Cornerstone Care Center
2550 9th Street, Sanger, CA 93657 · Fresno County · 99 certified beds · avg 94 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1971 · 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: JERICHO CARE GROUP (7 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
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 self-reported quality measures.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 10, 2024 · F-0685
The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
Why it matters: Untreated vision and hearing problems lead to falls, isolation, and confusion that could be avoided.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Jun 27, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 10, 2024 · F-0758
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.
Why it matters: Unneeded psychiatric medications can leave residents overly sedated and raise the risk of falls and other serious harm.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Jun 27, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, repeated · Feb 15, 2022 · F-0758
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.
Why it matters: Unneeded psychiatric medications can leave residents overly sedated and raise the risk of falls and other serious harm.
Severity (H): Multiple residents were actually harmed by the same failure — a pattern of real harm, not an isolated incident.
Corrected: May 23, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 15, 2022 · F-0697
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: May 23, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (52)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 29, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint |
| Dec 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| May 1, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| May 1, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| May 1, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| May 1, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 1, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 1, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
| May 1, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. |
| Jan 22, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint |
| Jan 22, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jan 22, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint |
| Jan 22, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint |
| Oct 28, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint |
| Jun 10, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| Jun 10, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | ▲ H · Actual harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| Feb 15, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (16 → 14).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 15 | 2 | H ▲ |
| 2024 | 17 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 19 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 1 | 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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
1 fine totaling $27,612.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 2024 | Fine | $27,612 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.22 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 43% in California; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.43 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 39% in California; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.67 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 44% in California; top 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.32 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 39% in California; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.0 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 20% in California; bottom 44% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 41.7 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 41% in California; top 50% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, 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 4.14, RN 0.42, weekend 3.60. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bayshire Central Valley LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 12/01/2022 |
| Bassi, Ravneet | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/27/2025 |
| Bassi, Ravneet | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/27/2025 |
| Carter, Benjamin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Carter, Benjamin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Grossman, Stephen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Grossman, Stephen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Kaur, Mandip | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Kaur, Mandip | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Kirby, Scott | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Kirby, Scott | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Parrott, Jason | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/30/2023 |
| Parrott, Jason | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/30/2023 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you arrange eye and hearing care for residents, including appointments and equipment like glasses or hearing aids?"
- "What is your approach to psychiatric medications — how do you try non-drug options first and work to reduce doses over time?"
- "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can I see where garbage is stored and how often it's removed?"
- "What is your current medication error rate, and what have you changed to bring errors down?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California Home for the Aged | 6.0 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Fowler Care Center | 6.1 mi | Fowler, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Vineyards at Fowler | 7.6 mi | Fowler, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Grace Healthcare Center | 8.3 mi | Fresno, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Pacific Gardens Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 8.6 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Evergreen Care Center | 8.7 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Stonehaven Senior Living | 9.0 mi | Fresno, CA | —/5 | ||
| Orchard Post Acute | 9.3 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Rolling Hills Care Center | 9.3 mi | Selma, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Bethel Lutheran Home | 9.6 mi | Selma, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sierra Vista Healthcare | 10.1 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sierra View Homes | 10.3 mi | Reedley, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 056100.