How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
11970 4th St, Yucaipa, CA 92399 (opens Google Maps) · San Bernardino County · (909) 790-2273· 99 certified beds · avg 94 residents/day · certified since Jan 22, 1992 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: MADISON CREEK PARTNERS (13 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint F-0689
The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · from a complaint F-0676
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. F-0641
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 21, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · from a complaint · F-0676 |
| Nov 25, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Nov 25, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656 |
| Nov 25, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Nov 25, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · F-0790 |
| Nov 25, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Oct 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791 |
| Mar 16, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Dec 6, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Dec 6, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Dec 6, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 5).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 3 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | D |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.70 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 21% in California; bottom 47% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.48 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 50% in California; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.53 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 33% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.53 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 28% in California; top 29% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 46.5 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 21% in California; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 43.8 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 37% in California; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.65, RN 0.61, weekend 4.43.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.65 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Cedar Mountain Post Acute. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cedar Operations LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 02/13/2015 |
| Christensen, Covey | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/13/2015 |
| Christensen, Covey | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/13/2015 |
| Christensen, Covey | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/13/2015 |
| Clegg, Michael | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/26/2023 |
| Clegg, Michael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/26/2023 |
| Clegg, Michael | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/26/2023 |
| Dalton, Robert | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Dalton, Robert | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Hage, Jean | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Hage, Jean | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Hopkins, Amber | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2021 |
| Hopkins, Amber | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2021 |
| Madison Creek Partners LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/13/2015 |
| Madison Creek Partners LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/28/2025 |
All 15 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Madison Creek Partners — 13 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 12 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creekside Post Acute | 1.9 mi | Yucaipa, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Yucaipa Hills Post Acute | 2.1 mi | Yucaipa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| University Post Acute | 4.0 mi | Mentone, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Oak Glen Post Acute | 6.2 mi | Cherry Valley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Highland Care Center of Redlands | 6.3 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Plymouth Village | 6.9 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Highland Springs Care Center | 7.7 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Redlands Healthcare Center | 8.6 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Madison Grove Post Acute | 8.6 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Redlands Comm Hosp D/P SNF | 8.6 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Brookside Healthcare Center | 9.2 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Vista Real Post Acute | 9.2 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in San Bernardino, CA — 55 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555494.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details