5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
Villa Gardens is a nursing home in Pasadena, California, offering nursing care and skilled nursing. Licensed nursing care is available on site around the clock, making the setting suitable for people whose health needs require ongoing clinical support. Villa Gardens may be a good fit for a resident who needs nursing care throughout the day and night.
The community has 340 beds. Residents live in a larger setting with a substantial resident population, rather than a small home environment. Total nurse staffing is 5 hours and 27 minutes per resident per day, representing the daily nursing time allocated to each resident.
Medicare and private pay are accepted. Shaun Rushforth serves as administrator, and Front Porch Communities And Services operates the community. Pets are allowed, so residents may keep a pet while living at Villa Gardens. An on-site pool gives residents access to swimming without leaving the community.
The Overall CMS Rating combines results from health inspections, staffing levels and quality measures. Health inspections carry the most weight. Staffing and quality scores can increase or decrease the final rating based on performance compared to state and national standards.
Based on the results of the facility's three most recent standard inspections and any complaint investigations. CMS reviews the number, scope, and severity of deficiencies, with more recent findings weighted more heavily.
Measures average nursing staff hours per resident per day, including Registered Nurses (RNs) and total nursing staff. Ratings are adjusted based on the level of care residents require and are compared to state and national benchmarks.
Based on clinical and physical health indicators reported to CMS, such as hospital readmissions, falls, pressure ulcers, and improvements in mobility. These measures reflect how well residents' health needs are being managed.
Data period: Q4 2025 (October 1 – December 31, 2025).
This nursing home is ranked 33rd out of 290 nursing homes we track in California for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
5h 27mStandout metric: LPN / LVN is +45% above California average
1 of 6 metrics below California average
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. 7 total: 5 of the facility's own employees and 2 agency contractors.
7 staff · 8.4-hour shifts
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. 19 total: 16 of the facility's own employees and 3 agency contractors.
19 staff · 8.2-hour shifts
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. 35 total: 32 of the facility's own employees and 3 agency contractors.
35 staff · 7.7-hour shifts
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–Sun
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–Sun
Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
90
60 employees · 30 contractors · 34 on an average day
90 total staff / 38 residents. Residents: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (data as of Jun 2026); staff: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (Q4 2025).Residents and staff come from two different CMS releases, so the two counts can be a few months apart.
2.37 : 1
↑ 33% · CA 1.79This facility: 2.37 staff per resident, 33% above the California average of 1.79 (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
90 staff ÷ 38 residents
See full California ranking →
Average hours one staff member works on a day they are on shift, across every role.
7.6 h
↓ 1% · CA 7.7 hThis facility: 7.6 h, 1% below the California average of 7.7 h (among California facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
23,716 staff hours this quarter
See full California ranking →86.5% of staff hours were worked by the facility's own employees
California average: 95.3% · Contractors this quarter: Respiratory Therapy Technician (5), Speech Language Pathologist (4), Physical Therapy Aide (4), Certified Nursing Assistant (3), Licensed Practical Nurse (3), Occupational Therapy Assistant (3), Registered Nurse (2), Physical Therapy Assistant (2), Qualified Social Worker (2), Administrator (1), Other Physician (1)
Why it matters: employees work here week after week and get to know each resident's routines and needs. Agency contractors often rotate between facilities, so a higher employee share usually means more consistent care.
A large-scale community that may provide a wide range of amenities, services, and structured programs.
340
Rank #36 / 341Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 36th out of 341 nursing homes we track in California for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other California facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.High-capacity home · May provide extensive amenities, services and programs.
A longer operating history, which may indicate experience navigating regulations and delivering ongoing care. This is the number of years in operation under current management.
Rank #93 / 198Years in operation — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 93rd out of 198 nursing homes we track in California for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other California facilities. Longer operating histories may benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Walker's paradise. Daily errands do not require a car, with many shops and services nearby.
