California ›Lomita

Lomita Post-Acute Care Center

1955 Lomita Blvd, Lomita, CA 90717 · Los Angeles County · 71 certified beds · avg 62 residents/day · certified since Sep 1, 1971

Part of chain: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.80
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 (51)

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

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Dec 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Dec 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Dec 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Dec 11, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Jul 22, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Apr 22, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint
Mar 29, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 11, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint
Nov 1, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.
Nov 1, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Oct 19, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Oct 19, 2023B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (14 → 22).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023100F
2024140E
2025260F
202610D

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)

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.804.313.95bottom 27% in California; top 48% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.420.610.69bottom 38% in California; bottom 25% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.303.903.50bottom 16% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.290.510.48bottom 30% in California; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)35.336.745.8top 47% in California; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)44.438.142.9bottom 36% in California; bottom 45% 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 4.11, RN 0.46, weekend 3.57. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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

Who owns this facility

For profit - Individual

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Burnam, SoonIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/08/2022
Cretz, DereckIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Cretz, DereckIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Cretz, DereckIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/29/2025
Ensign Services INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/02/2022
Keetch, ChadIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2011
Kim, JesseIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Port, BarryIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/29/2025
Sato, AmiIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE09/09/2024
Tarng, WilliamIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Tarng, WilliamIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Tarng, WilliamIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/29/2025
Twomagnets LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Willits, AdamIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Palos Verdes Health Care Center1.1 miLomita, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Sunnyside Nursing Center1.9 miTorrance, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Torrance Memorial Med Ctr SNF/DP1.9 miTorrance, CA★★★★★5/5
Vermont Healthcare Center2.2 miTorrance, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Beachside Post Acute2.4 miTorrance, CA★★★★★4/5
Harbor Post Acute Care Center2.6 miTorrance, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Heritage Rehabilitation Center2.6 miTorrance, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Del Amo Gardens Care Center3.4 miTorrance, CA★★★★☆4/5
Bay Crest Care Center3.8 miTorrance, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Torrance Care Center West, INC3.9 miTorrance, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Providence Little Co of Mary Transitional Care Ctr4.0 miTorrance, CA★★★★★4/5
The Earlwood4.1 miTorrance, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Lomita →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055262.