Sunset Manor Conv Hosp

2720 Nevada Avenue, El Monte, CA 91733 (opens Google Maps) · Los Angeles County · (626) 443-9425· 81 certified beds · avg 73 residents/day · certified since Jun 18, 1969 · 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 May 22, 2026

Serious findings on record

most recent Jan 3, 2025

Fines, last 3 years

3.86

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 3, 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jan 20, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 52 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

May 22, 2026E · 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
May 22, 2026E · 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
May 22, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. F-0605

View all 52 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
May 22, 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
May 22, 2026	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
May 22, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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. · F-0605
May 22, 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
May 22, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0657
May 22, 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. · F-0676
May 22, 2026	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
May 22, 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
May 22, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
May 22, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Jan 12, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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 · F-0689
Nov 26, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583
Nov 20, 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. · from a complaint · F-0656
Nov 20, 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. · from a complaint · F-0755
Mar 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
Mar 21, 2025	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
Mar 21, 2025	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
Mar 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
Mar 21, 2025	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. · F-0676
Mar 21, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
Mar 21, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Mar 21, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847
Mar 21, 2025	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. · F-0911
Mar 21, 2025	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	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. · F-0912
Jan 21, 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Jan 3, 2025	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	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 · F-0689
Jan 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint · F-0908
Aug 20, 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
Aug 13, 2024	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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Aug 13, 2024	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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Jul 24, 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Apr 12, 2024	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 12, 2024	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
Apr 12, 2024	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 12, 2024	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 12, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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 12, 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
Apr 12, 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. · F-0880
Apr 12, 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
Apr 12, 2024	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. · F-0676
Apr 12, 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 12, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
Apr 12, 2024	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 12, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Apr 12, 2024	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 12, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694
Apr 12, 2024	B · Potential for 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 12, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. · F-0911
Apr 12, 2024	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	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. · F-0912
Mar 4, 2024	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
Feb 6, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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 · F-0609
Oct 27, 2023	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. · from a complaint · F-0684

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 10).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2023

2024

2025

2026

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2023	1	0	D
2024	24	0	E
2025	16	1	G ▲
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)

How to file a complaint about care →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

3.86

4.31

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.40

0.61

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

3.47

3.90

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)	3.86	4.31	3.95	bottom 31% in California; top 46% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.40	0.61	0.69	bottom 32% in California; bottom 22% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.47	3.90	3.50	bottom 27% in California; top 43% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.23	0.51	0.48	bottom 17% in California; bottom 17% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	45.2	36.7	45.8	bottom 25% in California; bottom 49% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	57.1	38.1	42.9	bottom 18% in California; bottom 26% 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 4.48, RN 0.46, weekend 4.03.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.48 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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sunset Manor Conv Hosp. 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 - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Gibraltar Convalescent Hospital INC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	04/01/1977
Dehghanmanesh, Adrian	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	07/01/2021
Johnson, Frank	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/1977
Presnell, William	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/1977
Presnell, William	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	10/10/1986
Stewart, Selina	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	01/23/2020
Sun Mar Management Services	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/1977

All 7 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 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.

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
Villa Del Sol Post Acute — Bellflower, CA · overall 2/5
Villa Rancho Bernardo Care Center — San Diego, CA · overall 5/5
Vineland Post Acute — North Hollywood, CA · overall 3/5
Vista View Post Acute — Vista, CA · overall 4/5

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

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
"How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
"What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
"Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
"How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
"How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"

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 45% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
"Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 283 within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Valley View Post Acute	0.3 mi	El Monte, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Greater el Monte Community Hos	0.9 mi	El Monte, CA	★★★★☆	4/5
Madera Post Acute Center	1.5 mi	El Monte, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Eastland Subacute and Rehabilitation Center	1.9 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Rosemead Healthcare Center	1.9 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Penn Mar Healthcare Center	2.0 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Fidelity Health Care	2.4 mi	El Monte, CA	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse
Temple City Healthcare	2.7 mi	Temple City, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
The Gardens of el Monte	2.8 mi	El Monte, CA	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Santa Anita Convalescent Hospital	2.9 mi	Temple City, CA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	SFF
San Gabriel Conv Center	3.0 mi	Rosemead, CA	★★★☆☆	3/5
Green Acres Healthcare Center	3.0 mi	Rosemead, 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.

Sunset Park Healthcare — Santa Monica, CA · overall 2/5
Sunset Villa Post Acute — Long Beach, CA · overall 2/5
Tarzana Health and Rehabilitation Center — Tarzana, CA · overall 1/5abuse
Temple Park Convalescent Hospital — Los Angeles, CA · overall 1/5
Terrace Post Acute — Van Nuys, CA · overall 1/5
The Beach Post-Acute — Long Beach, CA · overall 2/5
The Bellefontaine Healthcare Center — Pasadena, CA · overall 3/5

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in El Monte →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055104.