Mar Vista Country Villa: Rights Documentation Gap - CA
That last part mattered. The facility's own policy required a copy of any proposed discharge notice to go to the ombudsman. The copy never went.
When a federal inspector asked the facility's administrator about it on January 30, the administrator said the ombudsman notification wasn't required because the discharge wasn't facility-initiated or involuntary. In other words: the administrator's position was that the rule simply didn't apply here.
The facility's paperwork said otherwise.
Inspectors reviewed two versions of the facility's internal policy on transfers and discharges. The first, revised February 7, 2025, stated plainly that before any discharge, the facility would give the resident a Notice of Proposed Transfer and Discharge, place a copy in the resident's medical record, and fax a copy to the ombudsman. The policy contained no carve-out for discharges that weren't facility-initiated. It said the ombudsman gets a copy. Full stop.
The second version of the policy, revised July 19, 2025, did narrow its language. That version described ombudsman notification specifically in the context of facility-initiated transfers and discharges, and it listed exceptions for urgent medical situations, safety concerns, and cases where a resident's health had improved enough to allow quicker discharge. But even under that version, when a facility-initiated discharge was occurring, the ombudsman was supposed to receive notice 30 days in advance unless one of those exceptions applied.
What the inspection report does not resolve is which version governed the January 2 discharge, or whether the discharge was in fact facility-initiated. The administrator's claim, that the ombudsman notification requirement didn't apply at all, was the position the facility put on record.
The resident, identified only as Resident 1, had declined to sign the discharge document. The inspection report notes that unsigned documents were supposed to be faxed to the ombudsman regardless. That step did not happen.
Ombudsmen exist specifically for situations like this one. Their role is to serve as an independent advocate for nursing home residents, someone outside the facility's chain of command who can be notified when a resident is being discharged, particularly when the resident has questions or concerns, or when they refuse to sign the paperwork. When the fax doesn't go out, the ombudsman doesn't know to ask.
CMS rated the harm level as minimal harm or potential for actual harm, and the violation affected only a few residents. Mar Vista Country Villa was inspected on a complaint basis, meaning someone outside the facility had raised a concern before inspectors arrived.
The facility, located in Los Angeles, is a skilled nursing and rehabilitation center. The inspection covered a single deficiency related to the discharge notice process.
What the report leaves behind is a resident who said no to signing, and a system that was supposed to make sure someone independent knew about it. The fax never went. The ombudsman was never told. And when an inspector asked why, the administrator said the rules didn't require it, in a facility where the written rules said they did.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Mar Vista Country Villa Healthcare & Wellness from 2026-01-30 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Additional Resources
Data source: This article is based on inspection data downloaded directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) via Medicare.gov. CMS releases inspection reports in bulk; we publish the findings as documented by state surveyors in the official Form CMS-2567 Statement of Deficiencies.
Plan of correction: The CMS report we receive does not include the facility's plan of correction. Facilities submit plans of correction separately to state survey agencies and those responses may not be reflected in CMS data at the time of publication. The absence of a plan of correction in our data does not mean one was not filed. Readers who want information about corrective steps taken are encouraged to contact the facility directly or their state survey agency.
Corrections may have occurred: Inspection reports reflect conditions observed on the date of the survey. Facilities may have implemented corrections, staffing changes, additional training, or other remediation since the report was issued. We report what CMS provides and encourage readers to seek current information from the facility.
Editorial process: Inspection findings are extracted from CMS source documents and synthesized using AI, reviewed for factual accuracy against the original report by our editorial team.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: August 9, 2026 · Our methodology
MAR VISTA COUNTRY VILLA HEALTHCARE & WELLNESS in LOS ANGELES, CA was cited for violations during a health inspection on January 30, 2026.
The facility's own policy required a copy of any proposed discharge notice to go to the ombudsman.
Health inspections identify deficiencies that facilities must correct. Violations range from minor documentation issues to serious safety concerns. Review the full report below for specific details and facility response.