Hearth Record

Americade Palliative Health Services, Inc.

A hospice in Montebello, California 90640

420 N Montebello Blvd Suite 204, Montebello, California 90640. (323) 728-8160.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 23, 2026. We couldn’t read Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ list since Oct 27, 2026: qcor.cms.gov now refuses our reader. This record is as of then.

The last 24 months 18 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2026. Most serious: Condition-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean3
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.
Condition-level deficiency
For hospices, home health agencies, hospitals and dialysis facilities, CMS writes deficiencies at two levels. Standard is the usual one; condition-level is the more serious, when a problem is serious enough that the provider doesn’t meet a whole condition of taking part in Medicare. Source: CMS, State Operations Manual.

What did inspectors find?

18 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 235 hospices serving ZIP code 90640 had 6.

The last inspection on record was on Jul 24, 2026: a follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission.

3 deficiencies at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

When those deficiencies happened

18 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2026. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

18 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Jun 11, 2026: reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission18 deficiencies
  • Quality assessment & performance improvement (42 CFR 418.58)

    “Observed in Data Session. During review of the QAPI program and discussion with the staff present it was noted that the hospice QAPI program was not evaluated annually. The documentation provided stated that the program was last evaluated 3/2023. This was confirmed and discussed with the nurse and office assistant present.”

    Rule L0559. Condition-level.

  • Governing body and administrator (42 CFR 418.100(b))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. There was no evidence that the governing body and leadership had established requirements to support patient care treatment and services as evidenced by a condition level finding at 418.60, 418.78, 418.100 and 418.58.”

    Rule L0651. Condition-level.

  • Services (42 CFR 418.100(c)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 173 words

    “Observed in Leadership Session. The organization failed to demonstrate that it ensured patient access to care, treatment, and services during nonbusiness hours.On arrival at the organization’s office, the surveyor found no staff present. The surveyor called the organization’s main phone number, which directed to an answering service. The answering service reported that it was unable to reach any on-call staff from the organization.The surveyor then contacted the account executive, who also attempted to reach staff through the answering service and received the same result—no staff could be contacted.A review of the home binders confirmed that the phone number called by the surveyor was the official contact number listed on all patient documentation, including on the front of the binders, where it was prominently displayed. The third day of survey the surveyor called the same number at 0850 and the answering service stated that they are unable to reach anyone.The organization did not have a process to ensure the after-hours services were working properly. These findings were confirmed during an interview with the CEO.”

    Rule L0653. Condition-level.

  • EP Training Program (42 CFR 418.113(d)(1)(iii))

    “Observed in HR File Review. In 4 of 10 HR files reviewed, it was noted that ongoing emergency management training was not completed every 2 years. For example in the Medical Director, MSW, Spiritual Counselor, and Volunteer files there was no documentation of emergency management training after orientation. This was confirmed and discussed with the Office Assistant present.”

    Rule E0037. Standard-level.

  • EP Testing Requirements (42 CFR 418.113(d)(2)(ii)(B))

    “Observed in Emergency Management Session. During review of the Emergency Operations plan and discussion with the nurse and office assistant present it was noted that for 2 years in a row the organization did a tabletop exercise and had no actual activations, either in response to an actual emergency or an organization based. This was confirmed and discussed with the nurse and office assistant present.”

    Rule E0039. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c))

    The inspectors’ words, 198 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 11 of 11 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the written plan of care was not based on the patient’s goals and the time frames, settings, and services required to meet those goals. For example, all goals in all records time frames were not individualized , they were the next IDG date. The goals were not individualized, for example all the records included the goal Will be free from injury daily. In record RRHV#2, all the goals had the same time frame, the next IDG, goals included: Establish trusting relationship with PT/family/PCG pt/cg able to expressed self, adopt to changes. In record RRHV#3, all the goals had the same time frame, the next IDG. Goals included Altered skin will health in 7-15 days and the wound had not resolved in the time frame and the goal was unchanged. Goal PCG will verbalized understanding of treatment order. and no treatment order was included on the POC. The intervention under treatment order goal was Family/PCG/hospice nurse to perform wound care as needed. with no further description. Other records with POC goals. This was confirmed and discussed with the CEO, Office Assistant and nurse present.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 93 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 11 patient records reviewed, it was noted that care was not provided according to hospice plan of care. For example in record RRHV#1 there was no visit frequency on the plan of care and no supplemental order for the MSW and the Social Worker performed visits. In record RRHV#3 the SN frequency was 1 time a week and the nurse visited the patient 2 days during 1 week with no as needed order or supplemental order documented. This was confirmed and discussed with the nurse present.”

    Rule L0547. Standard-level.

  • Program data (42 CFR 418.58(b)(3))

    “Observed in Data Session. During the Data system tracer it was noted that there was no evidence of the organization’s governing body had approved the frequency and detail of data collection. This was confirmed with the nurse present.”

    Rule L0565. Standard-level.

  • Performance improvement projects (42 CFR 418.58(d)(2))

    “Observed in Data Session. During a review of the QAPI program and discussion with the staff present, it was noted that the organization did not have any performance improvement projects being conducted. The documentation showed 2 PIPs that ended in 2025 and nothing since that time. Discussion with the staff present revealed they were unable to speak to any current PIPs being conducted. This was confirmed by the nurse and office assistant present.”

    Rule L0573. Standard-level.

