Hearth Record

Alpha Hospice Care Inc.

A hospice in Simi Valley, California 93063

5924 East Los Angeles Avenue, Suite U, Simi Valley, California 93063. (805) 422-8239.

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 23 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited May 2026. 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?

23 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 140 hospices serving ZIP code 93063 had 5.

The last inspection on record was on May 5, 2026: a follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission.

6 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

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

23 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 5, 2026: follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission3 deficiencies
  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(6)(i))

    “Observed in Tracer Visit. In 1 out of 1 home visits conducted with the LVN, the medication assessment was not accurately completed and did not meet policy requirements. During the visit, the LVN was prompted several times to review the labels and validate caregiver knowledge when discrepancies were noted. During the visit, the LVN did not use the revised agency tool for medication reconciliation in the home. This was confirmed by the DON.”

    Rule L0530. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 113 words

    “Observed in Tracer Visit. In 5 out of 5 records, the agency did not have individualized plan of care goals for each patient. Examples: RRHV#1 Goals not individualized. Reorienting to person, time, place and event. Discussing techniques on prevention of potential infections associated with bladder disturbance. RRHV#2 Communicating empathy or understanding of Patient’s experience. Facilitating and creating sense of support for adaptation. RRHV#3 Reorienting to person, time, place and event. RRHV#4 Reporting pain is at or below acceptable level ____. This was confirmed by the DON. Observed in Record Review. In RRNHV#2, the plan of care included wound goals. However, the patient did not have a wound. This was confirmed by the DON.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(3))

    “Observed in Tracer Visit. In 1 out of 1 home visits, the medication profile within the medical record was not accurate, as evidenced multiple outdated entries remaining on the medication profile in the medical record. For example, Vitamin B, Triple Antibiotic ointment, Seroquel 25 mg (morning), Seroquel 25 mg (evening), Norvasc, and Hydrocortisone cream had all been discontinued three weeks prior; however, these medications were still listed as active on the medication profile within the medical record. This was confirmed by the DON.”

    Rule L0674. Standard-level.

Mar 27, 2026: reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission20 deficiencies
  • Initial & comprehensive assessment of patient (42 CFR 418.54)

    “Observed in Record Review. In 5 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the initial comprehensive assessment was not completed within five calendar days of the patient electing the hospice benefit. For example in record RRHV#3 there was no spiritual assessment documented and no documentation that the patient/family declined. In RRNHV#1, #2, #3 and #4 there was no spiritual or social work assessment documented. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON and Administrator.”

    Rule L0520. Condition-level.

  • Quality assessment & performance improvement (42 CFR 418.58)

    “Observed in Data Tracer. During the Data session it was noted that the hospice to no documentation and was unable to demonstrate operation of a program 2023, 2024 and 2025 January to December. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON and Administrator present. Observed in Data Tracer. During the Data session it was noted that the hospice did not have a quality assessment and improvement program in place for 2023, 2024 and 2025 January to December. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON present.”

    Rule L0559. Condition-level.

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

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 2 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the RN had not effectively supervised the hospice aide. For example, in record RRHV#2 the aide service was ordered and did not begin for 5 weeks. During the 5 weeks the RN documented 2 aide supervision visits that stated that the aide had provided care, performed duties and Staff member visits on time. This was confirmed and discussed with the Administrator and DON present.”

    Rule L0629. Condition-level.

  • Governing body and administrator (42 CFR 418.100(b))

    “Observed in Leadership Session. There was no evidence that the governing body and leadership had established requirements to support patient care treatment and services. The hospice did not manage the implementation of policies and procedures as evidenced by- condition level findings at 418.114, 418.113, 418.54, 418.78, 418.100, 418.102, 418.56, 418.76, 418.104, and 418.58.”

    Rule L0651. Condition-level.

  • Clinical records (42 CFR 418.104)

    The inspectors’ words, 115 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the patient record was inaccurate. For example, RRHV#2 in the admission assessment there was documentation that the patient declined the volunteer, but in another section for the same visit it stated that the patient requested volunteer visits. In RRHV#3 on the admission the nurse’s narrative stated 2. Supervisory visit completed today and below the narrative the nurse checked the box No supervision at this time. Also, RRHV#3 the recertification assessment was incomplete with 1 page of the 6 page assessment left blank and the Nurse Recertification Assessment 2 page document left blank. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON.”

    Rule L0670. Condition-level.

  • Retention of records (42 CFR 418.104(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 107 words

    “Observed in Record Review. During discussion with the Administrator and DON it was noted that the patient clinical record had not been retained for 7 years as required by California. They reported that since December 2025 they have had 9 admissions and the hospice had no patients in 2025 prior to December and no patients in 2024 and 2023. The Surveyor requested to see the 5 patient records from the hospice’s initial survey in 2023. The organization was only able to provide 4 of the 5 original records. This was confirmed and discussed with the Administrator and DON who were hired in December 2025 and January 2026.”

