California ›Santa Monica

Ocean Park Healthcare

2828 Pico Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA 90405 · Los Angeles County · 41 certified beds · avg 38 residents/day · certified since Apr 8, 2002

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

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$12,735
Fines, last 3 years
4.51
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: 2/5

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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Mar 26, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Apr 25, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (56)

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
May 27, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
May 27, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or obtain x-rays and other imaging tests when ordered, or did not promptly tell the ordering doctor the results. · from a complaint
Jan 21, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint
Jan 21, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint
May 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
May 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 4, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
May 4, 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.
May 4, 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.
May 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
May 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
May 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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).
May 4, 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.
May 4, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services.
May 4, 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.
May 4, 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.
May 4, 2025D · 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.
May 4, 2025D · 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.
May 4, 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.
May 4, 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.
Apr 22, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Apr 22, 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. · from a complaint
Mar 26, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Feb 24, 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. · from a complaint
Feb 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 16, 2025D · 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
Jan 16, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Jul 16, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · from a complaint
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 11, 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. · from a complaint
Apr 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not educate its staff on residents' rights and the facility's responsibilities toward residents. Staff can only respect rights they've been taught about.
Mar 8, 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. · from a complaint
Feb 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Jan 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 12, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint
Jan 11, 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. · from a complaint
Jan 9, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility was not properly licensed, or did not operate in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and accepted professional standards. · from a complaint
Sep 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not post the names, addresses, and phone numbers of state agencies and advocacy groups, along with a notice that residents may file complaints with the state survey agency. · from a complaint
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a compliance and ethics program — an internal system designed to prevent and catch violations of the law and ethical standards. · from a complaint
Jan 27, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 27, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 27, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
Jan 27, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 27, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Jan 27, 2022E · 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.
Jan 27, 2022D · 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.
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 27, 2022D · 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.
Jan 27, 2022D · 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.
Jan 27, 2022B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 16).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022120E
202370D
2024100E
2025231G ▲
202640D

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)

1 fine totaling $12,735.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 26, 2025Fine$12,735

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)4.514.313.95top 28% in California; top 23% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.250.610.69bottom 5% in California; bottom 5% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.173.903.50top 25% in California; top 18% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.250.510.48bottom 21% in California; bottom 21% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)35.436.745.8top 48% in California; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.038.142.9—

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 4.33, RN 0.24, weekend 4.00. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Abe and Rachel Bak Family TrustOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Am Holdco, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest10%03/01/2021
Lehmann, KennethIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest25%05/01/2021
Moas, AaronIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest14%03/01/2021
Oscherowitz, AvishaiIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest5%03/01/2021
Abak Consulting LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021
Bak, AbrahamIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Bak, AbrahamIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Gastwirth, MenachemIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE03/06/2020
Gastwirth, MenachemIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Gastwirth, MenachemIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Gewirtz, ChonochIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Lehmann, KennethIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Lehmann, KennethIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2021
Mgaz Consulting LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/27/2021
Montag, MemphisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Montag, MemphisIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2023
Rutherford, KeinoIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Rutherford, KeinoIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025

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
Sunset Park Healthcare0.0 miSanta Monica, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Westwood Post Acute Care1.1 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Brentwood Health Care Center1.1 miSanta Monica, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Berkley West Healthcare Center1.2 miSanta Monica, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Ocean Pointe Healthcare Center1.2 miSanta Monica, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Pacific Post Acute1.2 miSanta Monica, CA★★★★★4/5
Santa Monica Health Care Center1.2 miSanta Monica, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Santa Monica Rehabilitation Center1.2 miSanta Monica, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Berkley East Healthcare Center1.2 miSanta Monica, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Beachwood Post-Acute & Rehab1.7 miSanta Monica, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Good Shepherd Health Care Center of Santa Monica1.7 miSanta Monica, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
New Vista Post-Acute Care Center1.7 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆1/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Santa Monica →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555786.