California ›Los Angeles

Virgil Rehabilitation & Skilled Nursing Center

975 North Virgil Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90029 · Los Angeles County · 124 certified beds · avg 73 residents/day · certified since Dec 10, 1968

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.58
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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Aug 23, 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 (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Sep 17, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jul 29, 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Aug 25, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (50)

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
Jun 22, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint
Feb 6, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Feb 6, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 6, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Feb 6, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Feb 6, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 6, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Feb 6, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 6, 2026D · 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.
Feb 6, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Feb 6, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 6, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 6, 2026D · 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.
Feb 6, 2026D · 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.
Feb 6, 2026B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 13, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Nov 20, 2025D · 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
Nov 20, 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
Nov 20, 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. · from a complaint
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Aug 23, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Aug 14, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Jul 29, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Feb 13, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · from a complaint
Dec 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role.
Dec 27, 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 27, 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.
Dec 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 27, 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.
Dec 27, 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.
Dec 27, 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.
Dec 27, 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.
Dec 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 29, 2023E · 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.
Dec 29, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023D · 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 29, 2023D · 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 29, 2023D · 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.
Dec 29, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 29, 2023D · 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.
Aug 1, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 → 14).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023160E
2024100D
202582J ▲
2026160E

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)

0 fines totaling $0, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jul 29, 2025Payment Denial55 days from Jul 29, 2025

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)5.584.313.95top 7% in California; top 7% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.520.610.69top 43% in California; bottom 41% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.143.903.50top 6% in California; top 5% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.370.510.48top 49% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)19.436.745.8top 6% in California; top 2% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)37.538.142.9top 50% in California; top 42% 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 5.17, RN 0.48, weekend 4.76. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Modi, RushabhIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest50%02/10/2016
Modi, ShrutiIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest50%02/10/2016
Antonio, TeresitaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/16/2018
Antonio, TeresitaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/16/2018
Austria, ElizabethIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/10/2016
Austria, ElizabethIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/10/2016
Brinley, BrittanyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2021
Brinley, BrittanyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2021
Brinley, BrittanyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2021
Ninonuevo, JeceryIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/12/2023
Ninonuevo, JeceryIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/12/2023
Parikh, SagarIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2015
Parikh, SagarIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2015

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
Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center D/P SNF0.4 miLos Angeles, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Garden Crest Rehabilitation Center0.7 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆3/5
The Meadows on Sunset Post Acute0.8 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Alexandria Care Center0.9 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Fountain View Subacute and Nursing Center1.2 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Palazzo Post Acute1.2 miLos Angeles, CA★★★★☆3/5
Hollywood Premier Healthcare Center1.2 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Temple Park Convalescent Hospital1.7 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆2/5
Los Feliz Healthcare & Wellness Center, LP1.8 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Skyline Healthcare Center - la1.8 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
The Rehabilitation Center of Los Angeles2.2 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Westlake Convalescent Hospital2.2 miLos Angeles, 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 055157.