Rank #23 / 344Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 23rd out of 344 nursing homes we track in California for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across California facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
The number of residents recorded at this facility in its most recent state inspection report that stated a census.
Source: state inspection report (Nov 2025)
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
Villa Gardens is administered by Shaun Rushforth.
This profile shows two inspection records, and their totals often differ. Inspection History and the Inspection Scorecard below are state data — the figures the state publishes and the state inspection reports we hold on file — covering the entire facility. CMS Health Inspection History covers only this home's Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing beds, from federal certification surveys.
In California, the Department of Social Services (for assisted living facilities) and the Department of Public Health (for nursing homes) conduct inspections to ensure resident safety and regulatory compliance.
This scorecard compares key inspection, citation, and complaint metrics at this facility against the California state average. Metrics rated ≥15% worse than average are highlighted in red; those ≥15% better are highlighted in green.
Citations
| This Facility | CA Average | vs. CA Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total citations
Formal regulatory issues recorded by inspectors across all inspection types.
| 10 | 7.0 | This facility has 43% more total citations than a typical California nursing home (10 vs. CA avg 7).↑ 43% worse |
|
Serious citations (Type A)
Citations that pose an immediate risk to resident health or safety. Type A citations are the most serious and typically require prompt corrective action.
| 6 | 3.0 | This facility has 100% more serious citations (type a) than a typical California nursing home (6 vs. CA avg 3).↑ 100% worse Rank #1 / 293 Serious citations (Type A) — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 1st out of 293 nursing homes we track in California for # of serious citations. Shows this facility's # of serious citations compared to the California average among the 293 nursing homes in the ranking pool. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. |
|
Moderate citations (Type B)
Citations that do not pose an immediate risk but still represent a departure from required care or operational standards.
| 4 | 4.0 | This facility has moderate citations (type b) in line with the California average (4 vs. CA avg 4).— At avg |
|
Citations per inspection
Average citations per inspection.
| 0.7 | 0.5 | This facility has 40% more citations per inspection than a typical California nursing home (0.7 vs. CA avg 0.5).↑ 40% worse |
Inspections & Visits
| This Facility | CA Average | vs. CA Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total inspections
Combined count of official scheduled inspections, complaint visits and other regulatory visits. California counts each evaluation report, so one trip can count twice when it serves two purposes.
| 14 | 19.0 | This facility has had 26% fewer total inspections than the California average (14 vs. CA avg 19). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 26% fewer |
|
Complaint visits
On-site visits triggered by formal complaints filed by residents, families, or staff.
| 3 | 6.0 | This facility has had 50% fewer complaint visits than the California average (3 vs. CA avg 6). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 50% fewer |
|
Other visits
Regulatory visits that are neither routine inspections nor complaint investigations — administrative check-ins, follow-up reviews, licensing-related visits.
| 6 | 4.0 | This facility has had 50% more other visits than the California average (6 vs. CA avg 4). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↑ 50% more |
|
Official inspections
Routine, scheduled inspections conducted by state regulators to evaluate whether the facility meets federal and state standards.
| 5 | 4.0 | This facility has had 25% more official inspections than the California average (5 vs. CA avg 4). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↑ 25% more |
Complaints & Investigations
| This Facility | CA Average | vs. CA Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total complaints
Formal expressions of concern made by residents, families, or staff.
| 2 | 13.0 | This facility has 85% fewer total complaints than a typical California nursing home (2 vs. CA avg 13).↓ 85% better |
Federal inspection data published by CMS, covering this home's Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing/nursing beds only.
100% corrected
31 of 31 citations corrected Latest inspection: Dec 05, 2025 · 9 citations, all corrected
Most cited category: Quality of Life & Care, 6 of 31 citations · 9 categories in total
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Health citations are formal notices following inspections when they fail to comply with safety and care standards.
27 of 31 citations resulted from standard inspections; and 4 of 31 resulted from complaint investigations.
