Palos Verdes Health Care Center
26303 Western Ave., Lomita, CA 90717 · Los Angeles County · 48 certified beds · avg 43 residents/day · certified since Oct 1, 1976
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide · May 17, 2024 · F-0880
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.
Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.
Severity (L): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation existed throughout the facility. The single most serious citation CMS can issue.
Corrected: Jun 16, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 22, 2024 · 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: Dec 22, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 11, 2024 · 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: Nov 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 8, 2023 · 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: Oct 8, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (52)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 1, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Apr 1, 2026 | 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, 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 |
| Feb 12, 2026 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 12, 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides were properly trained — aides working more than 4 months must be trained and competent, and newer aides must be enrolled in training. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| Jan 26, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · from a complaint |
| Jan 26, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · from a complaint |
| May 18, 2025 | 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. |
| May 18, 2025 | 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. |
| May 18, 2025 | 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. |
| May 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not notify the appropriate authorities when a resident with a mental disorder or intellectual disability had a significant change in condition. |
| May 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. |
| May 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 18, 2025 | 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. |
| May 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| May 18, 2025 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. |
| Nov 22, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 11, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 11, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 28, 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. · from a complaint |
| May 17, 2024 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, facility-wide | 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. |
| May 17, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| May 17, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
| May 17, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 17, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 17, 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. |
| May 17, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| May 17, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 17, 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. |
| May 17, 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. |
| May 17, 2024 | 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. |
| May 17, 2024 | 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. |
| May 17, 2024 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The 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 11, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 8, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 8, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 17).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 17 | 3 | L ▲ |
| 2025 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 22 | 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)
3 fines totaling $97,006, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 22, 2024 | Fine | $15,162 |
| Oct 11, 2024 | Fine | $10,851 |
| May 17, 2024 | Fine | $70,993 |
| May 17, 2024 | Payment Denial | 70 days from Jun 15, 2024 |
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) | 4.53 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 27% in California; top 22% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.26 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 6% in California; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.28 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 21% in California; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.23 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 17% in California; bottom 18% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 58.6 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 4% in California; bottom 18% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.42, RN 0.25, weekend 4.18. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Individual
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allelo & Associates | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 07/09/1999 |
| Licht, Amnon | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 07/21/1999 |
| Allelo & Associates | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/21/1999 |
| Licht, Amnon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/21/1999 |
| Perez, Chris | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/21/2026 |
| Perez, Chris | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/21/2026 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Do you have a qualified dietician on staff, and how involved are they in each resident's nutrition plan?"
- "Can I see where garbage is stored and how often it's removed?"
- "Who reviews your menus, and can I see this week's menu and join my family member for a meal?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lomita Post-Acute Care Center | 1.1 mi | Lomita, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Torrance Memorial Med Ctr SNF/DP | 2.6 mi | Torrance, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Sunnyside Nursing Center | 2.8 mi | Torrance, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Seacrest Post-Acute Care Center | 3.1 mi | San Pedro, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| White Point Care Center | 3.1 mi | San Pedro, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Providence Little Comp of Mary Subacute Care Ctr | 3.1 mi | San Pedro, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Vermont Healthcare Center | 3.2 mi | Torrance, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Beachside Post Acute | 3.3 mi | Torrance, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Harbor Post Acute Care Center | 3.6 mi | Torrance, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Heritage Rehabilitation Center | 3.7 mi | Torrance, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Del Amo Gardens Care Center | 4.0 mi | Torrance, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Torrance Care Center West, INC | 4.7 mi | Torrance, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555028.