9440 Citrus Ave, Fontana, CA 92335 (opens Google Maps) · San Bernardino County · (909) 823-3481· 99 certified beds · avg 91 residents/day · certified since Jan 29, 1968 · 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: DAVID JOHNSON (48 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Aug 30, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Sep 23, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. F-0921
The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. F-0690
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 31, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Jul 31, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Jul 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Jul 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Jul 31, 2025 | 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 |
| Jul 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Jul 31, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Aug 30, 2023 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 23, 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 |
| Aug 23, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Aug 23, 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 |
| Aug 23, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Aug 23, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Aug 23, 2019 | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 7).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2022 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 7 | 0 | F |
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 →
1 fine totaling $7,446.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 30, 2023 | Fine | $7,446 |
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) | 3.64 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 17% in California; bottom 44% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.28 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 8% in California; bottom 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.38 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 21% in California; top 48% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.24 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 19% in California; bottom 19% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 32.2 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 38% in California; top 18% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 63.6 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 12% in California; bottom 17% 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 4.02, RN 0.30, weekend 3.73.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.02 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Citrus Nursing Center. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citrus Nursing Center | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 12/24/1990 |
| Marmur, Eli | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 12/24/1990 |
| Bernard-Butler, Esther | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2024 |
| Cibc Bank USA | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2021 |
| Citrus Nursing Center | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/06/1991 |
| Citrus Nursing Center | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/06/1991 |
| De Jesus, Walter | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/18/2020 |
| De Jesus, Walter | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/18/2020 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Dehghanmanesh, Adrian | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Farrales, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Golboo, Sepehr | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2022 |
| Golboo, Sepehr | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/22/2025 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/24/1990 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/24/1990 |
| K-Regency, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/15/2024 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Oxford, Micheal | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2022 |
Showing 20 of 23 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 3 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain David Johnson — 48 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 47 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laurel Convalescent Hospital | 3.3 mi | Fontana, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Rialto Post Acute Center | 4.6 mi | Rialto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Riverside Heights Healthcare Center, LLC | 4.7 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Jurupa Hills Post Acute | 5.1 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Vista Pacifica Convalescent Hospital | 5.5 mi | Jurupa Valley, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Vista Pacifica Center | 5.6 mi | Jurupa Valley, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Riverside Postacute Care | 7.8 mi | Riverside, CA | —/5 | abuseSFF | |
| Community Convalescent Center of San Bernardino | 8.0 mi | San Bernardino, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Riverside Behavioral Healthcare Center | 8.0 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Community Hospital of San Bernardino DP SNF | 8.0 mi | San Bernardino, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Community Care on Palm | 8.1 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Grove Care and Wellness | 8.2 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
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 055872.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details