Hearth Record

Radiant Hospice, Inc.

A hospice in Winnetka, California 91306

19725 Sherman Way, Suite 295d, Winnetka, California 91306. (818) 305-6917.

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 20 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2025. 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?

20 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 194 hospices serving ZIP code 91306 had 5.

The last inspection on record was on Apr 29, 2025: an initial follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care.

1 deficiency 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

20 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2025. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

20 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.

Apr 29, 2025: initial follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care1 deficiency
  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 119 words

    “Upon client record review, 3 of 3 (Patients # 1, 2, 3) did not have evidence that the IDG ensures that the care and services are provided in accordance with the plan of care. Personnel # 1) Upon review of patient record there was no evidence of scheduled nursing visits in accordance with the current POC for the following dates: 4/2, 4/9, 4/16/2025. Personnel # 2) Upon review of patient record there was no evidence of scheduled nursing visits in accordance with the current POC for the following dates: 4/18/2025. Personnel # 3) Upon review of patient record there was no evidence of scheduled nursing visits in accordance with the current POC for the following dates: 4/3, 4/10, 4/17/2025.”

    Rule L0555. Standard-level.

Mar 12, 2025: initial inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care19 deficiencies
  • Core services (42 CFR 418.64)

    The inspectors’ words, 108 words

    “Upon observation and patient record review 2 of 14 (Patient #5,13), there was no evidence the hospice is in compliance with accepted professional standards and principles for all core services which includes nursing services, medical social services and counseling services. Patients #5, 13: Wound services were being provided by Wound Pro’s PA and MD for patient wounds. There is evidence in the record the hospice used a contracted service Omni-wound to provide a weekly core nursing service, wound care, to the patient. There is not evidence in the record that the wound is unrelated to the terminal diagnosis. There is not evidence that nursing specialized care was provided.”

    Rule L0587. Condition-level.

  • Rights of the patient (42 CFR 418.52(c)(4))

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 14 (Patient #4) did not have evidence that the patient chooses a health care provider, including an attending physician. Patient #4: Options for MD choice or decline to choose are blank”

    Rule L0515. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(6))

    The inspectors’ words, 128 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 14 (Patient #1, 4) did not have evidence in the patient record that a review was completed of all prescription and non-prescription medications, including herbal remedies that could affect drug therapy. This review includes, but is not limited to: • Effectiveness of drug therapy • Drug side effects • Actual or potential drug interactions • Duplicate drug therapy • Drug therapy currently associated with laboratory monitoring Patient 1: Med profile includes Digoxin 0.25 mg qd, but patient says he does not take. Also Rivaroxaban (Xarelto) 20 mg for prophylaxis on medication profile is not clear of description of indication for use. Patient #4: Quetiapine Fumarate 25mg (Seroquel) every evening on med profile, but patient not aware of this medication. Bottle not available.”

    Rule L0530. Standard-level.

  • Approach to service delivery (42 CFR 418.56(a))

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Upon observation, there was no evidence the hospice has an interdisciplinary group (IDG) or groups composed of individuals who work together to meet the physical, medical, psychosocial, emotional, and spiritual needs of the hospice patients and families facing terminal illness and bereavement. Interdisciplinary group members must provide the care and services offered by the hospice, and the group, in its entirety, must supervise the care and services. Patient #1: No SC signature or notation of participation for IDG meetings 1/10, 1/24, 2/21/25. SC service declined per plan of care. Patient #2: No SC signature or notation of participation for IDG meetings 1/10, 1/24, 2/21/25. SC service declined per plan of care.”

    Rule L0539. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 158 words

    “Upon patient record review, 3 of 14 (Patient #2, 8, 10) did not have evidence in the patient record that the hospice has developed an individualized written plan of care for each patient. The plan of care must reflect patient/family goals and interventions based on the problems identified in the initial, comprehensive, and updated comprehensive assessments. The plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions. Patient #2: Patient has comorbidity of NIDDM requiring Metformin. The CTI 1/10/25 included documentation of patients appetite 35-25% meals and significant weight loss. No NIDDM, nutrition related problems, goals, interventions on the plan of care. Patient #8: Patient has comorbidity of NIDDM requiring Glimepiride, Trulicity, and there are no related problems, goals and interventions on the plan of care. Patient #10: Patient on long term anticoagulant therapy - Lovenox. There are no related problems, goals, interventions on the plan of care.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 206 words

