Hearth Record

Global Hospice and Pallative Care, Inc.

A hospice in Modesto, California 95354

1200 G St, Suite B, Modesto, California 95354. (310) 784-0422.

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 10 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited May 2026. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

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

What these words mean3
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
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.

What did inspectors find?

10 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 17 hospices serving ZIP code 95354 had 6.

The last inspection on record was on May 15, 2026: a reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission.

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

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

10 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.

May 15, 2026: reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission10 deficiencies
  • EP Training Program (42 CFR 418.113(d)(1)(iii))

    “Observed in HR File Review. In 3 out of 10 personnel records reviewed, the organization failed to provide ongoing emergency management education and training to their staff. For example, in personnel record review for HR#1-Administrator, HR#2-DPCS, and HR#3-SC/BC/Vol Coord, there was no evidence that training had been provided for 2024. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule E0037. Standard-level.

  • Patient outcome measures (42 CFR 418.54(e)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 309 words

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 1 out 4 home visits conducted, the organization failed to maintain complete and accurate patient records. For example, in the home visit conducted for RRHV#2, the patient’s plan of care included orders and equipment for oxygen therapy. It was documented that the patient had oxygen in use at 2 LPM via nasal cannula as needed for symptom management; however, there was no oxygen equipment in the home. Upon further observation, the visiting nurse confirmed with the patient that they have never had oxygen equipment in the home. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator. Observed in Record Review. In 4 out of 14 active records reviewed, the organization failed to maintain complete and accurate patient records. For example, in record review for RRNHV#1, the initial comprehensive assessment documented that the patient was on continuous oxygen at 4 LPM via nasal cannula; however, the treatment and medication list documented that the patient was on oxygen at 2 LPM via nasal cannula continuously. All follow-up documentation notes that the patient is on oxygen at 4 LPM continuously via nasal cannula. In record review for RRNHV#3, it was documented in the comprehensive assessment that the patient was on oxygen at 3 LPM as needed for shortness of breath; however, the treatment list documented that the patient was on 2 LPM as needed. In record review for RRNHV#5, the registered nurse (RN) documented in the initial comprehensive assessment that the patient was on oxygen at 2 LPM via nasal cannula continuously; however, the treatment list and plan of care indicated that it was only used as needed. In record review of RRNHV#8, the recertification assessment documented continuous oxygen use at 4 LPM; however, the plan of care notes oxygen at 2 LPM continuously. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0535. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 127 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 19 out of 19 records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure that the written plan of care is based on the patient’s goals and the timeframes, settings, and services required to meet those goals. For example, in all records reviewed, the plan of care did not include measurable goals. All goals were vague, not individualized, and did not include a realistic or appropriate timeframe for completion. Examples include, Patient will achieve optimal level of sleep, The patient will be free of injuries to maintain safety within the certification period, The patient will have adequate foods and fluids to maintain comfort, and The patient will have pain controlled at an optimal level. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

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

    “Observed in Record Review. In 7 out of 14 active records reviewed, the organization failed to plan the patient’s care. For example, in record review for RRHV#4, RRNHV#2, RRNHV#3, RRNHV#5, RRNHV#7, RRNHV#8, and RRNHV#9, the plan of care’s included volunteer services with a frequency of as needed. However, there is no documentation to support why the volunteer services are needed, or how often and how long they are needed. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0547. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 184 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 4 out of 14 records reviewed, the organization failed to plan the patient’s care. For example, in record review of RRNHV#2, the patient had a documented wound to the right heel as a result of a ruptured blister; however, there were no wound care orders or interventions listed on the plan of care. In record review for RRNHV#6, the patient had a documented stage II pressure injury to the coccyx, a right heel deep tissue injury (DTI), and a left ankle DTI; however, there were no wound care or treatment orders listed on the plan of care. In record review of RRNHV#8, the patient had a documented stage II pressure injury to the sacrum; however, there were no interventions or treatment orders included in the plan of care. In record review for RRHV#4, the patient had a documented skin tear to the right forearm, and multiple open abrasions to the right lower leg; however, there were no wound care or treatment interventions included in the plan of care. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(5))

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 1 out of 4 home visits conducted, the organization failed to plan the patient’s care. For example, in the home visit conducted for RRHV#2, the patient was observed to be using a rollator with seat attachment for ambulation; however, this was not listed on the current plan of care. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0550. Standard-level.

