How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Sierra View Care Center
14318 Ohio Street, Baldwin Park, CA 91706 (opens Google Maps) · Los Angeles County · (626) 960-1971· 98 certified beds · avg 91 residents/day · certified since Jan 15, 1975 · 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: DAVID JOHNSON (48 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 24, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.52
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: 4/5 · 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 45 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. F-0558
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
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
View all 45 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0558 |
| Apr 24, 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. · F-0656 |
| Apr 24, 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. · F-0690 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 9, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Aug 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0627 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0578 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| Feb 21, 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 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 |
| Feb 21, 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0732 |
| Feb 21, 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 |
| Jun 3, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0676 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0686 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| Feb 16, 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 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Feb 16, 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 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| Feb 16, 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. · F-0656 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943 |
| Feb 16, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (13 → 10).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 11
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 20 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 14 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 11 | 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: 3.52
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.31
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.16
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) | 3.52 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 11% in California; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.31 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 13% in California; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.16 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 10% in California; bottom 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.17 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 6% in California; bottom 8% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 19.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 6% in California; top 2% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 26% in California; top 20% 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 0.36, weekend 3.66.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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sierra View 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sierra View Care Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 10/30/2008 |
| Casa/Sierra California Associates LP | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2025 |
| Casa/Sierra California Associates LP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2025 |
| Cibc Bank USA | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/08/2025 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Farrales, Mary | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Farrales, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/10/2008 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/10/2008 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/10/2008 |
| Khedia, Sanjay | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2018 |
| Khedia, Sanjay | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/08/2025 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Kwok, Whitney | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/27/2018 |
| Kwok, Whitney | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/27/2018 |
| Oxford, Micheal | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2022 |
| Oxford, Micheal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2022 |
Showing 20 of 26 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 6 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain David Johnson — 48 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.
- Spring Valley Post Acute LLC — Victorville, CA · overall 2/5
- Sun Mar Nursing Center — Anaheim, CA · overall 5/5
- Sunny Hills Post Acute — La Mirada, CA · overall 2/5
- Sunset Manor Conv Hosp — El Monte, CA · overall 3/5
- Tarzana Health and Rehabilitation Center — Tarzana, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- The Grove Post Acute — Garden Grove, CA · overall 5/5
- Trabuco Hills Post Acute — Lake Forest, CA · overall 2/5
- Victoria Care Center — Baldwin Park, CA · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 47 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.
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
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 19% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 26 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 227 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coast Care Convalescent Center | 0.2 mi | Baldwin Park, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Victoria Care Center | 1.4 mi | Baldwin Park, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| West Covina Healthcare Center | 1.8 mi | West Covina, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Garden View Post Acute Rehabilitation | 1.8 mi | Baldwin Park, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| West Covina Medical Center D/P SNF | 2.0 mi | West Covina, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| West Haven Healthcare | 2.2 mi | West Covina, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Clara Baldwin Stocker Home for Women | 2.7 mi | West Covina, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Gardens of el Monte | 2.9 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Santa Fe Lodge | 3.0 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mayflower Care Center | 3.0 mi | El Monte, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Royal Terrace Healthcare | 3.0 mi | Duarte, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Beacon Healthcare Center | 3.0 mi | West Covina, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
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.
- Skyline Healthcare Center - la — Los Angeles, CA · overall 1/5SFF
- Socal Post-Acute Care — Whittier, CA · overall 3/5
- Solheim Senior Community — Los Angeles, CA · overall 2/5
- South Pasadena Care Center — South Pasadena, CA · overall 1/5
- Southern California Hosp at Culver City D/P SNF — Culver City, CA · overall 2/5
- Southland — Norwalk, CA · overall 1/5
- St Andrews — Los Angeles, CA · overall 5/5
- St. John of God Retirement — Los Angeles, CA · overall 1/5
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 056466.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).