California ›Los Angeles

Veterans Home of California - West Los Angeles

11500 Nimitz Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90049 · Los Angeles County · 312 certified beds · avg 143 residents/day · certified since Nov 21, 2019

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
7.68
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (47)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jul 2, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint
Jan 14, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
Dec 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Dec 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not designate a physician to serve as medical director — the doctor responsible for overseeing resident care policies and coordinating medical care across the facility.
Dec 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not follow the rules about disclosing who owns it, or did not tell the state agency about changes in ownership or key administrative staff.
Dec 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Dec 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights.
Dec 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Dec 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · from a complaint
Aug 22, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · from a complaint
May 1, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint
Apr 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Dec 6, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 6, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Dec 6, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service.
Dec 6, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems.
Dec 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Dec 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Dec 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Dec 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
Dec 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Oct 31, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint
Oct 31, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint
Jul 31, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not include required infection control training — with written standards, policies, and procedures — as part of its infection prevention program.
Jul 31, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Jul 30, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint
Feb 22, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint
Jan 26, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Jan 26, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 26, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Jan 26, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · from a complaint
Jan 10, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (9 → 8).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024340F
2025110F
202620D

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)

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

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

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)7.684.313.95top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.620.610.69top 3% in California; top 4% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing6.943.903.50top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.860.510.48top 10% in California; top 9% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)35.336.745.8top 47% in California; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)23.338.142.9top 25% in California; top 19% in the U.S.

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 5.82, RN 1.23, weekend 5.26. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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

Government - State

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Department of Veterans Affairs of the State of CaliforniaOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%10/03/2010
Department of Veterans Affairs of the State of CaliforniaOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2018
Lindsey, CindyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2018
McGuire, KevinIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE10/15/2017
Nanoo, BrianIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2018

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Brentwood Health Care Center3.0 miSanta Monica, CA★★★☆☆3/5
New Vista Post-Acute Care Center3.1 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Westwood Post Acute Care3.1 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Berkley East Healthcare Center3.4 miSanta Monica, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Santa Monica Health Care Center3.4 miSanta Monica, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Santa Monica Rehabilitation Center3.4 miSanta Monica, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Berkley West Healthcare Center3.6 miSanta Monica, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Pacific Post Acute3.6 miSanta Monica, CA★★★★★4/5
Ocean Pointe Healthcare Center3.6 miSanta Monica, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Beachwood Post-Acute & Rehab3.6 miSanta Monica, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Good Shepherd Health Care Center of Santa Monica3.8 miSanta Monica, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Fireside Health Care Center4.0 miSanta Monica, CA★★★★☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Los Angeles →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555917.