Hearth Record

Hospice Providers of the Desert, Inc.

A hospice in Corona, California 92282

268 N. Lincoln Ave Ste 7a, Corona, California 92282. (760) 636-0880.

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.

The last 24 months 27 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Sep 2024. 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?

27 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 14 hospices serving ZIP code 92282 had 5.5.

The last inspection on record was on Sep 4, 2024: a follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission.

4 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

27 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Sep 2024. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

27 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.

Sep 4, 2024: follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission10 deficiencies
  • Exercise of rights/respect for proprty/person (42 CFR 418.52(b)(1)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 1 live discharge records reviewed, the patient discharged from service without the completion of a Notice of Medicare Non Coverage (NOMNC) completed prior to discharging patient from service. On review of RRDC #1, the agency did not have record that the NOMNC was completed prior to discharging the patient due to no longer qualifying for Hospice. This finding was reviewed with the Administrator.”

    Rule L0505. Standard-level.

  • Update of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(d))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 active patient records review, the interdisciplinary group (IDG) had not updated the comprehensive assessment no less frequently than every 15 days. On review of RRNHV #1, it was noted the Spiritual Counselor for the last 2 months has not documented any input on the IDG but has made 2 visits to the patient during that timeframe. This was discussed with the Administrator.”

    Rule L0533. Standard-level.

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

    “Observed in Record Review. On 2 of 2 patient records review, goals were not measurable and specific to the patients needs. On review of RRNHV #1, goals were not measurable and specific with examples of minimize episode, no injury for anxiety and disorientation and alleviate frustration due to difficulty remembering specially recent past. On review of RRNHV #2, the goals were not measurable and specific with examples of Increased strength to his fullest and Will maintain comfort for a problem with pain. This was discussed with the Administrator.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(2))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 active patient records reviewed, care was not provided according to the plan of care. On RRNHV #1 it was noted that the orders were for aide visits 2 times per week the order started at the beginning of service and it took a month before the first documented aide visit occurred. There was one communication note of a cancelled aide visit during that time but that only covered 1 visit day. This finding was reviewed with the administrator.”

    Rule L0555. Standard-level.

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

    “Observed in Data Session. During review of the organization’s quality program, the governing body had not approved the frequency and detail of the data collection associated to QAPI measures for 2024. The governing body had met but the frequency of the collection was not approved by the governing board for 2024. This was reviewed and validated with the administrator.”

    Rule L0565. Standard-level.

  • Control (42 CFR 418.60(b)(2)(ii))

    “Observed in Infection Control System Tracer. On review of the organizations infection control plan, the hospice organization failed to establish hand hygiene goals that were measurable and only noted it would limit the spread of infection with a strategy of maintaining hand hygiene compliance. This finding was reviewed with the administrator.”

    Rule L0581. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 128 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 1 Bereavement records reviewed, the organization did not develop a bereavement plan of care as required and defined in their Bereavement Services Policy No. 2.010.1 that specifies the type of bereavement services to be offered and the frequency of service delivery based on identified risk. The policy states for a person experiencing normal grief the Bereavement counselor will contact the bereaved person for ongoing assessment and support at 3, 6 and 9 months after the death and the anniversary of the death. On review of RRBR #1 it was noted that the patient passed away 5 months ago and a 3 month call has not been made per agency policy for a low bereaved risk. This was discussed with the Administrator.”

    Rule L0596. Standard-level.

  • Supervision of hospice aides (42 CFR 418.76(h)(1)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 1 patient records reviewed with aide services order, the registered nurse had not supervised the aide at least every 14 days. On review of RRNHV #1, it was noted that the last sup visit on the patient was 19 days ago. This finding was reviewed with the administrator.”

    Rule L0629. Standard-level.