    “Upon patient record review, 5 of 14 (Patient #1, 2, 3, 4, 7) did not have evidence that the IDG in collaboration with the attending physician reviewed, revised and documents the individualized plan as frequently as the patient’s condition requires but no less frequently then every 15 calendar days. Patient #1: No MSW signature or notation of participation for IDG meetings: 1/10, 1/24, 2/21/25, 3/7/25. MSW service was being provided per patient need/acceptance. Patient #2: No MSW signature or notation of participation for IDG meetings: 1/10, 1/24, 2/21/25, 3/7/25. MSW service was being provided per patient need/acceptance. Patient #3: No MSW or SC signature or notation of participation for IDG meetings: 3/7/25. MSW, SC service were being provided per patient need/acceptance. Patient #4: No MSW signature or notation of participation for IDG meetings 1/10, 1/24, 2/7, 2/21, 3/7/25. MSW, SC service were being provided per patient need/acceptance. Patient #7: No MSW signature or notation of participation for IDG meeting 12/13/24. No SC signature or notation of participation in IDG: 11/15, 11/29, 12/13/24; Both services was being provided per patient need/accedptance. Pre and post discharge meeting notes (12/27/24 and 1/10/25) do not reflect update of discharge planning and that patient was discharged 1/17/25 due to extended prognosis.”

    Rule L0552. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 94 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 14 (Patient #4, 6) did not have evidence that a revised plan of care includes information from the patient’s updated comprehensive assessment and must note the patient’s progress towards outcome/goals from the plan of care. Patient #4: On 9/12/24 order for Hospice Aide 2x/week. Service provided 2x/week. IDG care plan frequency section does not include Aide service and/or ordered frequency at all. Patient #6: Admitted 8/31/23. Patient experienced UTI with positive culture results 9/20/23, requiring antibiotic treatment. There were no updates to related IDG problems, goals and interventions.”

    Rule L0553. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 217 words

    “Upon patient record review, 6 of 14 (Patient #1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 13) did not have evidence that the IDG ensures that the care and services are provided in accordance with the plan of care. Patient #1: MSW note 1/25/25 was blank except time in and out, and was not authenticated with clinician signature. Completed during survey. Patient #2: MSW ordered monthly at SOC and was seen monthly, but no February note in record at time of survey. In addition, the MSW note 1/17/25 was incomplete and was not authenticated with clinician signature. Completed during survey. Patient #3: On 6/10/24 SC order, Plan of Care, IDG Care Plan frequency lists SC declined. However, there are documented SC assessment/reassessment visit notes for 6/10/24 and 8/30/24. There are also visit notes for 11/12/24, 12/16/24, 1/20/25 with narrative plan to continue monthly. No additional visits documented after January. Patient #4: MSW note 1/10/25 was blank except time in and out and was not authenticated with clinician signature. Completed during survey. Patient #7: MSW note 1/5/25 was blank except time in and out, and was not authenticated with clinician signature. Visit note was completed during survey. Patient #13: On 2/27/23 order SC services declined. SC visit documented 10/6/23 with no documented explanation, update to orders/Plan of Care or IDG frequency.”

    Rule L0555. Standard-level.

  • Prevention (42 CFR 418.60(a))

    “Upon observation, there was no evidence the hospice follows acceptable standards of practice to prevent the transmission of infections and communicable diseases, including standard precautions. Visits 1, 2, 3: Nurse did not clean inside of pulse oximetry device before replacing in bag”

    Rule L0579. Standard-level.

  • Competency evaluation (42 CFR 418.76(c))

    The inspectors’ words, 176 words

    “Upon personnel record review, 1 of 14 (Personnel #4) did not have evidence in the personnel file that the following competency assessment was performed by the aide with a patient: (This standard applies to all Hospice Aides providing care/service who are directly employed by the hospice or through a contractual agreement.) ·Communication skills, including the ability to read, write, and verbally report clinical information to patients, caregivers, and other hospice staff. ·Reading and recording temperature, pulse, and respiration ·Safe transfer techniques and ambulation. ·Normal range of motion and positioning ·Appropriate and safe techniques in personal hygiene and grooming that include-- ·(A) Bed bath ·(B) Sponge, tub, and shower bath ·(C) Shampoo, sink, tub, and bed ·(D) Nail and skin care ·(E) Oral hygiene ·(F) Toileting and elimination The other subject areas in this section may be evaluated through written examination, oral examination or after observation of a Hospice Aide with a patient. Personnel #4: Aide competency form used by agency only said “shampoo” and did not specify various types of shampoo such as sink, tub, bed.”

    Rule L0615. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 162 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 14 (Patient #4, 5) did not have evidence in the patient record that hospice aide assignments and duties are: • Assigned to a specific patient by a registered nurse that is a member of the interdisciplinary group • Written patient care instructions for a hospice aide must be prepared by a Registered Nurse who is responsible for the supervision of a hospice aide as specified under paragraph (h) of 418.76 • There is evidence in the patient record that the plan of care; indicate what tasks are to be done by the Aide and the frequency of these tasks. The use of “PRN” or “per patient choice”, for any task, whether personal care or non-personal care tasks, are not acceptable Patient #4: No frequency of visits on Hospice Aide assignment sheet. Patient #5: 1/18/24 order that patient declined Hospice Aide. 2/2/24 order Aide freq 3x/wk, but Hospice Aide frequency 2x on 2/2/24 Hospice Aide Assignment sheet”

    Rule L0625. Standard-level.