    Rule L0681. Condition-level.

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

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 2 of 2 home visits conducted, with the hospice nurse, it was noted that she failed to conduct a medication assessment. For example during visits RRHV#1 and RRHV#3 the LVN did not perform a medication assessment as required by policy. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON.”

    Rule L0530. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 160 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 9 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the hospice had not developed an individualized plan of care for each patient. For example in record RRHV#1 the Care Problems section of the record included goals such as: Verbalizing a plan to eliminate health and safety hazards. Displaying hemodynamic stability, e.g., blood pressure, cardiac output, peripheral pulse, renal perfusion. Discussing techniques on prevention of potential infections associated with bladder disturbance. These goals were not individualized. For example, RRHV#2 the Care problems section goals were not individualized, Providing safe measures to prevent injuries. Facilitating creation of support system. Record RRHV#3 the Care problems section goals were not individualized, Displaying hemodynamic stability, e.g., blood pressure, cardiac output, peripheral pulse, renal perfusion. In RRNHV#1 the Care problems section goals wer not individualized, Demonstrating proper feeding techniques. Records RRNHV#2,3 and 4 and RRDC#1 and 2 included similar issues with goals. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON.”

    Rule L0545. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 110 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that there was no documentation that the interdisciplinary group had reviewed or revised the plan of care.. For example in RRHV#1 documentation the was no documentation for the initial IDG meeting. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON present. Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the interdisciplinary group did not document its review and revision of the patient’s plan of care. For example in RRHV#1 the only documentation for 2 IDG meetings was a sign in sheet. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON present.”

    Rule L0552. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 165 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 5 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the organization had not provided the patient with care and service according to the patient’s individualized plan of care. For example in record RRHV#2 the hospice aide did not follow the ordered frequency of visits. The admission order was for weekly aide visits and the first aide visit was documented 5 weeks after the admission date. In record RRHV#1 the nurse frequency was ordered weekly and 2 weeks over 2 months there was no visit or missed visit documented. In record RRHV#3 the nurse visit frequency was ordered weekly and 3 weeks over 2 months there were 2 visits documented. In records RRNHV#3 and RRMHV#4 it was noted that there was no documentation of visit frequency for the nurse; not on IDG, the admission order or nurse notes. As a result unable to evaluate if the frequency was followed. This was confirmed and discussed with the Administrator and DON present.”

    Rule L0555. Standard-level.

  • Executive responsibilities (42 CFR 418.58(e)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 93 words

    “Observed in Data Tracer. During the Data session it was noted that the hospice had not developed a data-based performance improvement program and did not have any active patients 2023, 2024, and 2025 January to December, hence leadership did not set priorities for data collection. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON present. Observed in Tracer Activities. During the Leadership and Data session the hospice was not able to provide an organization wide performance improvement for 2023, 2024 and 2025 January through November. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON present.”

    Rule L0575. Standard-level.

  • Recruiting and retaining (42 CFR 418.78(c))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. During review of the Volunteer program and discussion with the Volunteer Coordinator it was noted that the hospice had not documented efforts to recruit or retain volunteers. The Volunteer Coordinator reported that he had started with the organization 3 months ago and that there was no documentation of a volunteer program on his arrival. He also stated that he plans to develop flyers for recruitment, but had not yet. This was confirmed with the Volunteer Coordinator and Administrator present.”

    Rule L0645. Standard-level.

  • Cost saving (42 CFR 418.78(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 94 words

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. During review of the Volunteer program and discussion with the volunteer coordinator it was noted that the volunteer cost savings, positions occupied, work time spent occupying positions, and estimated dollar costs were not documented. For example, the organization did not have any patients in 2023 or 2024 and in 2025 admitted the first patient 12/6/26. There was no documentation of volunteer hours, the type of volunteer services, time worked and no percentage of the total patient care hours for December 2025. This was discussed with the Administrator and DON present.”

    Rule L0646. Standard-level.

  • Level of activity (42 CFR 418.78(e))

    The inspectors’ words, 151 words

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. During review of the Volunteer program and discussion with the volunteer coordinator it was noted that the volunteer had not provided at least 5% of the total patient care hours of all paid hospice employees and contract staff. For example, the organization did not have any patients in 2023 or 2024 and in 2025 admitted the first patient 12/6/26. There was no documentation of volunteer hours, the type of volunteer services, time worked and no percentage of the total patient care hours for December 2025. The Volunteer Coordinator stated during discussion that the total patient care hours for January 2026 was 7%. On review of the documented data, the data stated 5% of the total patient hours for the month was completed by a volunteer, however the math had been done incorrectly and the number was below 5%. This was discussed with the Administrator and DON present.”

