Maluhia
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Maluhia nursing home in Honolulu has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and recommended for families seeking care. It ranks #12 out of 41 facilities in Hawaii, placing it in the top half, and #9 out of 26 in Honolulu County, indicating that only eight local options are better. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from seven in 2024 to four in 2025. Staffing is a strong point, with a rating of 4 out of 5 and a low turnover rate of 22%, significantly below the state average, which suggests that staff are experienced and familiar with residents. However, the facility was fined $8,278, which is average, and there have been serious concerns, including a resident suffering an anaphylactic reaction due to improperly managed food allergies, and care plans that failed to address specific health needs for two residents, indicating areas that need improvement. Overall, while Maluhia has strengths in staffing and rankings, there are critical areas needing attention to ensure resident safety and well-being.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Hawaii
- #12/41
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 22% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 26 points below Hawaii's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $8,278 in fines. Lower than most Hawaii facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 96 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Hawaii nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 20 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (22%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (22%)
26 points below Hawaii average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 20 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the care plan was revised for two Resident's (...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
3 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews the facility was aware of Resident (R) 7's nut allergy but failed to document severity of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to report the results of an allegation of staff to resident abuse, involving Resident (R) 5 and a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA), within five worki...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of three residents (Resident (R) 7) sampled for food allergies, was not served a food allergy. R7 was served mayonnaise on her l...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from physical restraints i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility staff failed to correctly document Resident (R) 6's facility acquired injury, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for one of 19 residents sampled (Resident (R) 68). R68's care plan did not ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to invite one of the sampled residents (Resident (R) 76) to attend an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Findings include:
On 06/30/24 at 08:42 AM, dur...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to update Resident (R) 6's electronic health record (EHR) to accurately...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene procedures were followed by a staff member during medication administration. This deficient prac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide the right to reside and receive services in the facility wi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean environment as evidenced by a supply shelf, in the second-floor storage room, found covered with spider webs. As a res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement interventions in a care plan to provide e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0661
(Tag F0661)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to communicate necessary discharge information to the resident, resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview with staff member the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs for two of five residents sampled (Resident (R) 27...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview with staff member the facility failed to evaluate one of five residents sampled (Resident (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to properly store medications in a manner that facilitates considerations of precautions and safe administration in on...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident's (Resident (R) 55) menu met her p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow proper infection control during lunch service on a nursing unit and did not do hand hygiene after removing used glov...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade B+ (83/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Hawaii.
- • 22% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 26 points below Hawaii's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 20 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Maluhia's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Maluhia an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Hawaii, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Maluhia Staffed?
CMS rates Maluhia's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 22%, compared to the Hawaii average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Maluhia?
State health inspectors documented 20 deficiencies at Maluhia during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 19 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Maluhia?
Maluhia is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility is operated by HAWAII HEALTH SYSTEMS CORPORATION, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 158 certified beds and approximately 87 residents (about 55% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Honolulu, Hawaii.
How Does Maluhia Compare to Other Hawaii Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Hawaii, Maluhia's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.5, staff turnover (22%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Maluhia?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Maluhia Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Maluhia has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Hawaii. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Maluhia Stick Around?
Staff at Maluhia tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 22%, the facility is 24 percentage points below the Hawaii average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 15%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.
Was Maluhia Ever Fined?
Maluhia has been fined $8,278 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Hawaii average of $33,162. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Maluhia on Any Federal Watch List?
Maluhia is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.