  • Clinical records (42 CFR 418.104)

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 2 active patient record reviews, documentation in the patient record is not entered timely. Agency policy 5-006.2 is that documentation is entered on day care is provided and turned in at the end of the workday. In RRNHV #1 the aide documentation has not been completed for the last 19 days of visits. On review of RRNHV #2, it was noted that the RN note from one week ago has not been signed by the RN. This was reviewed with the administrator. 
”

    Rule L0670. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(1)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 1 discharged patient records reviewed where patient discharged from service, a discharge summary for care and treatment was not sent to the provider or a notification given that it was available. In RRDC #1, the discharge summary indicated the patient was discharged for an extended prognosis and the discharge summary was written but it was not sent to physician and notification of it’s availability was not completed. This was reviewed and validated with Administrator. 
”

    Rule L0682. Standard-level.

Jan 19, 2024: reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission17 deficiencies
  • Quality assessment & performance improvement (42 CFR 418.58)

    “Observed in Data Session. The organization’s governing body had not ensured the quality assessment and performance improvement program (QAPI) meets the required criteria. The organization’s QAPI program failed to include services provided under contract. Additionally, though some data was collected by the DPCS on bereavement and volunteer services, these activities were not included in the organization’s QAPI plan. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0559. Condition-level.

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

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 3 patient records reviewed, the hospice had not developed a bereavement plan of care that specified the type of bereavement services to be offered and the frequency of service delivery. There was no bereavement POC in the charts for RRBR#1, RRBR#2 nor RRBR#3. There was documentation that bereavement mailings had occurred, however no planned type nor frequency of bereavement services were found as confirmed with the Administrator and DPCS.
”

    Rule L0596. 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 Condition level observations at 418.54, 418.58, 418.64, 418.100 and 418.102. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0651. Condition-level.

  • Medical director (42 CFR 418.102)

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. There was no backup medical director under contract or directly employed by the organization as confirmed with the Administrator.”

    Rule L0664. Condition-level.

  • EP Program Patient Population (42 CFR 418.113(a)(3))

    “Observed in Emergency Management Session. The organization’s continuity of operations plan did not identify in writing how and where it will continue to provide its essential business functions when the location of the essential or critical service has been compromised due to an emergency or disaster incident. This was discussed with the Administrator and DPCS.”

    Rule E0007. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(7))

    The inspectors’ words, 98 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 3 patient records reviewed, the organization had not conducted and documented a patient-specific reassessment that identified the survivor risk factors after death, availability of coping mechanisms, and potential for pathological grief reactions. In the charts for RRBR#1, RRBR#2, RRBR#3, an assessment at death was not done to assess bereavement risk in order to inform the decisions made by the IDG about the bereavement plan of care. Organizational policy for bereavement assessment required that a bereavement assessment would be completed post-death of the patient. This was discussed with the Administrator and DPCS.”

    Rule L0531. Standard-level.

  • Update of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 109 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 14 patient records reviewed, the interdisciplinary group (IDG) had not updated the comprehensive assessment no less frequently than every 15 days. In the chart for RRHV#1, there was no input from the MSW into the IDG for the past 6 weeks as of the date of the survey. In the chart for RRHV#3, there was no input from the Spiritual Counselor for the past three IDG meetings. In the chart for RRNHV#7, though the patient had declined spiritual care, there was no documented input from the hospice Spiritual Counselor for past 6 IDT meetings. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0533. Standard-level.

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

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, the patient record was not accurately documented. In the chart for RRNHV#5, the spiritual care update in the IDT contained the exact same verbiage for the past 5 meetings, despite the patient having been seen twice during that time by the spiritual care counselor. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0535. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 96 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 14 patient records reviewed, the written plan of care (POC) was not based on the patient’s goals and the time frames, settings, and services required to meet those goals. In the chart for RRHV#1, there were no goals related to the patient’s high risk for falls, safe oxygen use and pressure ulcer development risk. In the chart for RRHV#2, there were no goals on the POC for safe use of oxygen, fall risk for this patient at high risk for falls. This was discussed with the Administrator and DPCS.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 202 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 14 patient records reviewed, the plan of care (POC) did not include treatments necessary to meet the patient’s needs. In the chart for RRHV#1, the patient’s plan of care did not include any interventions related to the patient’s assessed high fall risk. During the home visit, the aide and the primary caregiver (PCG) demonstrated and discussed the falls precautions in place for the patient including bed rails. Additionally, this patient was at high risk for pressure ulcer development; during the home visit, the PCG spoke to the interventions he uses to reduce the patient’s risk of pressure ulcers, yet the POC did not include any interventions related to this risk. In the chart for RRHV#2, the POC did not include any fall/injury prevention interventions, despite during the home visit when the RN and SNF staff were able to speak to and demonstrate fall/injury prevention interventions in place such as rubber bumpers added to the patient’s lower bed, bed in lowest position, fall matt beside the bed, etc. Both patients were using oxygen, yet the POC did not include any safety interventions related to this high risk treatment. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

  • Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, the plan of care was not revised based on information from updates to the patient’s comprehensive assessment. In the chart for RRNHV#5, the RN documented that based upon a conversation with the aide and the facility staff, aide visits would be discontinued. The hospice plan of care was not updated to remove the aide services. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0553. Standard-level.

  • Program scope (42 CFR 418.58(a)(1))

    “Observed in Data Session. The quality assessment and performance improvement program did not demonstrate improvement in indicators related to improved palliative outcomes and hospice services. As the organization had not identified any palliative outcomes for improvement activities, they were not able to demonstrate improvement. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0561. Standard-level.

  • Program activities (42 CFR 418.58(c)(1)(iii))

    “Observed in Data Session. The hospice had not selected performance improvement activities that affect palliative outcomes, patient safety, and the quality of care. The only documented performance improvement projects for the past two years were staff compliance with CMS’ COVID vaccination requirement. This was confirmed with the Administrator and DPCS.”

    Rule L0568. Standard-level.

  • Control (42 CFR 418.60(b)(2)(ii))

    The inspectors’ words, 199 words

    “Observed in Data Session. The organization’s written infection prevention and control goals did not include the following: Limiting the spread of infections associated with the use of medical equipment, devices, and supplies. The goal was a restatement of the element of performance and was not measurable. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator. Observed in Data Session. The organization’s written infection prevention and control goals did not include the following: limiting unprotected exposure to pathogens. The goal was a restatement of the element of performance and was not measurable. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator. Observed in Data Session. The organization’s written infection prevention and control goals did not include the following: limiting the spread of infections associated with procedures. The goal was a restatement of the element of performance and was not measurable. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator. Observed in Data Session. The organization’s written infection prevention and control goals did not include the following: Addressing its prioritized risks. The organization had goals for UTI’s, URI’s and wound infections, which were not on the list of prioritized infections. Additionally, the goals were not measurable. This was discussed with the DPCS and Administrator.”

    Rule L0581. Standard-level.

  • Supervision of hospice aides (42 CFR 418.76(h)(1)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, the registered nurse had not supervised the aide during an on-site visit no less frequently than every 14 days. In the chart for RRHV#3, 43 days lapsed between documented aide supervisory visits in the past two months. This was discussed with the DPCS.”

    Rule L0629. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(3))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization did not educate the patient about the safety risks of smoking with oxygen therapy. In the chart for RRNHV#5, there were multiple RN notes documenting that the patient continued to smoke, even though oxygen was ordered and used prn. There was no documentation that the patient was educated about the risks of smoking with oxygen. This was discussed with the Administrator and DPCS.”

    Rule L0674. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(3)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 3 patient records reviewed, of patient’s discharged alive, the discharge summary did not include the required elements. In the chart for RRDC#1, there was no discharge summary for the patient as confirmed with the DPCS.”

    Rule L0684. Standard-level.

All 3 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Sep 4, 2024Follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission10 deficiencies cited
Feb 27, 2024Follow-up inspection by The Joint CommissionNo deficiencies cited
Jan 19, 2024Reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission17 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Feb 24, 2021.
  • 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): 11.7 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 7% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 82.6% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 63% at home, 2% in assisted living, 35% 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 day11.7 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends7%
Visits near death82.6% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • CMS’s ownership file has no owners listed for this hospice.
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: 8 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 88.46% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025).
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 threshold8 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 14 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 92282, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 5.5; this one had 27.
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.