Hearth Record

Eclipse Hospice Care, Inc.

A hospice in Glendale, California 91204

127 S Brand Blvd Unit 305, Glendale, California 91204. (818) 858-0431.

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 17 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Sep 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?

17 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 151 hospices serving ZIP code 91204 had 4.

The last inspection on record was on Sep 25, 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

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

17 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 25, 2025: follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care1 deficiency
  • Counseling services (42 CFR 418.64(d)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 168 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 8 (Patient # 6,7) did not have evidence the hospice offers bereavement counseling that includes: • Making bereavement services available to the family and other individuals in the bereavement plan of care up to 1 year following the death of the patient. Bereavement counseling also extends to residents of a SNF/NF or ICF/IID when appropriate and identified in the bereavement plan of care • Ensuring that bereavement services reflect the needs of the bereaved • Development of a bereavement plan of care that notes the kind of bereavement services to be offered and the frequency of service delivery Patient 6: The 6 month bereavement letter was not sent as outlined in the bereavement plan of care. Corrected on site. Patient 7: The 10 month bereavement letter was not sent as outlined in the bereavement plan of care. There is evidence of a returned letter dated 1-24-25 with no forwarding address. Corrected on site for 10 month letter, after agency contacted the bereaved.”

    Rule L0596. Standard-level.

Aug 15, 2025: reaccreditation inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care16 deficiencies
  • Initial & comprehensive assessment of patient (42 CFR 418.54)

    “Condition of Participation: Initial and Comprehensive Assessment of the Patient.”

    Rule L0520. Condition-level.

  • Core services (42 CFR 418.64)

    “Condition of Participation: Core Services.”

    Rule L0587. Condition-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 304 words

    “Upon patient record review, 6 of 14 (Patients #2,3,5,6,7,10) 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 #2: This patient has the following on medication profile-Acetaminophen 325 mg i tab Q 6 hours, Acetaminophen Suppository 650mg Q 6 hours and Norco 10/325 mg Q6 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. Corrected on site-special instructions added. Patient #3: This patient had Lantus 25 units Q morning, Humalog Kwik Pen 100units/ml per sliding scale and Polyethylene Glycol (Miralax)17 gm that were not on medication list. Additionally, Bepreve eye drops, ASA, and Alendronate were not in the home and listed on medication profile. Patient #5: Polyethylene Glycol (Miralax) order with no diluent Ordered on 4/4/25, Corrected on Site-med profile updated. Patient #6: This patient had Norco 10/325 mg Q 4 hours PRN, Acetaminophen 325 mg 2 tabs Q 4 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. ***Corrected on site-special instructions added. Patient #7: This patient had Norco 10/325 mg Q 4 hours PRN, Acetaminophen 325 mg 1 tab Q 4 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. Corrected on site-special instructions added. Patient #10: This patient has the following on medication profile-Acetaminophen 325 mg 2 tabs Q 6 hours, Acetaminophen Suppository 650mg Q 4 hours and Norco 5/325 mg Q 4 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. Corrected on site-special instructions added.”

    Rule L0530. Standard-level.

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

    “Upon patient record review, 8 of 14 (Patients #1,2,4,5,6,7,13,14) did not have evidence in the patient record that the comprehensive assessment includes a bereavement component which includes the needs of the patient’s family and other individuals focusing on the social, spiritual, and cultural factors that may impact their ability to cope with the patient’s death. Information gathered from the initial bereavement assessment is incorporated into the plan of care and is considered in the bereavement plan of care. Patients #1,2,4,5,6,7,13,14: Did not have Initial Bereavement Risk Assessment completed to date.”

    Rule L0531. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 166 words

    “Upon patient record review, 2 of 14 (Patient #3, #7) 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 #3: This record indicated this patient is a diabetic and is taking oral anti-diabetic medication Jardiance 25mg and has Humolog and Lantus in the home. There was no evidence of problems, goals, or interventions related to the Endocrine system. Corrected on site Care plan updated. Patient #7: This record indicated this patient is a diabetic and is taking oral anti-diabetic medication metformin 1000mg BID and uses Diabetic Tussin 10mL. There was no evidence of problems, goals, or interventions related to the Endocrine system. Corrected on site Care plan updated.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 233 words

    “Upon patient record review, 5 of 14 (Patients #2,#5, #6, #7, #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 medications and treatments. Patient #2: This patient has the following on Plan of Care-Acetaminophen 325 mg 1 tab Q 6 hours, Acetaminophen Suppository 650mg Q 6 hours and Norco 10/325 mg Q6 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. Corrected on site-special instructions added to supplemental order. Patient #5: Polyethylene Glycol (Miralax) order with no diluent Ordered on 4/4/25, Corrected on Site-med profile updated. Patient #6: This patient had Norco 10/325 mg Q 4 hours PRN, Acetaminophen 325 mg 2 tabs Q 4 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. Corrected on site-special instructions added. Patient #7: This patient had Norco 10/325 mg Q 4 hours PRN, Acetaminophen 325 mg 1 tab Q 4 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. Corrected on site-special instructions added. Patient #10: This patient has the following on medication profile-Acetaminophen 325 mg 2 tabs Q 6 hours, Acetaminophen Suppository 650mg Q 4 hours and Norco 5/325 mg Q 4 hours. The record did not indicate NTE 3000 mg of Acetaminophen in 24 hours. Corrected on site-special instructions added.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 133 words

    “Upon patient record review, 3 of 14 (Patients #1,2,3) 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: This patient had a bedside commode. This item was not included on the Plan of Care. The Plan of Care indicated this patient had a over the bed table. This item was not in the home. Patient #2: The Plan of care indicated this patient had hospital bed, over the bed table, LAL mattress, nebulizer machine and suction machine. These items were not in the home. Patient #3: The Plan of care indicated this patient had bedside table, LAL mattress, nebulizer machine and shower chair. These items were not in the home.”

