0 mi	Glendale, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Glendale Post Acute Center	1.6 mi	Glendale, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Los Feliz Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP	1.7 mi	Los Angeles, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Skyline Healthcare Center - la	1.7 mi	Los Angeles, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	SFF
College Vista Post-Acute	1.7 mi	Los Angeles, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Broadway Manor Care Center	1.8 mi	Glendale, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Royal Palms Post Acute	1.8 mi	Glendale, CA	★★☆☆☆	1/5
Autumn Hills Health Care Center	1.8 mi	Glendale, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Solheim Senior Community	1.9 mi	Los Angeles, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Glendale →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055845.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Leisure Glen Post Acute Care Center

330 Mission Road, Glendale, CA 91205 · 8182474476

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

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
☐ "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
☐ "Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
☐ "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 055845 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)