Hearth Record

Blue River Hospice, Inc.

A hospice in Pasadena, California 91107

171 N Altadena Dr Suite 235, Pasadena, California 91107. (818) 254-8845.

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 12 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Feb 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?

12 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 131 hospices serving ZIP code 91107 had 5.

The last inspection on record was on Feb 5, 2025: a follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care.

2 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

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

12 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.

Feb 5, 2025: follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care2 deficiencies
  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 95 words

    “Upon patient record review, 1 of 5 (Patient #1) did not have evidence the plan of care must includes all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions, including the following: • A detailed statement of the scope and frequency of services necessary to meet the specific patient and family needs Patent #1: Physician’s order for SC/MSW visit frequency is “1x then PRN”. Additionally, Physician’s order for SN visit frequency “2x week + PRN” There is no evidence of the number of PRN visits for SC/MSW/SN. Corrected on Site.”

    Rule L0547. Standard-level.

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

    “Upon patient record review, 3 of 5 (Patients #2,4,5) did not have evidence the plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions, including equipment and supply needs. Patients #2,4,5: The record reflected that this patient had a oxygen concentrator. This item was not included on the Plan of Care. Corrected on Site.”

    Rule L0550. Standard-level.

Dec 18, 2024: reaccreditation inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care10 deficiencies
  • Core services (42 CFR 418.64)

    The inspectors’ words, 161 words

    “Upon observation, 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. The agency has a contract for wound care with California wound Docs. They are sending wound care to at least 1 patient at least weekly. The wound company is doing all full assessments of wounds. These wounds are part of the hospice plan of care. The Hospice medical director is writing orders for the dressing changes. This does not ensure that nursing is providing all core services when providing care that is related to the patient’s plan of care. The agency was using services frequently from Wound Pros. They did not have a contract, though secured one during on site survey on day 3. This contracted agency was providing services that should have been provided by the core nursing services of the hospice as it was not highly specialized care.”

    Rule L0587. Condition-level.

  • Furnishing of non-core services (42 CFR 418.70)

    “Upon observation, there was no evidence the hospice is in compliance with accepted professional standards and principles for all non-core services which includes physical therapy, occupational therapy and speech-language pathology. Patient #2: During home visit with RN to a patient with extensive wounds, the RN asked when the dressing had been changed. The caregiver responded, “the shower nurse did it this morning”. Interview with aide revealed that the aide was in fact putting the new dressing on after showers. This is outside the aides scope of practice.”

    Rule L0601. Condition-level.

  • Approach to service delivery (42 CFR 418.56(a)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 266 words

    “Upon patient record review, 4 of 14 (Patients #2, 3, 5, 7) did not have evidence that a Registered Nurse is designated to ensure continuous assessment of the patient and family’s needs and to coordinate activities with other members of the interdisciplinary group (IDG). The IDG must work together and is responsible for supervision of the care and service for each patient and family. Patient #2: The patient has multiple wounds. There is no evidence of continuous assessment and management of wounds by hospice RN. On 01/05/24, Caregiver called, reporting symptoms of UTI. Cipro was ordered over phone. No follow up call or visit until 01/09/24. Patient #3: On 07/11/24, patient caregiver called with complaints of anxiety and agitation. Ativan ordered for 2mg at bedtime. No follow up call or visit until 07/15/24. On 08/14/24, call from caregiver with reports of nausea and vomiting. Approval for comfort kit received but no nurse assessment done. Next visit was 08/17/24. On 09/11/24, caregiver called with complaints of anxiety and agitation. Seroquel was ordered , 50mg at bedtime. No nurse assessment completed. No follow up call or visit for 6 days on 09/17/24. Patient #5: On 11/04/24, caregiver called with complaints of pain. Order given for Motrin. No nursing assessment done. No follow up call or visit until 11/11/24. On 11/18/24, caregiver called requesting cough syrup as patient had complaints of cough. orders received for Robitussin DM. No follow up call or nursing visit done until 11/25/24. Patient #7:The patient has wounds on bilateral legs. There is no evidence of continuous assessment and management of wounds by hospice RN.”