Includes all CMS health inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Data sourced from CMS Health Deficiencies reports, which cover the Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing and nursing beds and no other part of the community. Citation severity codes range from A (least serious) to L (most serious). Immediate Jeopardy (J-L) citations indicate situations where the facility's noncompliance has placed residents at risk of death or serious harm.
Federal penalties imposed by CMS for regulatory violations, including civil money penalties (fines) and denials of payment for new Medicare/Medicaid admissions.
Source: CMS Penalties Database · Data as of Aug 2026
No penalties in the past 3 years
No civil money penalties or payment denials on record since Aug 2023.
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
How residents at this home fare on health outcomes and preventive care, compared with the California average.
CMS star rating for the care of long-stay residents, who live at the home for 100 days or more. It is built from the long-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
5
/ 5
Significantly above average
CMS star rating for the care of short-stay residents, mostly people recovering after a hospital stay for under 100 days. It is built from the short-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
5
/ 5
Significantly above average
Average of five long-stay measures: pressure ulcers, falls with major injury, unplanned weight loss, worsening ability to walk, and needing more help with daily activities. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
8.5
Score · lower is better
↑ 44% · CA 5.9This facility: 8.5, 44% above the CA average of 5.9 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of three long-stay measures: needing more help with daily activities, worsening ability to walk, and loss of bowel or bladder control. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
18.8
Score · lower is better
↑ 88% · CA 10.0This facility: 18.8, 88% above the CA average of 10.0 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.11 long-stay measures: 5 better, 4 worse, 2 near CA average
3 short-stay measures: 2 better, 1 near CA average
People who live at the home · 11 measures
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
13.2%
↑ 29% · CA 10.2This facility: 13.2, 29% above the CA average of 10.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
22.1%
↑ 126% · CA 9.8This facility: 22.1, 126% above the CA average of 9.8 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
21.2%
↑ 107% · CA 10.2This facility: 21.2, 107% above the CA average of 10.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
2.2%
↑ 82% · CA 1.2This facility: 2.2, 82% above the CA average of 1.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
1.1%
↓ 34% · CA 1.6This facility: 1.1, 34% below the CA average of 1.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
2.5%
↓ 41% · CA 4.3This facility: 2.5, 41% below the CA average of 4.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
3.5%
↓ 14% · CA 4.0This facility: 3.5, 14% below the CA average of 4.0 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
0.0%
↓ 100% · CA 7.3This facility: 0.0, 100% below the CA average of 7.3 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
1.4%
↓ 88% · CA 12.0This facility: 1.4, 88% below the CA average of 12.0 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
↑ 1% · CA 98.6This facility: 100.0, 1% above the CA average of 98.6 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
100.0%
↑ 2% · CA 98.2This facility: 100.0, 2% above the CA average of 98.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Rehab and recovery after a hospital stay · 3 measures
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.3%
↓ 79% · CA 1.5This facility: 0.3, 79% below the CA average of 1.5 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
99.4%
↑ 5% · CA 94.4This facility: 99.4, 5% above the CA average of 94.4 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
97.4%
↑ 4% · CA 93.2This facility: 97.4, 4% above the CA average of 93.2 (among CA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Arrows show whether a figure is above or below the average. Green is better for residents, red is worse, and yellow means within 5% of the average. The line on each bar marks the average.
Quality measures are calculated by CMS from Minimum Data Set (MDS) resident assessments and Medicare claims.
86% of new residents, usually for short-term rehab.
13% of new residents, often for short stays.
1% of new residents, often for long-term daily care.
Source: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (Data as of Jun 2026)
Total residents
38Residents meet regularly to discuss policies, care quality, and activities
State-approved Nurse Aide Training and Competency Evaluation Program on-site
Part of a Continuing Care Retirement Community offering multiple care levels
Organized group of residents that meets regularly to discuss facility policies, quality of life, and activities.
Data sourced from CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics quarterly report. Payer mix reflects the current resident census by primary payment source.
Villa Gardens’s finances from its CMS cost report for the fiscal year ending March 2025, compared with 288 California nursing homes that filed a recent report. Includes all financial data for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Is it financially stable?
Losing money on care, and more than last year
−176.0% operating margin
−7.2 pts vs prior year
An operating loss in 4 of the last 8 reported years. Other income ($21.1M) turns it into a net profit to $2.2M. Watch for cost-cutting that reaches staffing.
Does it invest in staff?
Spends more on payroll than most California homes
131.1% payroll share of revenue
CA average 61.4%Rank #11 / 288Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 11th out of 288 nursing homes we track in California for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Payroll rose $2.1M while revenue rose $0.8M. Check hours per resident in the staffing section to confirm it reaches the floor.
FY 2025 scorecard
Each row shows the FY 2025 figure, the change since the prior report, the trend, and how it compares with California homes.
Losing money on care
| Metric | FY 2025 | vs prior year | Trend 2018 → 2025Trend | CA median | Compared with CA homesRank in CA | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue What the home earns from resident care, after discounts and bad debt. | $10.7M | +$0.8M | Trend 20182025 | CA median $15.3M | Rank in CA Rank #229 / 288Net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 229th out of 288 nursing homes we track in California for net patient revenue. Shows this facility's net patient revenue compared to the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher revenue generally means more resources for staffing and capital — read alongside Payroll %. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 21% of homes | Below CA median Higher net patient revenue than 21% of CA homes that filed a recent report. Revenue mostly follows how big a home is. |
| Operating expenses Everything it costs to run the home: staff, supplies, rent, admin. | $29.6M | +$2.8M | Trend 20182025 | CA median — | Rank in CA Not ranked | Exceeds revenue Operating expenses are higher than net patient revenue, so resident care runs at a loss. |
| Net patient income Revenue minus operating expenses. Negative means care loses money. | −$18.9M | −$2.1M | Trend 20182025 | CA median — | Rank in CA Not ranked | Loss, widening Resident care lost money this year, more than in the prior report. |
| Operating margin Net patient income as a share of revenue. The clearest health signal. | −176.0% | −7.2 pts | Trend 20182025 | CA median — | Rank in CA Not ranked | Loss A negative margin means resident care costs more than it earns. |
| Other income Money not from resident care: investments, grants, services. | $21.1M | — | Trend — | CA median — | Rank in CA Not ranked | Offsets part of the loss Income from outside resident care covers part of the loss on care. |
| Net income The bottom line after other income. | $2.2M | −$1.4M | Trend — | CA median — | Rank in CA Not ranked | Profit The bottom line is above zero after other income. |
Spends more of revenue on staff than most California homes
| Metric | FY 2025 | vs prior year | Trend 2018 → 2025Trend | CA median | Compared with CA homesRank in CA | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Payroll costs Salaries and wage-related benefits, not counting contract labor. | $14.1M | +$2.1M | Trend 20182025 | CA median $8.8M | Rank in CA Rank #46 / 288Payroll costs — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 46th out of 288 nursing homes we track in California for payroll costs. Shows total staff payroll — salaries plus wage-related benefits — benchmarked to the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher payroll relative to peers often signals better staffing and less reliance on contract labor. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 84% of homes | Above CA median Higher payroll than 84% of CA homes. Payroll in dollars mostly follows how big a home is, so this compares size, not staffing levels. |
| Payroll share of revenue Payroll divided by revenue. Higher usually means more staff per resident. | 131.1% | +11.1 pts | Trend 20182025 | CA median 53.8% | Rank in CA Rank #11 / 288Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 11th out of 288 nursing homes we track in California for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the California average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in California that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 97% of homes | 69.7 pts over CA average The CA average is 61.4% of revenue. Within 3 points of it reads as near the average. |
What the home earned from resident care (net patient revenue), what it cost to run (operating expenses) and the difference between the two (net patient income), for each fiscal year it filed a CMS cost report.
USD, millions
Net patient revenue Operating expenses Net patient income
Both lines are a share of net patient revenue. Payroll share is what goes to salaries and wage-related benefits; operating margin is what is left after every operating cost (below 0%, resident care lost money). The dashed line is the California payroll average.
% of net patient revenue
Payroll share Operating margin CA payroll average
| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue | $23.3M | $24.5M | $24.8M | $20.9M | $24.3M | $9.3M | $10.0M | $10.7M |
| Operating expenses | $19.0M | $21.4M | $22.4M | $21.9M | $23.0M | $24.8M | $26.8M | $29.6M |
| Net patient income | $4.3M | $3.1M | $2.4M | −$1.0M | $1.3M | −$15.4M | −$16.8M | −$18.9M |
| Operating margin | 18.3% | 12.8% | 9.8% | −4.7% | 5.5% | −165.4% | −168.7% | −176.0% |
| Net income | $7.5M | $7.3M | $7.4M | $1.4M | $3.9M | $4.3M | $3.6M | $2.2M |
| Payroll costs | $9.0M | $9.9M | $9.8M | $9.5M | $9.5M | $11.0M | $12.0M | $14.1M |
| Payroll share of revenue | 38.8% | 40.5% | 39.5% | 45.3% | 39.2% | 118.2% | 120.0% | 131.1% |
| Beds | 54 | 268 | 268 | 261 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 74 |
| Gross revenue | $24.2M | $25.7M | $26.0M | $21.6M | $25.1M | $10.2M | $11.6M | $11.4M |
| Salaries | $8.4M | $9.2M | $9.5M | $9.2M | $9.0M | $10.2M | $11.0M | $13.0M |
| Wage-related costs | $0.7M | $0.7M | $0.3M | $0.2M | $0.5M | $0.8M | $1.0M | $1.1M |
| Contract labor | $1.1M | $1.1M | $0.9M | $0.4M | $0.8M | $0.7M | $0.7M | $0.8M |
| Other operating costs | $10.0M | $11.5M | $12.6M | $12.5M | $13.4M | $13.7M | $14.8M | $15.5M |
| Net patient revenue per day | $230 | $236 | $239 | $231 | $1,111 | $439 | $467 | $499 |
| Cost per day | $188 | $206 | $215 | $241 | $1,051 | $1,165 | $1,255 | $1,376 |
| Average length of stay | 29.5 days | 37.1 days | 41.8 days | 78.5 days | 64.5 days | 49.6 days | 50.2 days | 58.8 days |
Showing 2025–2023 · scroll sideways for 5 earlier years
Earlier and partial years are in the download. Download CSV
Most residents typically stay for a few weeks or months before returning home or moving on.
Most new residents arrive under Medicare (86% of admissions), and a typical Medicare stay runs around 26 days.
Coverage residents most often arrive under.
Coverage residents most often leave under.
0.5 miles from city center
Estimated distance in miles from Pasadena's city center to Villa Gardens's address, calculated via Google Maps.
Add your location
Info below is compiled from CMS reports & the CA Dept. of Social Services (CDSS), senior community websites & trusted data sources such as Walk Score & BBB.
Communities are listed from highest-ranked to lowest-ranked based on our methodology.
The facility name. Click to view the full profile page on Assisted Living Magazine, including photos, services, and contact info.
|
CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that regulates nursing homes) Overall 5-star rating — a composite of Health Inspection, Staffing, and Quality Measures scores. 5 stars = top 10% nationally. 1 star = bottom 10%. The single most important number to start with when comparing facilities.
|
Care Types in This Table
AL (Assisted Living):
Housing with help for daily activities like bathing, dressing, and medication, without 24-hour skilled nursing.
NH (Nursing Home):
24/7 skilled nursing care for residents with complex, ongoing medical needs.
SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility):
Round-the-clock nursing care, often for recovery after surgery, injury, or illness.
RC (Respite Care):
Short-term temporary care that gives family caregivers a break.
ADC (Adult Day Care):
Daytime supervision, health monitoring, and social activities for seniors who live at home.
|
Neighborhood or city area where the facility is located. Proximity to family, hospitals, and green space matters for both quality of life and ease of visitation. Consider drive time and transit access when evaluating location.
|
Licensed bed capacity. Larger facilities (300+ beds) often have more specialized programs but can feel institutional. Smaller homes (under 150 beds) tend to deliver more personalized care. Compare with Avg Res/Day to understand how full the facility typically runs.
|
Percentage of licensed beds filled on an average day. Color indicates financial health: green (90%+) = operationally strong, typically profitable. Amber (80–89%) = stable but leaving revenue on the table. Orange (70–79%) = financial strain likely, may struggle with fixed costs. Red (<70%) = significant distress, closure or ownership change risk increases sharply.
|
This facility's occupancy rate compared to the statewide average for similar facilities. A positive number means above-average demand. Facilities running 5%+ above the state average are typically the most sought-after in their market — a strong proxy for reputation.
|
CMS-adjusted total nurse hours per resident per day (RN + LPN + CNA combined). The national average is approximately 3.5 hrs. Higher is better — more direct care time per resident. Below 3.0 is a red flag. CMS weights RN hours more heavily because RNs handle complex clinical decisions that CNAs cannot.
|
CMS Health Inspection star rating (1–5 stars), based on the 3 most recent annual state surveys plus any complaint investigations. This is the hardest rating to manipulate — it reflects real surveyor findings on-site. 5 stars = fewest deficiencies found. 1 star = most. It carries the heaviest weight in the Overall CMS rating.
|
CMS Staffing star rating (1–5 stars), based on daily nurse staffing hours submitted to CMS via verified payroll data. Compares RN, LPN, and CNA coverage relative to resident acuity level. 5 stars = well above expected staffing. Weekend staffing is evaluated separately, as that's where many facilities quietly reduce coverage.
|
CMS Quality Measures star rating (1–5 stars), based on 15 clinical outcome metrics including fall rates, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic drug use, and hospital readmissions. Captures actual resident health outcomes, not just compliance. High QM combined with low Health Inspection scores can indicate a facility with strong care but weak documentation practices.
|
Registered Nurse hours per resident/day compared to the statewide average. RNs are the highest-skilled nursing staff — they assess residents, manage medications, and respond to emergencies. A value of +50% means RN coverage is 50% above the state norm. Negative values are a concern for residents with complex or acute medical needs.
|
Total nursing staff hours (RN + LPN + CNA combined) per resident/day vs. the statewide average. A broader measure than RN vs State — it captures the entire care team. A facility can have high total staffing but low RN hours, meaning more aides and fewer nurses. Read both columns together for the full picture.
|
Total dollar amount of federal monetary fines (civil money penalties) issued by CMS in the past 3 years. Fines are only levied for serious violations — typically actual harm to residents, repeated uncorrected deficiencies, or systemic non-compliance. Even a single fine is noteworthy. Multiple fines strongly suggest a pattern, not isolated incidents.
|
Total health deficiency citations from the most recent standard inspection cycle. Minor citations (scope A–C) are common and often administrative in nature. Higher counts aren't always disqualifying, but should be read alongside Severe Citations to understand actual harm levels. Under 10 is strong for a large facility; 30+ warrants a closer look.
|
Average deficiency citations per CMS inspection (survey) in the reporting window — total citations divided by the number of inspections. Lower is better; compare alongside total Citations and Severe Citations for context.
|
Citations at CMS scope/severity level G or higher — G–I means actual harm occurred; J–L means residents were placed in immediate jeopardy. (D–F is potential for harm only). Examples include unaddressed falls, medication errors causing injury, neglect, or abuse.
|
Average number of residents in the building on any given day, derived from annual census data. Reflects true operating scale — a 400-bed facility running 200 residents/day operates very differently from one at 390. Higher resident counts generally mean more funded staffing hours.
|
Better Business Bureau rating (A+ to F). Reflects complaint history, business transparency, and how family disputes were resolved. A+ means no significant unresolved complaints. A blank (—) means the facility isn't BBB-accredited, which is common for healthcare providers and not necessarily a negative signal.
|
Walk Score® (0–100). Measures walkability of the surrounding area. 90–100 = Walker's Paradise. 70–89 = Very Walkable. 50–69 = Somewhat Walkable. Below 50 = Car-Dependent. Higher scores benefit family visitors, resident outings, and staff commuting.
|
The licensed owner or operator of record filed with CMS — the individual or organization legally accountable for the facility. Searching the operator name across other facilities can reveal chain or multi-site ownership, which matters: chain-operated homes tend to have more variable quality outcomes than independently run facilities.
|
What the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts — not gross billings. Taken from the latest complete annual cost report, so it is comparable across homes reporting the same period. Revenue alone doesn't indicate care quality, but it funds staffing and capital reinvestment. Pair with Payroll %. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Staff salaries plus wage-related benefits from the latest complete annual cost report. Contract and agency labour is counted separately, under other operating costs, so a home leaning on agency staff can show a low figure here. Payroll is the cost most directly tied to care quality — compare with Payroll % for full context. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Payroll as a share of NET PATIENT REVENUE (not gross revenue). Both figures come from the same cost-report year. A higher figure means more of each revenue dollar goes to staff pay. Read with the Staffing star rating to judge whether spend translates into coverage — and note that homes whose patient revenue covers only part of their operation can read implausibly high. The California average is: 61.4% Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
CMS Certification Number: the unique federal identifier for this skilled nursing provider.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Villa Gardens | NH SNF | Pasadena | 340
Facility
340
CA AVG
161
Rank
#36 / 341 | - | - | 5.45
Facility
5.45
CA AVG
4.33
Rank
#33 / 290 | -12% | +26% | $0
Facility
$0
CA AVG
$60.5k
Rank
#1 / 295 | 31
Facility
31
CA AVG
49.9
Rank
#102 / 293 | 6.2
Facility
6.2
CA AVG
4.7
Rank
#242 / 293 | - | 19 | - |
92
Facility
92
CA AVG
60
Rank
#23 / 344 | Front Porch Communities And Services | $10.7MFiscal year ending 03/2025
Facility
$10.7MFiscal year ending 03/2025
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#229 / 288 | $14.1MFiscal year ending 03/2025
Facility
$14.1MFiscal year ending 03/2025
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#46 / 288 | 131.1%Fiscal year ending 03/2025
Facility
131.1%Fiscal year ending 03/2025
CA AVG
61.4%
Rank
#11 / 288 | 555429 | ||||
| St. Vincent Health Care | NH SNF | Pasadena (North Central) | 78
Facility
78
CA AVG
161
Rank
#244 / 341 |
98.1%
Facility
98.1%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#82 / 299 | +19% | 3.78
Facility
3.78
CA AVG
4.33
Rank
#174 / 290 | -45% | -13% | $0
Facility
$0
CA AVG
$60.5k
Rank
#1 / 295 | 50
Facility
50
CA AVG
49.9
Rank
#190 / 293 | 16.7
Facility
16.7
CA AVG
4.7
Rank
#293 / 293 | - | 77 | - |
62
Facility
62
CA AVG
60
Rank
#185 / 344 | Robert Barrett | $9.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$9.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#241 / 288 | $5.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$5.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#256 / 288 | 53.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
53.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.4%
Rank
#141 / 288 | 555119 | ||||
| Foothill Heights Care Center | NH ADC AL RC SNF | Pasadena (North Central) | 49
Facility
49
CA AVG
161
Rank
#302 / 341 |
94.9%
Facility
94.9%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#115 / 299 | +15% | 4.36
Facility
4.36
CA AVG
4.33
Rank
#141 / 290 | -53% | +1% | $9.4k
Facility
$9.4k
CA AVG
$60.5k
Rank
#204 / 295 | 61
Facility
61
CA AVG
49.9
Rank
#225 / 293 | 3.4
Facility
3.4
CA AVG
4.7
Rank
#81 / 293 | - | 47 | A+ |
69
Facility
69
CA AVG
60
Rank
#136 / 344 | Foothill Heights Care Center LLC | $7.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$7.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#263 / 288 | $3.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$3.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#276 / 288 | 49.9%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
49.9%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.4%
Rank
#199 / 288 | 555894 | ||||
| Brighton Care Center | NH SNF | Pasadena (North Central) | 99
Facility
99
CA AVG
161
Rank
#176 / 341 |
88.2%
Facility
88.2%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#144 / 299 | +7% | 3.68
Facility
3.68
CA AVG
4.33
Rank
#174 / 290 | -30% | -15% | $0
Facility
$0
CA AVG
$60.5k
Rank
#1 / 295 | 73
Facility
73
CA AVG
49.9
Rank
#248 / 293 | 3.7
Facility
3.7
CA AVG
4.7
Rank
#112 / 293 | 1 | 87 | - |
62
Facility
62
CA AVG
60
Rank
#185 / 344 | Rachel Rodriquez | $13.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$13.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#169 / 288 | $6.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$6.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#204 / 288 | 49.6%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
49.6%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.4%
Rank
#203 / 288 | 555338 | ||||
| Pasadena Nursing Center | NH ADC RC SNF | Pasadena (North Central) | 108
Facility
108
CA AVG
161
Rank
#170 / 341 |
75.0%
Facility
75.0%
CA AVG
82.2%
Rank
#221 / 299 | -9% | 4.15
Facility
4.15
CA AVG
4.33
Rank
#127 / 290 | -3% | -4% | $9.1k
Facility
$9.1k
CA AVG
$60.5k
Rank
#199 / 295 | 90
Facility
90
CA AVG
49.9
Rank
#269 / 293 | 3.6
Facility
3.6
CA AVG
4.7
Rank
#102 / 293 | 2 | 81 | - |
64
Facility
64
CA AVG
60
Rank
#170 / 344 | Gardena Retirement Center, Inc | $8.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$8.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$17.3M
Rank
#254 / 288 | $4.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$4.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
$9.8M
Rank
#261 / 288 | 54.6%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
54.6%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
CA AVG
61.4%
Rank
#132 / 288 | 555213 |
Rank badges are statewide and care-type specific: each nursing home is ranked against every other CA nursing home we track that reports that metric, not just the 5 on this page. See how we rank facilities
Villa Gardens is located in PASADENA, California.
Here are the financial assistance programs available to residents in California.
Villa Gardens is legally operated by Front Porch Communities And Services, and administered by Shaun Rushforth.
Villa Gardens has a walk score of 92. Walker's paradise. Daily errands do not require a car, with many shops and services nearby.
Villa Gardens's occupancy is 79.6%.
Villa Gardens has been operating for approximately 27 years, based on available licensing and registration records.
Yes, Villa Gardens allows residents to bring their pets.
Villa Gardens is registered as a non-profit in CA.
Shaun Rushforth is the administrator of Villa Gardens.
Care Cost Calculator: See Prices in Your Area
Nursing Home Data Explorer
Don’t Wait Too Long: 7 Red Flag Signs Your Parent Needs Assisted Living Now
The True Cost of Assisted Living in 2025 – And How Families Are Paying For It
Understanding Senior Living Costs: Pricing Models, Discounts & Financial Assistance
