How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Rose Villa Health Care Center
9028 Rose Street, Bellflower, CA 90706 (opens Google Maps) · Los Angeles County · (562) 925-4252· 53 certified beds · avg 49 residents/day · certified since Nov 1, 1971 · 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★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 24, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.60
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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 50 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0690
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. · from a complaint F-0676
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint F-0755
View all 50 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0690 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0676 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Nov 26, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0760 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 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 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0758 |
| Apr 24, 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 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0688 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0758 |
| Apr 7, 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 |
| Apr 7, 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · F-0711 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, approved x-ray services or have an agreement with an approved provider to supply them. · F-0776 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0803 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 5, 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 |
| Oct 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0626 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0758 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide enough space and equipment to meet each resident's needs. · F-0907 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0760 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · F-0825 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2022 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 10).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 5
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 | 15 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 18 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 5 | 0 | E |
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: 3.60
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.58
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.15
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) | 3.60 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 15% in California; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.58 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 34% in California; bottom 50% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.15 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 9% in California; bottom 39% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.31 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 37% in California; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 32.7 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 39% in California; top 19% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 41.7 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 41% in California; top 50% 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 4.07, RN 0.66, weekend 3.56.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.07 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · 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 Rose Villa Health Care 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flagstone Healthcare South LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/30/2006 |
| The Ensign Group INC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/30/2006 |
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/30/2006 |
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2025 |
| Caretrust GP LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2003 |
| Caretrust Reit INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2003 |
| Ctr Partnership LP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2003 |
| Ensign Bellflower LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2003 |
| Ensign Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/14/2011 |
| Howell, David | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/05/2013 |
| Howell, David | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/05/2013 |
| Howell, David | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2025 |
| Keetch, Chad | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Pole, Shivanand | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2024 |
| Pole, Shivanand | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2024 |
| Pole, Shivanand | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2025 |
| Port, Barry | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/07/2025 |
| Willits, Adam | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/29/2019 |
All 18 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.
- Sea Cliff Healthcare Center — Huntington Beach, CA · overall 2/5
- Shoreline Healthcare Center — Long Beach, CA · overall 3/5
- Somerset Post Acute Care — El Cajon, CA · overall 3/5
- South Bay Post Acute Care — Chula Vista, CA · overall 5/5
- Southland — Norwalk, CA · overall 1/5
- St Elizabeth Healthcare Center — Fullerton, CA · overall 3/5
- St. Catherine Healthcare — Fullerton, CA · overall 3/5
- Summerfield Health Care Center — Santa Rosa, 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 do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Who oversees antibiotic use here, and how do you decide when an antibiotic is really needed?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 33% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 18 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 299 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bellflower Post Acute | 0.7 mi | Bellflower, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Bay Vista Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP | 0.7 mi | Long Beach, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Cerritos Vista Healthcare Center | 1.1 mi | Bellflower, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Sunset Villa Post Acute | 1.2 mi | Long Beach, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Villa Del Sol Post Acute | 1.4 mi | Bellflower, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| La Paz Geropsychiatric Center | 1.5 mi | Paramount, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Paramount Convalescent Hosp. | 2.4 mi | Paramount, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Meadow Creek Post-Acute | 2.7 mi | Paramount, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Artesia Christian Home INC. | 2.9 mi | Artesia, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Springs Post-Acute | 3.0 mi | Norwalk, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| North Long Beach Post Acute | 3.1 mi | Long Beach, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Artesia Palms Care Center | 3.5 mi | Artesia, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Los Angeles, CA — 369 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Rosecrans Care Center — Gardena, CA · overall 2/5
- Rosemead Healthcare Center — El Monte, CA · overall 2/5
- Royal Gardens Healthcare — Alhambra, CA · overall 1/5
- Royal Oaks Manor-Bradbury Oaks — Duarte, CA · overall 4/5
- Royal Palms Post Acute — Glendale, CA · overall 2/5
- Royal Terrace Healthcare — Duarte, CA · overall 3/5
- Royal Vista Care Center — San Gabriel, CA · overall 1/5
- Saint Vincent Healthcare — Pasadena, 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 056104.