    Rule L0647. Standard-level.

  • Training (42 CFR 418.100(g)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 153 words

    “Observed in HR File Review. During review of HR files it was noted that staff did not participate in ongoing education and training to maintain their competency. For example, in files HRMSW and HRSC there was no documentation of annual or triannual education in the files. This was confirmed and discussed with the Administrator and DON present. Observed in HR File Review. In 3 of 12 HR files reviewed, it was noted that the staff competency was not assessed as part of orientation. For example, the volunteer’s file did not include an initial competency documented as part of orientation. RN file the competency document was only signed by the employee with no Qualified observer signature. The LVN file’s competency document stated that the LVN was competent to provide IV, IV medication and central line care. Upon discussion with the DON this was a mistake. In the This was confirmed with the Administrator present.”

    Rule L0663. Standard-level.

  • Initial certification of terminal illness (42 CFR 418.102(b))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the Medical Director did not review clinical information or sign the initial certificate of terminal illness. For example in records RRHV#1, RRHV#2 and RRNHV#1 the initial CTI documentation was not completed, left blank. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON and Administrator present.”

    Rule L0667. Standard-level.

  • Recertification of the terminal illness (42 CFR 418.102(c))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the Medical Director failed to review the clinical information and sign the CTI prior to recertification. For example in record RRHV#2 and RRHV#3the CTI was not completed prior to recertification, it was blank. This was confirmed and discussed with the Administrator and DON present.”

    Rule L0668. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(7))

    The inspectors’ words, 261 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 9 of 9 patient records reviewed, it was noted that the patient record documentation was incomplete. For example RRHV#1 there were no medications or medication list included on 2 of 4 IDG notes, there was no narrative documented by anyone of the hospice core team (MD, RN, MSW, or SC) on 4 of 4 IDG notes, there was no POC with goals and interventions documented on 4 of 4 IDG notes and there was no visit frequency documented on 4 of 4 IDG notes. In RRHV#2 there were no narratives documented by anyone of core team on 2 of 4 IDG notes and on 2 of 4 notes only by RN documented, there was no POC with goals and interventions documented on 4 of 4 IDG notes, and there was no visit frequency documented on 4 of 4 IDG notes. In RRHV#3 there were no narratives documented by any core team on 1 of 7 IDG notes and on 3 of 7 IDG notes only the RN documented, there was no POC with goals and interventions on 5 of 7 IDG notes. and there were no visit frequency documented on 7 of 7 IDG notes. in RRNHV#1 there were no narratives documented, all areas left blank, by the core hospice team on 2 of 2 IDG notes, There were no medications or medication list on 2 of 2 IDG notes, and no visit frequencies on 2 of 2 IDG notes. Record RRNHV#2, #3, and #4 had similar findings. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON.”

    Rule L0678. Standard-level.

  • Personnel qualification (42 CFR 418.114(a))

    “Observed in HR File Review. During review of human resource files it was noted that the organization had not verified a license upon hire. For example in HRHHA2 file there was a document that stated it was a primary source of license, however there was no date of when the hospice received the document. This was confirmed and discussed with the DON and Administrator present.”

    Rule L0784. Standard-level.

  • Criminal background checks (42 CFR 418.114(d)(1))

    “Observed in HR File Review. During HR file review it was noted that the criminal background check was not conducted or documented per policy. For example in the HRMed Director file the employee start date was 3/25/2020 and the criminal background check in the file was dated 1/6/2017. This was confirmed and discussed with the Administrator and DON present.”

    Rule L0795. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
May 5, 2026Follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission3 deficiencies cited
Mar 27, 2026Reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission20 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since May 10, 2023.
  • 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.
Source:

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

Who owns it?

  • 13 owners or officers are people: Rogerick Andrada (corporate officer, 100%); Rogerick Andrada (corporate director, 100%); Ludmila Elgourt (managing employee (under contract), 100%); Romeo O Gumba (corporate officer, 100%); Romeo O Gumba (corporate director, 100%); Mary Jane Andrada (corporate officer, 100%); Mary Jane Andrada (corporate director, 100%); Mary Jane Andrada (managing employee (on the payroll), 100%); Maria Socorro A Gumba (corporate director, 100%); Rogerick Andrada (owns 5% or more directly, 25%); Romeo O Gumba (owns 5% or more directly, 25%); Mary Jane Andrada (owns 5% or more directly, 25%); Maria Socorro A Gumba (owns 5% or more directly, 25%).
  • 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 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 140 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 93063, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 5; this one had 23.
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.