  • Prevention (42 CFR 418.60(a))

    The inspectors’ words, 106 words

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 1 out of 4 home visits conducted, the organization failed to implement activities for the prevention and control of infections and communicable diseases. For example, during the home visit conducted for RRHV#3, the Registered Nurse (RN) was observed entering her nursing bag on three separate occasions with gloved hands, and two occasions with ungloved hands. Each time the RN entered the bag on these occasions, she failed to perform hand hygiene. According to organizational policy [Policy# 9-014.1], hand hygiene must be performed prior to entering or re-entering the nursing bag. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0579. Standard-level.

  • Counseling services (42 CFR 418.64(d)(3)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 out of 14 active records reviewed, the organization failed to assess its patients. For example, in record review for RRNHV#1, there was no evidence that the organization had completed a spiritual assessment for the patient. There was no documentation that their spiritual concerns or needs were identified. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0598. Standard-level.

  • Hospice aide assignments and duties (42 CFR 418.76(g)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 154 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 8 out of 14 active records reviewed, the organization failed to plan the patient’s care. For example, in record review for RRNHV#1 and RRNHV#9, the patient’s were documented to be on continuous oxygen at 4 LPM via nasal cannula; however, the aide care plan’s did not include instructions detailing if the oxygen could be removed during the bed bath. For RRNHV#5, the patient was documented to be on oxygen at 2 LPM via nasal cannula continuously; however, the aide care plan did not indicate if the oxygen could be removed during the bed bath. For RRHV#1, RRHV#4, RRNHV#3, RRNHV#8, and RRNHV#10, the patient’s were documented to be on oxygen at 2 LPM via nasal cannula as needed; however, the aide care plan’s did not include instructions for what to do if oxygen was in use during aide visits. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0625. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 196 words

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 2 out of 3 home visits conducted with an observed medication reconciliation, the organization failed to ensure the patient record contains information that reflects the patient’s care, treatment, or services. For example, in the home visit conducted for RRHV#3, the patient was noted to be taking Tylenol ES 500 mg one tablet every four hours as needed for mild pain; however, this medication was not listed on the medication profile in the home or medical record. In the home visit conducted for RRHV#4, the patient was noted to be taking Lorazepam 0.5 mg every four hours as needed; however, this was not listed on the medication profile in the home or medical record. Upon further review, the medication profile included Miconazole nitrate powder to be applied topically three times a day for 14 days; however, this medication was not present in the home and had been discarded eight months prior. It was also noted that the medication profile included Imodium A-D 2 mg caplet to be taken once daily as needed; however, this medication was not present in the home. This was reviewed, discussed, and validated with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0674. Standard-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
May 15, 2026Reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission10 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Feb 25, 2020.
  • Ownership: other.
  • No deficiency or on record in the last three years.
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): 12.8 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 5.1% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 99.6% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 39% at home, 40% in assisted living, 20% 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 day12.8 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends5.1%
Visits near death99.6% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • 5 owners or officers are people: Grace J Flores (owns 5% or more directly, 100%); Grace J Flores (corporate officer, 100%); Grace J Flores (corporate director, 100%); Grace J Flores (managing employee (on the payroll), 100%); Kirti Kumar Solanki (managing employee (under contract), 5%).
  • 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?

  • Family caregivers rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s survey (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 88% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 91% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 9 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 90.43% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 17.6% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (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 53 of 5
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 threshold9 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 17 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 95354, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 6; this one had 10.
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 28, 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.