The Cove At La Jolla

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

52.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 449 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 77.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 154 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 1.01 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 97% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 59 beds and averages 51.0 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.95 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.25 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.39 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.21 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.26 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.40 to 0.89 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

21 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-05-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure fall mats were placed appropriately for one of 14 sampled residents (40), and ensure loose flooring was identified for three of three hallways. These failures placed residents at increased risk of injury. Findings: 1. Per the facility's admission Record, Resident 40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of difficulty walking. Per the facility's undated Care Plan Report, Resident 40 was at risk for falls related to impaired mobility, weakness, and a history of falls. The Care Plan Report had an intervention to add floor mats to both sides of Resident 40's bed to prevent injury due to a previous fall on 4/30/25. On 5/15/25 at 2:59 P.M., an observation of Resident 40 and interview was conducted with Licensed Nurse (LN) 5. There was a floor mat one side of Resident 40's bed, and the floor mat on the other side of his bed was stood up against the wall. LN 5 stated, staff moved the floor mat out of the way while…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-16 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that palatable food was served to fifteen of fifty-one sampled residents. This failure had the potential to prevent residents from eating their meals and not receiving their daily nutrition. Cross reference F550 Findings: On 5/13/25 from 7:30 A.M. to 4:30 P.M., resident interviews were conducted during the initial tour of the facility. The following represents residents' statements about food during the initial tour: Resident 8 stated I received cereal with no milk .the combinations are ridiculous like yesterday I got cold sausage with brussels sprouts .food is usually lukewarm, not enough food .I had two meals that I couldn't figure out what it was, it looked like fried mush, and I didn't' t eat it . the orange juice is terrible, doesn't taste like orange . Resident 159 stated .The food is always cold, dry eggs, scrambled, and hard . Resident 15 stated .Food barely adequate, not very good, always cold .Canned vegetables, lettuce not fresh. Portions too big to finish . Resident 31 stated .Food not good,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that one kitchen staff wore a beard restraint during breakfast tray line. This failure had the potential to contaminate all residents' food with staff's facial hair and promote foodborne illness. Findings: On 5/13/25 at 7:45 A.M., an observation of the breakfast tray line and an interview with the Dietary Supervisor (DS) was conducted. The DS was observed with an uncovered beard and mustache plating breakfast food. The DS stated that the policy was that he could serve food without a beard restraint if the beard and mustache were trimmed and groomed. The Registered Dietician(RD) was asked to review policy for facial hair for kitchen staff. Record review of the facility policy titled DRESS CODE, dated 2023, indicated that .8. If applicable, beards and mustaches (any facial hair) must wear beard restraint . On 5/16/25 at 10 A.M., an interview with the Registered Dietician (RD) was conducted. The RD stated that the expectation was for any staff with facial hair needed to cover it with beard restraint. The RD…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to honor two (Resident 1, 16) of 14 sampled residents reviewed for resident rights when: 1. The facility did not honor Resident 1's request not to have eggs for breakfast; 2. The facility did not honor Resident 16's request to have a sandwich during dialysis appointments. These failures resulted in not allowing residents to make a choice regarding their care. Findings: 1. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia (total or partial paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (muscle weakness on one side of the body) involving unspecified cerebrovascular disease (a condition affecting blood flow and blood vessels in the brain) according to the facility's admission Record. During an observation and interview on 5/13/25 at 8:43 A.M. with Resident 1, Resident 1 stated she disliked eggs but received eggs for breakfast. Resident 1 showed an omelette on the breakfast tray and a meal ticket which…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and/or implement a patient centered care plan for one of 14 residents reviewed for care plan. (Resident 209) Cross reference F695 This failure had the potential for Resident 209 to not receive appropriate care, treatment, and interventions for the use of a continuous positive airway pressure machine (CPAP-a machine that delivers mild air pressure through the nose to keep breathing airways open while asleep). Findings: Resident 209 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including