    Rule L0550. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 121 words

    “Upon patient record review, 6 of 14 (Patients #9,10,11,12,13,14) did not have evidence the hospice offers bereavement counseling that includes: • Making bereavement services available to the family and other individuals in the bereavement plan of care up to 1 year following the death of the patient. • Ensuring that bereavement services reflect the needs of the bereaved • Development of a bereavement plan of care that notes the kind of bereavement services to be offered and the frequency of service delivery Patient #9: The 3 month and 6 month bereavement letters were not sent per record as outlined in the bereavement plan of care. Patients #10,11,12,13,14: These patients did not have bereavement plan of care in their record to date.”

    Rule L0596. Standard-level.

  • Competency evaluation (42 CFR 418.76(c))

    “Upon personnel record review, 1 of 10 (Personnel #7 ) 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.) Personnel #7: Did not have the following tasks observed while the aide was performing the following tasks: · Safe transfer techniques and ambulation. · Toileting and elimination”

    Rule L0615. Standard-level.

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

    “Upon contract review, 1 of 4 (Contract Helping Hands PT/OT/ST) 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: • Furnished in a safe and effective manner by qualified personnel”

    Rule L0655. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(2))

    “Upon patient client record review, 3 of 14 (Patient #5,12,13) did not have evidence that each patient record contains: • Signed election statement in accordance with 418.24 Patient #5: The Election Statement indicated Start of Care (SOC) to begin on 4/3/25. The hospice admitted this patient on 4/4/25. Note- the Nursing Comprehensive, CTI, SW/SC/BR assessments were all completed timely with actual start date of 4/4/25. Patients #12, 13: The Election Statement did not have Start of Care date. The space for SOC provided on the form was left blank.”

    Rule L0673. Standard-level.

  • Authentication (42 CFR 418.104(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 242 words

    “Upon patient client record review, 8 of 14 (Patients #1,2,3,4,6,7,8,11,) 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 #1: The following SN visits did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record for 5/7/25, 5/14/25 and 8/5/25 (recert). Patient #2: The following RN weekly visits did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record from 6/28/25 through 7/29/25. Patient #3: The following RN weekly visits did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record from 6/24/25 through 8/8/25. Patient #4: The following SN visit did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record on 10/20/24. Patient #6: The following RN weekly visits did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record from 1/15/25 through 5/14/25. Patient #7: The following RN weekly visits did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record from 4/5/25 through 5/5/25. Patient #8: The following RN weekly visits did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record from 12/30/24 through 2/22/25. Patient #11: The following RN weekly visits did not have employee signature in space provided on the electronic record from 2/26/25 through 3/5/25.”

    Rule L0679. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Upon client record review, 5 of 14 (Patients #4,5,6,7,8) did not have evidence that the discharge summary includes all required information. as follows: Patients #4,7: The Discharge Summary did not have all CMS required elements as follows: • The patient’s current plan of care • The patient’s latest physician orders • A summary of the patient’s stay, including treatments, symptoms and pain management Patient #5,6: The Discharge Summary did not have all CMS required elements as follows: • The patient’s current plan of care Patient #8: The Discharge Summary did not have all CMS required elements as follows: • The patient’s current plan of care • The patient’s latest physician orders”

    Rule L0684. Standard-level.

  • Label dispose storage drugs (42 CFR 418.106(e)(2)(i)(A))

    “Upon observation, there was no evidence a copy is provided of the hospice written policies and procedures on the management and disposal of controlled drugs to the patient or patient representative and family.”

    Rule L0695. Standard-level.

  • Label dispose storage drugs (42 CFR 418.106(e)(2)(i)(B))

    “Upon observation, there was no evidence the hospice discussed the policies and procedures for managing the safe use and disposal of controlled drugs with the patient or representative and the family in a language and manner that they understand to ensure that these parties are educated regarding the safe use and disposal of controlled drugs.”

    Rule L0696. Standard-level.

  • Label dispose storage drugs (42 CFR 418.106(e)(2)(i)(C))

    “Upon client record review, 14 of 14 (Patients #1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14) did not have evidence that the written policies and procedures for managing controlled drugs was provided and discussed.”

    Rule L0697. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Sep 25, 2025Follow-up inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care1 deficiency cited
Aug 15, 2025Reaccreditation inspection by the Accreditation Commission for Health Care16 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since May 9, 2022.
  • 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?

  • CMS hasn’t published nursing time from Medicare claims for this hospice.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 79% at home, 21% in assisted living.
Source:

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

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 gives no Hospice Care Index for this hospice.
Source:

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

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 151 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 91204, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 4; this one had 17.
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.