    Rule L0540. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 243 words

    “Upon patient record review, 3 of 14 (Patient #2, 4, 7) did not have evidence the plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions, including medications and treatments. Patient #2: Current wound order for patient states, “Left Anterior Breast: cleanse the wound with cleanser and pat dry with gauze. Apply tetracyte to the wound bed, followed by alginate. Cover with foam with silicone bordered dressing 3x weekly and PRN for soiled or loose dressing.” as well as a second wound order that reads, “Sacro-coccyx: cleanse with NS, pat dry with gauze, apply thin layer of triple antibiotic and cover with bordered gauze, daily and as needed when soiled.” Neither order specifies who will change the dressing. It does not specify frequency of hospice RN dressing changes. Patient #4: Patient has a diagnosis of seizures and is currently on seizure medications. There are no interventions or goals for seizures. Patient #7: Current wound order for patient reads, “BLE wounds: Cleanse wound with Hypochlorous acid spray or wound cleanser like Anasept if available and pat dry, apply Mupirocin ointment to wound beds, until refill is available use Medihoney, apply adaptic to secure ointment in beds, cover with ABD, and secure with Kerlix and ace wrap or Coban. 5x/week and as needed if soiled or dislodged.” This order does not specify who is to change dressing and frequency that hospice RN will change dressing.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 196 words

    “Upon patient record review, 5 of 14 (Patients #1, 3, 5, 6, 10) did not have evidence the plan of care must include all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions, including equipment and supply needs. Patient #1: During home visit, it was noted that the patient has a fall mat, mechanical lift, wheelchair, grab assist bar, elbow and heel protectors that are not included in the plan of care. Patient #3: The patient’s plan of care does not have any DME listed. The patient has an over bed table, Nebulizer, oxygen concentrator, E-tank, and suction machine that were discussed in initial RN assessment. Patient #5: The patient has a nebulizer to use with her Duoneb. She also has a walker. These items are not listed on the plan of care. Patient #6: The patient has an oxygen concentrator, e-tank, and nebulizer ordered on initial RN assessment. There are no DME items included on the plan of care. Patient #10: The patient’s plan of care does not include the provided DME or supplies. Patient was assessed at initial RN assessment and the following were ordered: Walker, wheelchair, hospital bed.”

    Rule L0550. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 117 words

    “Upon patient record review 2 of 14 (Patient #3,10) did not have evidence that the IDG ensures that the care and services provided are based on all assessments of the patient and family needs. Patient #3: on 08/01/24, it is documented that patient was referred for MSW visit. No visit ever completed. Patient #10. On February 12, 2024 the Case manager contact MSW for an “asap visit in person.” Then on February 29, 2024, the case manager contacted MSW to update on patient and visit needs. No visit made until March 19, 2024. On June 17, 2024, the caregiver called to request MSW visit to patient. The MSW did not see the patient until July 15, 2024.”

    Rule L0556. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(5))

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 14 (Patients #2, 7) did not have evidence that the IDG shares information on a on-going basis with non-hospice healthcare providers furnishing services unrelated to the terminal illness and related conditions. Patients #2 and #7: Both patients are receiving care related to their plan of care from an outside company for wound care. The IDG meetings for each patient do not reflect discussion regarding wounds from the medical director or registered nurse. There is no collaboration through IDG of care for patient’s wounds.”

    Rule L0558. 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. Patient #2: During RN visit, RN did not clean dirty equipment prior to returning it to his bag. Patient #3: During aide visit, aide did not place a bag barrier and returned her equipment to the bag without cleaning it.”

    Rule L0579. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 116 words

    “Upon patient record review 1 of 14 (Patient #2) 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 #2: During home visit with RN to a patient with extensive wounds, the RN asked when the dressing had been changed. The caregiver responded, “the shower nurse did it this morning”. Interview with aide revealed that the aide was in fact putting the new dressing on after showers. This is not on the aide plan of care.”

    Rule L0626. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 142 words

    “Upon contract review, 1 of 6 (Wound Pros 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 The agency did not have a contract with this wound management agency until day of survey exit. The contract did not reference hospice having administrative and financial oversight. In addition, the agency was using contract staff to provide services that were not highly specialized nursing services and no evidence of documentation that wounds were not related.”

    Rule L0655. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Feb 5, 2025Follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care2 deficiencies cited
Dec 18, 2024Reaccreditation inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care10 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Nov 19, 2021.
  • CMS doesn’t list its type of ownership.
  • 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): 7.9 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 22.1% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 84% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 96% at home, 4% in assisted living.
Source:

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

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day7.9 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends22.1%
Visits near death84.0% 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: 7 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 87.5% 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 threshold7 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 131 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 91107, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 5; this one had 12.
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.