obstructive sleep apnea (OSA- a problem in which breathing pauses during sleep due to blocked airways) according to the facility's admission Record. An observation and interview was conducted on 5/13/25 at 11:42 A.M. with Resident 209. Resident 209 had a white machine on the bedside drawer. Resident 209 stated the machine was a BIPAP [Bilevel positive airway pressure machine used as breathing support and administered through a face mask or…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care services for one of one resident who used a continuous positive airway pressure machine (CPAP-a machine that delivers mild air pressure through the nose to keep breathing airways open while asleep) when Resident 209 used a CPAP machine but did not have a physician's order. In addition, Licensed nurses did not know how to clean the CPAP machine. This failure had the potential for Resident 209 to receive inappropriate care and treatment to address Resident 209's respiratory problems. Cross reference F656 Findings: Resident 209 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including obstructive sleep apnea (OSA- a problem in which breathing pauses during sleep due to blocked airways) according to the facility's admission Record. An observation and interview was conducted on 5/13/25 at 11:42 A.M. with Resident 209. Resident 209 had a white machine on the bedside drawer. Resident 209 stated the machine was a…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide residents with a diet free of food they were allergic to for one of 14 sampled residents (6). This failure placed Resident 6 at an increased risk of allergic reaction. Findings: Per the facility's admission Record, Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Per the facility's Allergy Report, dated 5/15/25, Resident 6 had an allergy to Broccoli, documented on 1/19/25. On 5/15/25 AT 9:40 A.M., an interview was conducted with Resident 6. Resident 6 stated, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) brought her broccoli on 5/14/25 at dinnertime. On 5/15/25 at 1:38 P.M., an interview was conducted with CNA 4. CNA 4 stated, when she brought the dinner meal tray to Resident 6 on 5/14/25, Resident 6 complained to her that there was Broccoli on her plate. CNA 4 further stated, she was supposed to check the meal tray to see if it matched her diet, but she missed that one. On 5/15/25 at 1:52 P.M., an interview was conducted with Licensed…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-06-06 · tag F0641 — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess and code the Minimum Data Set (MDS-a clinical assessment tool) for three of four residents (1, 5, 103) reviewed for wander guards (a wrist band worn by residents that alarms and alerts staff when the resident get near or exit a specific area). As a result, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) was unaware of Resident 1, 5, and 103's current health status and wandering behavior. Findings: a. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included encephalopathy (a disease of the brain which affects daily function), per the facility's admission Record. On 6/5/24, Resident 1's clinical record was reviewed: According to the physician's order, dated 2/21/24, .WanderGuard wrist band to LEFT Wrist . According to the quarterly Elopement/Wandering Evaluation, dated 4/2/24, Resident 1 was categorized as a high risk for elopement. The care plan titled At Risk for Elopement, undated, listed…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow professional standards for food safety when: 1. Dishware was not properly stored; and 2. Date on powdered thickener did not indicate open, discard, or preparation date; and 3. Gloves were not changed and hand hygiene was not conducted during food service. This failure had the potential to cause food-borne illness to all residents in the facility. Findings: 1. On 6/3/24 at 8:15 A.M., during an initial tour of the kitchen with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), an observation of [NAME] 1 (CK 1) was conducted. CK 1 was observed removing wet dishware from the dish machine and immediately stacking them on a nearby metal rack, without allowing them to air dry first. The CDM stated, Dishes shouldn't be stored wet, because there's a risk of bacterial growth that could effect everyone who eats food from our kitchen. A review of the facility policy titled Dish Washing dated 2018, .Dishes are to be air dried in racks before stacking and storing . 2. On 6/3/24 at 8:24 A.M., during an initial tour of the dry…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were answered in a timely manner for six of 56 residents (Residents 10, 4, 24,15,19,7) reviewed for call lights response. This failure had the potential for resident needs to go unmet and at risk for safety. Findings. On 6/3/24 a review of the past three Resident Council (when residents meet once a month to discuss facility concerns) meeting minutes was reviewed. Resident Council minutes dated 3/5/24, 4/2/24, and 5/14/24 indicated slow call light responses. The ADM response to the concerns was documented as, Noted. 1. A review of Resident 10's admission Record indicated, Resident 10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included acute (sudden) cystitis (an infection of the bladder). An interview on 6/3/24 at 10:30 A.M., with Resident 10 was conducted. Resident 10 stated he knew the facility was understaffed, due to call lights not being answered timely and it would take more than 20 minutes or more to get a…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in CA