How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Lemon Grove Care and Rehabilitation Center
8351 Broadway, Lemon Grove, CA 91945 (opens Google Maps) · San Diego County · (619) 463-0294· 158 certified beds · avg 151 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967 · 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 →
Part of chain: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 18, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.35
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 54 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. F-0865
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
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. F-0677
View all 54 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0677 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0757 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | 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 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0580 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0610 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | 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). · F-0628 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0644 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | 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. · F-0689 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0693 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | 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 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0761 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. · F-0911 |
| Dec 27, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility required residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits or pay privately as a condition of moving in, or failed to tell residents which types of care it does not provide. Both practices are against the rules. · from a complaint · F-0620 |
| Dec 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint · F-0622 |
| Oct 17, 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Sep 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0761 |
| Aug 15, 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 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Aug 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 8, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Feb 8, 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Aug 17, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0561 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly. · F-0624 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | 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 17, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0693 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 17, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. · F-0911 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 24).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 24
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 20 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 24 | 0 | F |
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: 4.35
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.49
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.09
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) | 4.35 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 36% in California; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.49 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 49% in California; bottom 36% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.09 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 29% in California; top 20% 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 (%) | 47.7 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 19% in California; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 35.3 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 47% in California; top 39% 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 3.92, RN 0.44, weekend 3.68.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.92 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lemon Grove Care and Rehabilitation Center. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/28/2019 |
| Ensign Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2003 |
| Kambo, Amanpreet | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/27/2017 |
| Kambo, Amanpreet | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/27/2017 |
| Kambo, Amanpreet | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/27/2017 |
| Keetch, Chad | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Lincare INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2003 |
| MCS PGCH LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2003 |
| Muralidhara, Sowmya | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2025 |
| Muralidhara, Sowmya | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2025 |
| Muralidhara, Sowmya | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2025 |
| Port, Barry | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/22/2015 |
| Willits, Adam | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/29/2019 |
All 13 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 The Ensign Group — 342 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.
- Lomita Post-Acute Care Center — Lomita, CA · overall 3/5
- Madera Post Acute Center — El Monte, CA · overall 1/5
- Magnolia Post Acute Care — El Cajon, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Mainplace Post Acute — Orange, CA · overall 2/5
- Mission Care Center — Rosemead, CA · overall 4/5
- Mission Hills Post Acute Care — San Diego, CA · overall 4/5
- New Orange Hills — Orange, CA · overall 1/5
- Northbrook Healthcare Center — Willits, CA · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 341 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
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 does your quality improvement program work, and can you share a recent example of a problem you found and fixed?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "Who oversees antibiotic use here, and how do you decide when an antibiotic is really needed?"
- "How do you inspect and maintain essential equipment, and how quickly are repairs made?"
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 48% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 13 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 61 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amaya Springs Health Care Center | 0.8 mi | Spring Valley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Bella Vista Health Center | 1.1 mi | Lemon Grove, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| La Mesa Healthcare Center | 1.2 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Brighton Place Spring Valley | 1.2 mi | Spring Valley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Community Care Center | 1.6 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Parkway Hills Nursing & Rehabilitation | 1.9 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Arbor Hills Nursing Center | 1.9 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Grossmont Gardens Healthcare Center | 2.1 mi | La Mesa, CA | —/5 | ||
| Grossmont Hospital D/P SNF | 2.3 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Grossmont Post Acute Care | 2.4 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Country Manor la Mesa Healthcare Center | 2.5 mi | La Mesa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Mount Miguel Covenant Village | 3.2 mi | Spring Valley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in San Diego, CA — 83 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Magnolia Post Acute Care — El Cajon, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Meadowbrook Village Christian Retirement Community — Escondido, CA · overall 5/5
- Mission Hills Post Acute Care — San Diego, CA · overall 4/5
- National City Post Acute — National City, CA · overall 3/5
- Ocean View Post Acute — Escondido, CA · overall 4/5
- Pacific Villas Post Acute — Oceanside, CA · overall —/5
- Palomar Heights Post Acute — Escondido, 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 055182.