California ›Los Angeles

West Pico Terrace Healthcare & Wellness Centre LP

6070 W. Pico Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90035 · Los Angeles County · 49 certified beds · avg 45 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1968

Part of chain: CORPORATE INTERFACE SERVICES (40 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.71
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5

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 (42)

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
Apr 17, 2026E · 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.
Apr 17, 2026E · 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.
Apr 17, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Apr 17, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services.
Apr 17, 2026D · 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.
Apr 17, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Apr 17, 2026B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Apr 30, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Feb 9, 2025E · 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 9, 2025E · 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Feb 9, 2025D · 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way.
Feb 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
Feb 9, 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Feb 9, 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · 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 9, 2025D · 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.
Feb 9, 2025D · 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 9, 2025D · 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.
Feb 9, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Nov 8, 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 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 19, 2024E · 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.
Jan 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 19, 2024E · 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.
Jan 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing.
Jan 19, 2024D · 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.
Jan 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services.
Jan 19, 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 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 19, 2024D · 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.
Jan 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Jan 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms.
Oct 13, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint
Aug 11, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 7).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202320D
2024150E
2025180E
202670E

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)3.714.313.95bottom 22% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.440.610.69bottom 43% in California; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.273.903.50bottom 14% in California; bottom 45% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.470.510.48top 35% in California; top 37% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)0.036.745.8—
RN turnover (%)0.038.142.9—

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 4.70, RN 0.56, weekend 4.14. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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 - Partnership

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Corporate Interface Services LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/18/2024
Corporate Interface Services LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/24/2025
Ramin, DavidIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2021
Ramin, DavidIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2021
Rechnitz, ShlomoIndividualLimited Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2014
Rockport Administrative Services, LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/31/2014
Rockport Administrative Services, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/25/2025
Weiss, MeshulemIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/04/2024
Weiss, MeshulemIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/04/2024
West Pico Terrace Wellness GP LLCOrganizationGeneral Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/15/2014
West Pico-Let LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/04/2025

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
Pavilion on Pico Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP0.1 miLos Angeles, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Flower Villa, INC0.6 miLos Angeles, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Miracle Mile Healthcare Center, LLC0.7 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Beverly Hills Rehabilitation Centre1.0 miLos Angeles, CA★★★☆☆2/5
Guardian Rehabilitation Hospital1.1 miLos Angeles, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Sharon Care Center1.4 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆1/5
Crenshaw Nursing Home1.4 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Longwood Manor Conv.hospital1.4 miLos Angeles, CA★★☆☆☆2/5
Kennedy Care Center2.1 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
West Hollywood Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP2.4 miLos Angeles, CA★★★★☆3/5
La Brea Rehabilitation Center2.6 miLos Angeles, CA★☆☆☆☆1/5
Southern California Hosp at Culver City D/P SNF2.7 miCulver City, CA★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Los Angeles →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055119.