  • Hospice aide assignments and duties (42 CFR 418.76(g)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 99 words

    “Upon patient record review 1 of 14 (Patient #5) did not have evidence documentation in the patient record that a hospice aide provides services that are: • Ordered by the interdisciplinary group • Included in the plan of care • Permitted to be performed under state law by such hospice aide • Consistent with the hospice aide training Patient #5: 2/2/24 order states Aide freq 3x/wk, but 2/2/24 Hospice Aide Assignment sheet has Hospice Aide frequency 2xwk. Patient was seen 2x week in June and week of 7/8/24. Patient was seen 3x weeks of 7/1, 7/15, 7/22, 7/29, 8/5.”

    Rule L0626. Standard-level.

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

    “Upon patient record review 2 of 14 (Patient #4, 5) did not have evidence documentation in the patient record that a Registered Nurse made an on-site visit to the patient’s home no less frequently than every 14 days to assess the quality of care and services provided by the hospice aide and to ensure that services ordered by the hospice interdisciplinary group meet the patient’s needs. Patient #4: There is no documented Hospice Aide Supervisory Visit 2/13-3/10/25. Patient #5: There is no documented Hospice Aide Supervisory Visit 7/11/24-8/14/24.”

    Rule L0629. Standard-level.

  • Professional management responsibility (42 CFR 418.100(e))

    The inspectors’ words, 130 words

    “Upon contract review, (Wound Pro contract) did not have evidence the agreement to furnish any services under arrangement included that the hospice must retain administrative and financial management, and oversight of staff and services for all arranged services, to ensure the provision of quality care. Arranged care/services are supported by written contract/agreement that requires all care/services are: • Authorized by the hospice • Furnished in a safe and effective manner by qualified personnel • Delivered in accordance with the patient’s plan of care Specialized services were being provided by Wound Pro’s PA and MD for patient wounds (Patient#5, 13). There was no documented evidence that the patients’ wounds were unrelated to terminal diagnosis. There was a business associates agreement in place, but no actual contract with the Wound Pro provider.”

    Rule L0655. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(2))

    “Upon patient record review, 9 of 14 (Patient #1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13) did not have evidence that each patient record contains: • Signed copies of the notice of patient rights in accordance with 418.52 • Signed election statement in accordance with 418.24 Patients 1,2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13: No allocated space to identify effective date of election for this form. Patient #4: MD choice or decline to choose are blank Patient #8: Requested hospice addendum but no evidence provided.”

    Rule L0673. Standard-level.

  • Authentication (42 CFR 418.104(b))

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 14 (Patient #7, 11) did not have evidence that all entries are legible, clear, complete, and appropriately authenticated and dated in accordance with the organizations policies and procedures and currently accepted standards of practice. Electronic signatures are acceptable as long the hospice is following appropriate safeguards to prevent unauthorized access to the patient records. Patient #7: DC Planning form/note not authenticated with preparer’s signature. Patient #11: LVN note 2/6/24 is not authenticated with clinician signature.”

    Rule L0679. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(2))

    “Upon patient record review, 4 of 14 (Patient #7, 8, 9, 10) did not have evidence that if a patient revokes the election of hospice care or is discharged from hospice in accordance with §418.26, the hospice must forward to the patient’s attending physician: • A copy of the hospice discharge summary • The patient’s clinical record, if requested Patient #7: Discharge Summary says informed MD of discharge planning, but no documentation of documents shared/sent in patient discharged for extended prognosis. Patient #8, 9, 10: No evidence discharge summary shared/sent.”

    Rule L0683. Standard-level.

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

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 14 (Patient #5) did not have evidence that the discharge summary includes all required information Patient #5: Discharge summary did not include history of wound and specialty service consult. Narrative includes that MSW was evaluation only, when in fact MSW documented monthly visits.”

    Rule L0684. Standard-level.

  • Multiple locations (42 CFR 418.116(a))

    “Upon observation, there was no evidence the organizational chart matches the hospice’s information submitted to CMS and/or State licensing agencies for ownership and management personnel. Administrator hire date of 1/15/2025. No evidence of 855A was presented to surveyor by end of survey.”

    Rule L0799. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Apr 29, 2025Initial follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care1 deficiency cited
Mar 12, 2025Initial inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care19 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Nov 17, 2020.
  • 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): 9.7 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 8.2% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 100% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 100% at home.
Source:

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

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day9.7 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends8.2%
Visits near death100.0% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • 5 owners or officers are people: Bibi Mohammed (owns 5% or more directly, 100%); Bibi Mohammed (corporate officer, 100%); Bibi Mohammed (corporate director, 100%); Bibi Mohammed (managing employee (on the payroll), 100%); Bibi Mohammed (runs it (operational or managerial control), 100%).
  • 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: 8 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 threshold8 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 194 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 91306, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 5; this one had 20.
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.