Osage Healthcare & Wellness Centre
Inglewood, California · CCN 056143
38 surveys since 2010, 10 of them producing a finding at harm level or worse.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 192
- Surveys
- 38
- Harm or worse
- 10
- Immediate jeopardy
- 4
Findings at the most serious level CMS records.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 53
- Ownership
- For profit - Corporation
- Chain
- PACIFIC HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS
- County
- Los Angeles
- Medicare-certified since
- 1979
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 3
- Health inspection
- 3
- Staffing
- 2
- Quality measures
- 4
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Since 2021, this facility recorded somewhat more weighted findings than its peer group.
Weighted by harm level, against 252 for-profit facilities with fewer than 66 beds in California.
Last survey on record
Feb 13, 2026
269 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Staffing
| Measure | This facility | Peer median |
|---|---|---|
| Nurse hours per resident day | 4.41 | 4.36 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 0.48 | — |
As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.
Enforcement
No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.
Severity of recent findings
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J— | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D3986.7% | E36.7% | F— |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B36.7% | C— |
Most frequently cited here
In CMS’s current monthly file.
- F6563×
Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
- F8123×
Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
- F9113×
Ensure resident rooms hold no more than 4 residents; for new construction after November 28, 2016, rooms hold no more than 2 residents.
- F5582×
Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
- F5802×
Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Osage Healthcare & Wellness Centre, in the surveyor’s own words.
- Immediate jeopardy, isolatedF689Apr 13, 2021
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three sampled residents (Resident 1) was adequately supervised to prevent residents who were at risk for leaving the facility unaccompanied. Resident 1, who had a documented history of depression (characterized by persistent feelings of sadness and hopelessness) with attempts to harm self, left the facility unsupervised and went missing from the facility for seven (7) days. Resident 1, who used the wheelchair for mobility and had multiple medical conditions that required medications for treatment, was without her medications for 7 days. The facility also failed to report Resident 1 being missing until eight days after the incident. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF695Feb 13, 2026
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Provide continuous supplemental oxygen (a medical treatment delivering oxygen enriched air to people with breathing problems) at two liters per minute (lpm, unit of measurement the rate of oxygen flow delivered to the resident) through nasal cannula (a small plastic tube, which fits into the person's nostrils for providing supplemental oxygen) as ordered by the physician for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2). 2. Ensure the oxygen tubing (a flexible, latex-free tubing, to deliver oxygen from a source) was labeled and dated for one of three sampled residents (Resident 22). 3. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Feb 13, 2026
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure Resident food brought from outside was labeled, dated and stored in the designated resident's refrigerator in the activity room for one of one sampled resident (Resident 30). 2. Ensure 1 week old lettuce in a clear container was labeled and dated in the vegetable refrigerator in the kitchen. These deficient practices had the potential to result in harmful bacteria growth and cross contamination (transfer of harmful bacteria from one place to another) that could lead to foodborne illness (an infection or irritation of the gastrointestinal tract caused by eating or drinking food or beverages contaminated with harmful bacteria, viruses, parasites, or chemicals). Findings: 1. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Nov 1, 2024
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a sandwich for one of five sampled resident (Resident 40) was identified with a label and date. This deficient practice placed Resident 40 at risk for foodborne illness (any illness resulting from eating contaminated/spoiled foods). Findings: During review of Resident 40's Admission Record (front page of the chart that contains a summary of basic information about the resident), Resident 40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including anxiety (conditions that cause excessive and persistent feelings of fear or worry that can interfere with daily life), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD-a chronic lung disease causing difficulty in breathing), and muscle weakness (loss of muscle… […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF644Nov 4, 2022
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess and complete the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review ([PASRR] a federal requirement to help ensure that individuals are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) assessment for two out of two sampled residents (Resident 15 and Resident 33) This deficient practice had the potential to result in inappropriate placement and placed the residents at risk of not receiving the necessary care and services Findings: a). During a review of the clinical record for Resident 15, the Admission Record indicated Resident 15 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . […]
Read 30 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 30 of 192 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Feb 13, 2026Standard18 findings
- Feb 4, 2026Complaint4 findings
- Aug 27, 2025Complaint2 findings
- Nov 1, 2024Standard14 findings
- Nov 3, 2023Standard5 findings
- Sep 1, 2023Complaint2 findings
- Nov 4, 2022Standard7 findings
- Apr 13, 2021Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
Show the 30 earlier surveys
- Feb 12, 2021Complaint2 findings
- Sep 28, 2020Infection control1 finding
- Dec 23, 2019Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
- Oct 11, 2019Standard9 findings
- Apr 15, 2019Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
- Oct 13, 2018Standard7 findings
- Aug 22, 2018Complaint1 finding
- Jun 19, 2018Complaint1 finding
- May 3, 2018Complaint1 finding
- Mar 28, 2018Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
- Mar 20, 2018Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
- Dec 11, 2017Standard18 findings · 1 harm
- Jun 26, 2017Complaint1 finding
- May 31, 2017Complaint1 finding
- May 5, 2017Complaint1 finding
- Mar 3, 2017Complaint1 finding
- Feb 17, 2017Complaint1 finding
- Jan 31, 2017Complaint1 finding
- Dec 21, 2016Complaint1 finding
- Dec 15, 2016Complaint1 finding
- Dec 12, 2016Standard and complaint19 findings · 1 harm
- Dec 1, 2016Complaint1 finding
- Mar 31, 2016Complaint1 finding
- Nov 15, 2015Standard and complaint6 findings
- Aug 15, 2014Standard5 findings
- Jul 24, 2013—2 findings
- Jun 25, 2013—2 findings
- Apr 25, 2013Standard19 findings · 2 harm
- Jan 30, 2012—18 findings
- Oct 22, 2010—14 findings · 1 harm
Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.
Comparable facilities
The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.
Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction