← Back to search results

PROVIDENCE LITTLE COMP OF MARY SUBACUTE CARE CTR

SAN PEDRO, CA · Los Angeles County · Non profit - Corporation · 125 certified beds

📍 1322 West Sixth Street, San Pedro, CA 90732  ·  📞 (310) 791-4518

Medicare ID: 555848  ·  Last Medicare inspection: Jan 30, 2026

Overall Safety Score
79
out of 100
Generally Positive
Component Scores
77
Inspection
100
Staffing
52
Enforcement
✓ None
Complaints
60
Quality
📋 Last inspected: January 30, 2026 📦 CMS data as of: May 2026

Score Breakdown

Inspection
77
Staffing
100
Enforcement
52
Complaints
100
Quality Outcomes
60

What the numbers mean

PROVIDENCE LITTLE COMP OF MARY SUBACUTE CARE CTR scored 79 out of 100 — 13 points above the state average of 66.

📋 Inspections: 35 citations over the last 36 months — 17 fewer than the state average (52). 1 was rated serious (G+) — an inspector determined it caused or risked harm to a resident. 6 findings recurred across inspection cycles — indicating a problem that was not fixed.

👥 Staffing: Staffing levels are strong — RN hours and total nurse hours per resident are in the favorable range. Adequate staffing is one of the most important factors in resident safety.

⚠️ Penalties & enforcement: CMS has recorded 1 enforcement action totaling $11,170 against this facility. Penalties are only issued after a facility fails two levels of regulatory review — meaning this is a serious escalation beyond a standard citation. Ask for a written explanation of every fine and what corrective actions were taken.

💬 Complaints: Low complaint activity — few formal complaints from residents or families have triggered inspections. Ask if there is a family council you can speak with.

📊 Resident quality outcomes: Quality outcome measures are in an acceptable range. Some measures are at or near national benchmarks. Review the quality section in the full report for specifics.

🔍 Most cited areas: The facility had a problem with sprinkler coverage, maintenance, testing, or outage procedures. Sprinklers are a key fire-protection system that help control fires before residents are in danger., The facility had a problem with fire alarms, smoke detectors, alarm testing, or alarm outage procedures. These systems warn staff and residents when fire or smoke is detected.. The full report provides the complete citation record with dates, severity levels, and plain-English descriptions.

What inspectors found (last 3 surveys)

35
Total citations
State avg: 51.8
1
Serious (G+)
State avg: 1.1
6
Repeat findings

Top concern areas

32
2
Fire Sprinkler System
The facility had a problem with sprinkler coverage, maintenance, testing, or outage procedures. Sprinklers are a key fire-protection system that help control fires before residents are in danger.
1
Fire Alarm & Smoke Detection
The facility had a problem with fire alarms, smoke detectors, alarm testing, or alarm outage procedures. These systems warn staff and residents when fire or smoke is detected.

⚖ Penalties & Enforcement

Federal civil monetary penalties (CMPs) are only issued after a facility has failed two levels of regulatory review — meaning problems were found on inspection and the facility could not rebut the findings. This is a serious escalation beyond a standard citation.

$11,170
Total federal fines
1
Enforcement action

⚠ Each enforcement action required CMS to make a separate non-compliance determination — meaning this facility failed two levels of regulatory review before any fine was issued. Ask management specifically what violations triggered these fines and what corrective steps were taken.

📋 Enforcement Context Analysis
📊
Enforcement score: 52/100 — 19 points below the state average of 71/100 — worse than most comparable facilities. A score below 70 indicates a meaningful enforcement history that warrants direct conversation with facility management.
Serious Citations That May Have Triggered Enforcement
Prohibited staff behaviors — Immediate danger · Dec 14, 2023
Food sanitation & safety — No harm, could worsen · Dec 14, 2023

📅 Per-action enforcement records (date, fine amount, and penalty type for each individual action) are sourced from a separate CMS enforcement dataset and will be added in a future data update.

🩹

Resident Wellbeing — Key Indicators

These are the measures families ask about most. They come from CMS clinical assessments of every resident — not just inspection reports. Stars (★) count toward the official CMS quality star rating.

Antipsychotic medication use
7.3% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents given antipsychotic drugs. High use can signal residents being over-medicated rather than receiving attentive care.

Source: CMS MDS Quality Measures & Medicare claims data. Scores shown are the most recent 4-quarter averages for long-stay residents.

Track this facility with free email alerts

Get notified when new inspections, citations, score changes, or enforcement actions are published for this facility.

No account or payment required. Enter your email and we will save this facility-watch request.

What to know about Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr

Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr is a Medicare-certified nursing home in San Pedro, Ca with 125 certified beds. Its current Senior Care Report Card score is 79/100, placing it in the Generally Positive range. The latest CMS survey date in our data is Jan 30, 2026. Over the last 36 months, our CMS citation data shows 35 citations, including 1 serious finding and 6 repeat findings. Families comparing this facility should pay close attention to penalties and enforcement before scheduling a tour or accepting placement. Ownership type on file: Non profit - Corporation.

🟢
Overall Assessment — Generally Positive  ·  79/100
This facility performs well overall. A few areas are worth reviewing before making a final decision.
What to do next: Worth considering. Check the specific areas flagged below during your facility tour.
Federal Penalty: $11,170
CMS has imposed civil monetary penalties totaling $11,170 against this facility. Penalties are only levied after a separate non-compliance determination — meaning a facility must fail two levels of regulatory review before a fine is issued. Ask management specifically what violations triggered these fines and what corrective actions were taken.

What this facility's data shows

📋 Inspections
Some deficiencies on record. Review Section D to see what was cited.
👥 Staffing
Staffing levels are adequate — RN hours and nurse-to-resident ratios meet or exceed benchmarks.
⚖ Penalties
Facility has received federal fines or enforcement sanctions. Requires direct explanation from management.
💬 Complaints
Complaint activity is low — few formal complaints filed by residents or families.
Quality outcomes are acceptable overall but some measures are below benchmarks. See the How Are Residents Doing section.
⚠ Serious Findings on Record: 1 citation(s) where inspectors found actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents. See Section D for the full details and ask management how each was resolved.
Score breakdown — the numbers behind this assessment
👥 Staffing 100
What it measures RN hours per resident per day, total nurse hours, and RN turnover rate.
💡 Understaffing is the strongest single predictor of poor inspection outcomes.
📋 Inspection 77
What it measures Number, severity (A–L), and scope of deficiencies found. Repeat findings carry extra weight.
💡 Every citation in Section D feeds directly into this score.
⚖ Penalties 52
What it measures Whether CMS escalated from a deficiency citation to actual financial or operational sanctions.
💡 A penalty means the facility already failed a second level of regulatory review.
💬 Complaints 100
What it measures Volume of complaint-triggered inspections and the share that were substantiated.
💡 Complaint surveys are unannounced — they often surface issues annual surveys miss.
🎯 Quality outcomes 60
What it measures Resident outcome measures: falls, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic use, weight loss, hospitalizations.
💡 Reflects the lived experience of residents beyond what inspectors observe.

Each pillar scores 0–100 and is combined into the overall score. A strong overall can mask a weak pillar — compare all four and see how they stack against the state average in Section B.

🏗 How This Facility Compares to CA State Averages

Comparing a facility to others in the same state puts its score in context. A facility might have 8 citations and that could be above average in one state and below in another. Green means this facility is doing better than its peers; red means it's falling short.

Metric This facility CA avg vs. State
Overall score
The combined Senior Care Report Card score out of 100.
79 66 ▲ Better than state avg
Inspection score
How well the facility performs on standard health surveys.
77 53 ▲ Better than state avg
Staffing score
RN hours, total nurse hours, and staff turnover from CMS payroll data.
100 58 ▲ Better than state avg
Penalty score
Fines, payment denials, and enforcement actions on file.
52 71 ▼ Worse than state avg
Complaint score
Volume of complaint surveys and substantiated complaints.
100 80 ▲ Better than state avg
Quality score
Resident clinical outcomes vs national benchmarks: falls, antipsychotics, pain, vaccination, hospitalizations.
60 75 ▼ Worse than state avg
Citations (3 yrs)
Total number of deficiencies cited in the last 36 months.
35 51.8 ▲ Better than state avg
Serious citations
Citations rated severity G or higher (actual harm or immediate jeopardy).
1 1.1 ✓ At avg

📅 Inspection Timeline

State health inspectors visit nursing homes on a regular cycle — typically every 12 to 15 months — and document every deficiency they find. The timeline below shows the date and scale of each inspection visit over the past several years. A pattern of worsening surveys is a red flag even if the most recent visit looks clean.

2026-01-30
11 citations
2025-01-16
1 citations
2024-12-06
7 citations
2023-12-14
15 citations  (1 serious)
2023-11-03
1 citations
2023-05-15
1 citations
2023-04-03
1 citations

Bar length proportional to citation count. Red = serious findings (severity G+). Orange = elevated. Green = low.

📄 Full Citation Record

Every time state inspectors visit a nursing home, they write up anything that doesn’t meet federal standards. Each write-up is called a citation.

Each citation shows what the problem was and how serious it was, using a color-coded badge:

Confused by codes like F0732 or K0363? Use the free inspection report decoder to understand F-tags, fire-safety K-tags, severity letters, and repeat findings. Get the decoder →
Green — No residents harmed Yellow — Risk of harm, no injury Orange — A resident was harmed Red — Life or safety in danger

A Repeat tag means the same problem appeared in a previous inspection — it was not fully corrected the first time. Citations shown cover the last two years.

Survey: 2026-01-30 11 citation(s)
F0814 No harm, could worsen
F0814
F0677 No harm, could worsen
Personal hygiene & grooming assistance
F0812 No harm, could worsen
Food sanitation & safety
F0558 No harm, could worsen
Reasonable accommodations
F0645 No harm, could worsen
BHP referral requirements
F0880 No harm, could worsen
Infection prevention & control
F0656 No harm, could worsen
Comprehensive care plan
F0883 No harm, could worsen
Immunizations (flu & pneumonia)
F0684 No harm, could worsen
Quality of care
F0740 No harm, could worsen
Behavioral health services
K0353 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: sprinkler system maintenance and testing
The facility had a problem with sprinkler coverage, maintenance, testing, or outage procedures. Sprinklers are a key fire-protection system that help control fires before residents are in danger.
Survey: 2025-01-16 1 citation(s)
F0880 No harm, could worsen
Infection prevention & control
Survey: 2024-12-06 7 citation(s)
F0812 No harm, could worsen
Food sanitation & safety
F0814 No harm, could worsen
F0814
F0881 No harm, could worsen
Infection preventionist qualifications
F0609 No harm, could worsen
Timely reporting of alleged violations
F0803 No harm, could worsen
Nutritionally adequate menus
F0758 No harm, could worsen
Unnecessary psychotropic drugs
F0880 No harm, could worsen
Infection prevention & control
🩹

How Are Residents Doing?

Inspections tell you whether a facility followed the rules. These measures tell you how residents actually fared — whether they fell, experienced pain, lost weight, or were over-medicated. CMS collects this data through regular clinical assessments that nurses complete for every resident. Unlike inspections, which happen once a year, these assessments happen continuously.

✓ Positive signal: Most star-rated quality measures for this facility are within a good range, suggesting residents\' day-to-day wellbeing compares favorably to typical nursing homes.

How to read these cards: Each card shows one measure. Lower percentages are better for most (e.g. fewer falls), but higher is better for vaccination rates and community return. ★ Star rating marks measures CMS uses in its official quality star rating.

Long Stay Residents — 2025Q1-2025Q4
★ Star rating
Daily activity decline
2.2% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents who lost the ability to dress, eat, or move around independently over the past year. Rising rates can signal that residents aren't receiving enough physical therapy or that staffing is too thin to support mobility.
★ Star rating
Urinary tract infections
8.1% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents who had a urinary tract infection. While some UTIs are unavoidable, high rates can point to poor hydration practices, catheter hygiene, or rushed care routines.
★ Star rating
Antipsychotic medication use
7.3% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents given antipsychotic drugs. These medications carry serious risks for older adults. High use often signals that a facility is medicating residents to manage behavior instead of addressing needs through attentive, person-centered care.
★ Star rating
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing on…
0.0% lower is better
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
★ Star rating
Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure u…
15.6% lower is better
Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers
★ Star rating
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an…
1.0% lower is better
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
Physical restraints used
1.3% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents physically restrained (lap belts, side rails). Federal regulations require restraints to be a last resort. High use is a red flag for understaffed facilities cutting corners on behavioral care.
Signs of depression
0.0% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents showing symptoms of depression. Social isolation, lack of meaningful activities, and poor staffing all contribute. This measure reflects the emotional quality of life inside the facility.
Unexplained weight loss
8.0% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents who lost 5% or more of body weight unexpectedly. This can indicate inadequate nutrition, difficulty eating without assistance, or unaddressed medical issues.
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and ap…
97.2% lower is better
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
Pneumonia vaccination rate
13.7% higher is better
Share of long-stay residents vaccinated against pneumococcal pneumonia — one of the leading causes of death in older adults. Higher is better.
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and ap…
95.3% lower is better
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
Percentage of long-stay residents with new or wor…
7.3% lower is better
Percentage of long-stay residents with new or worsened bowel or bladder incontinence
Short Stay Residents — 2025Q1-2025Q4
★ Star rating
Worsening depression symptoms
0.0% lower is better
Share of long-stay residents whose depression got measurably worse over the past year — despite being in a care facility.
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and a…
73.2% lower is better
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
Emergency room visits (short-stay)
80.8% lower is better
Share of short-stay residents sent to the ER during their recovery stay. ER visits are disruptive for recovering patients and sometimes avoidable with better on-site clinical management.

Source: CMS MDS Quality Measures (2025Q1-2025Q4). Collected via standardized clinical assessments — not inspector visits.

💬 Questions to Ask Before Touring

These questions are generated specifically from this facility's score profile and citation history — not a generic checklist. A facility's willingness to answer them openly, and the quality of their answers, is itself an important signal. Bring this list when you tour or call.

  1. Can you walk us through the findings from your most recent state inspection and explain how each citation was addressed?
  2. This facility has a significant CMS enforcement history. Can you identify each action in the past three years, what it was for, and what systemic — not just procedural — changes were made to prevent recurrence?
  3. 1 citation in the public record were rated as causing actual harm to a resident. Can you describe what occurred in each case and what specific safeguards are now in place?
  4. Can we speak privately with two or three current residents or their families?

👪 Family Decision Guide

This guide translates this facility's data into practical next steps for families. It is not a recommendation for or against placement — it is a structured framework for the conversations you need to have before making a decision.

✓ Positives to confirm

  • Inspection record is above average — verify improvements are maintained
  • Staffing levels appear adequate — ask about weekend and night coverage
  • Low complaint activity — ask if there is a family council you can speak with
  • No pattern of repeat violations detected

⚠ Areas to probe

  • Penalty history present — ask what enforcement actions occurred and outcomes
  • Serious-harm citations on record — require a written explanation of corrective action
  • Always speak with at least two current residents or family members independently

📈 Score History

The score is recalculated every time CMS releases updated data (typically monthly). A consistent downward trend is more concerning than a single low score. An improving trend after a period of poor performance may indicate management changes are taking effect. Use the free facility-watch form above to get email alerts when this facility's record changes materially.

2026-05-27
79 — Good

🏢 Ownership & Operators

Ownership matters because large corporate chains sometimes prioritize cost controls over care quality. CMS requires every nursing home to disclose its owners, operators, and managing employees. Frequent ownership changes can disrupt staffing and operations — which is why we flag facilities that changed ownership in the past 12 months.

🔗 PACINI, CAROL operates 7 facilities across CA, AK, WA. A mid-size operator; compare scores across their other facilities if evaluating multiple options.
Owner / Operator Role Ownership % Effective
PACINI, CAROL Individual 1970-01-01
RICKS, MICHAEL Individual 1970-01-01
PROVIDENCE HEALTH & SERVICES - WASHINGTON Organization 1970-01-01
SPRUNK, ERIC Individual 1970-01-01
MARTIN, JAMES Individual 1970-01-01
GOEDERS, JOHN Individual 1970-01-01
ANDERSON, DONALD Individual 1970-01-01
LYONS, MARY Individual 1970-01-01
CRAWFORD, ISIAAH Individual 1970-01-01
NEWSOM, ANNA Individual 1970-01-01
PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM-SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Organization 1970-01-01
WEXLER, ERIK Individual 1970-01-01
HEJNA, DIANE Individual 1970-01-01
MURPHY, MICHAEL Individual 1970-01-01
O'QUINN, MARVIN Individual 1970-01-01
KINGSTON, MARY BETH Individual 1970-01-01
SORENSON, CHARLES Individual 1970-01-01
MARKHAM, DONNA Individual 1970-01-01
GHATAN, BIJAN Individual 1970-01-01
WATSON, JAMES Individual 1970-01-01
HUGHES, PHYLLIS Individual 1970-01-01
HOFFMAN, GREGORY Individual 1970-01-01
BLAIR, RICHARD Individual 1970-01-01

🔔 Monthly tracking is now free

We check CMS data monthly. Use the tracking form above and we will email you when new citations appear, scores change, or enforcement actions are added.

📋
Monthly report update
New citation alerts
📈
Score trend tracking
🏠 Verify this data on Medicare.gov
All data in this report comes from the CMS Care Compare database. You can review the official public record directly on Medicare.gov — including the full inspection narrative, star ratings, and any recent enforcement actions.
View on Medicare.gov ↗

This report reflects publicly available CMS data only and is updated monthly. Severity codes and narratives are reproduced directly from the CMS health inspection database. Senior Care Report Card scores are independently computed and are not affiliated with or endorsed by CMS or Medicare.gov.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Senior Care Report Card safety score for Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr?
Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr has an independently computed Safety Score of 79 out of 100, based on CMS inspection findings, staffing levels, penalty history, complaint volume, and quality measures.
Where is Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr located?
Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr is located in San Pedro, CA. View the full address, phone number, and a map at the top of this report.
How many beds does Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr have?
Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr is certified for 125 beds in the CMS Care Compare dataset.
When was the most recent CMS health inspection at Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr?
The most recent CMS health inspection summarized in this report was completed on January 30, 2026. CMS publishes a new inspection cycle approximately every 12 months.
What does the Senior Care Report Card Safety Score measure?
The Safety Score (0-100) combines five public-data signals: CMS health inspection severity, nursing staffing hours per resident, civil monetary penalties, complaint counts, and quality measures. Methodology and weightings are documented at /how-it-works/.
Is the report on Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr affiliated with the facility?
No. This report is independently computed from public CMS Care Compare data and is not affiliated with Providence Little Comp Of Mary Subacute Care Ctr, CMS, or Medicare.gov. It is provided as a research aid for families.

Data source: CMS Care Compare · Methodology · State Ombudsman

This report uses public CMS nursing home data and simplified scoring to help families ask better questions. It is not a recommendation, ranking, medical opinion, legal opinion, or substitute for an in-person visit. Source data last published by CMS: May 27, 2026.