  • Prevention (42 CFR 418.60(a))

    The inspectors’ words, 205 words

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 3 of 3 home visits conducted, it was noted that the staff failed to perform hand hygiene consistent with policy and failed to follow the organization’s bag technique police. For example during RRHV#1 after removing gloves the RN tore open and used 2 alcohol pads to perform hand hygiene. The organization’s policy stated that after removing gloves staff were to use an alcohol based hand rub which conforms to CDC guidelines. During RRHV#2 the RN entered the nursing bag multiple times without performing hand hygiene, including while on the sidewalk outside the home. She opened the bag and searched around, pulled out her name badge. RN also entered the bag greater than 5 times without performing hand hygiene while in the home working with the patient. The organization’s policy stated that hand hygiene was to be performed prior to entering the nursing bag. Also during RRHV#2 the RN used Lysol wipes to clean the equipment after use. During RRHV#3 the RN used purple top Sani wipes to clean the equipment prior to returning it to the bag. The organization’s policy stated that the equipment was to be cleaned using alcohol. This was confirmed and discussed with the nurses and CEO.”

    Rule L0579. Standard-level.

  • Control (42 CFR 418.60(b)(2)(ii))

    “Observed in Data Session. During the review of the Infection Control plan and discussion with the staff present it was noted that the data collected in 2025 stated 96% compliance hand hygiene compliance. However, there was no documentation that the data was analyzed for possible improvement. The data that was collected did not include all disciplines such as volunteers and therapists. This was confirmed and discussed with the nurse and office assistant present.”

    Rule L0581. Standard-level.

  • Education (42 CFR 418.60(c))

    “Observed in HR File Review. In 4 of 10 HR files reviewed, During review of HR files it was noted that the organization had not provided infection control education to staff. For example, the Medical Director, Volunteer, MSW and Spiritual Counselors files did not include infection control education. This was confirmed and discussed with the Office Assistant present.”

    Rule L0582. Standard-level.

  • Counseling services (42 CFR 418.64(d)(1)(iv))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 3 patient records reviewed, in bereavement care it was noted that the organization had not provided care or services according to the individualized POC. For example in records RRBR#1, #2, and #3 there was no bereavement plan of care documented and no documentation of services after the post death assessment. This was confirmed and discussed with the nurse and office assistant present.”

    Rule L0596. Standard-level.

  • Competency evaluation (42 CFR 418.76(c)(5))

    “Observed in HR File Review. In 1 of 10 HR files reviewed, staff competence was not assessed and documented once every year as required by organization policy. For example, a volunteer did not have a competency since their initial competency over six years ago. This was confirmed with the Office Assistant present.”

    Rule L0619. Standard-level.

  • Recruiting and retaining (42 CFR 418.78(c))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. During review of the Volunteer program documentation and discussion with the Volunteer Coordinator it was noted that the hospice had not documented efforts to recruit or retain volunteers. The Volunteer Coordinator stated that he talked with people at church, but he was unable to discuss any other recruitment activities and no retention activities. There was no documentation of any efforts. This was confirmed and discussed with the Volunteer Coordinator.”

    Rule L0645. Standard-level.

  • Cost saving (42 CFR 418.78(d)(3))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. During review of the Volunteer program documentation and discussion with the Volunteer Coordinator it was noted that the organization did not have documentation of cost savings achieved through use of volunteers for 2025 and 1st quarter 2026.”

    Rule L0646. Standard-level.

  • Level of activity (42 CFR 418.78(e))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. During review of the Volunteer program documentation and discussion with the Volunteer Coordinator it was noted that volunteers did not provide at least 5% of the total patient care hours of all paid hospice employees and contract staff. For example the organization documented 2.06% for the year 2025 and 1.52% for 1st quarter 2026. The was confirmed and discussed with the Volunteer Coordinator.”

    Rule L0647. Standard-level.

  • Use and mintenance of equipment and supplies (42 CFR 418.106(f)(2))

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 1 of 1 home visits conducted, that included oxygen therapy it was noted that the staff did not provide education on the safe storage of oxygen cylinders in the home. For example during visit RRHV#1 the backup oxygen e-tank was stored in a enclosed closest without air flow. The RN did not provide education related to oxygen storage. This was confirmed and discussed with the nurse present.”

    Rule L0702. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Jul 24, 2026Follow-up inspection by The Joint CommissionNo deficiencies cited
Jun 11, 2026Reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission18 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Sep 18, 2014.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules.
Source:

CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • 0 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who does the caring?

  • From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 14.6 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 9.4% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 85.7% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 91% at home, 3% in assisted living, 6% in a skilled nursing facility.
Source:

CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day14.6 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends9.4%
Visits near death85.7% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • 15 owners or officers are people: Filomeno Ebora Alcaide (owns 5% or more directly, 70%); Filomeno Ebora Alcaide (corporate officer, 70%); Filomeno Ebora Alcaide (corporate director, 70%); Filomeno Ebora Alcaide (managing employee (on the payroll), 70%); Filomeno Ebora Alcaide (runs it (operational or managerial control), 70%); Maria Visitacion A Tesoro (owns 5% or more directly, 10%); Maria Visitacion A Tesoro (corporate director, 10%); Maria Visitacion A Tesoro (runs it (operational or managerial control), 10%); Emma Reario Remonte (owns 5% or more directly, 10%); Emma Reario Remonte (corporate director, 10%); Emma Reario Remonte (managing employee (on the payroll), 10%); Retzie Reyla Eugenio (owns 5% or more directly, 10%); Retzie Reyla Eugenio (corporate director, 10%); Yvette Laws (other role (CMS gives no detail), 0%); Soumitra Sarkar (managing employee (under contract), 0%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What do families say?

  • CMS gives no family caregiver survey rating: “The number of cases is too small to report Star Ratings.”
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 10 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 5Not rated
Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold10 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 235 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 90640, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 6; this one had 18.
Source:

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
  • Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 27, 2026.

From the hospice

The public record above comes first. Anything the hospice adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the hospice”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 8, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.