How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Extended Care Hospital of Riverside
8171 Magnolia Avenue, Riverside, CA 92504 (opens Google Maps) · Riverside County · (951) 687-3842· 99 certified beds · avg 94 residents/day · certified since Sep 1, 1977 · 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★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 13, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.89
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 38 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 did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. F-0755
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. F-0578
View all 38 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0578 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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). · F-0628 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808 |
| Feb 13, 2026 | 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 |
| Dec 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Aug 4, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Aug 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Jun 5, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0645 |
| Apr 2, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint · F-0660 |
| Feb 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint · F-0623 |
| Feb 5, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · from a complaint · F-0565 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 12, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0692 |
| May 3, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Nov 16, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0690 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely. · F-0813 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | 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 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Jun 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 10).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 7 | 0 | F |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 8 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 10 | 0 | E |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.89
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.26
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.41
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 3.89 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 33% in California; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.26 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 6% in California; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.41 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 23% in California; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.25 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 22% in California; bottom 22% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 41.5 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 34% in California; top 40% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 26% in California; top 20% 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 4.50, RN 0.30, weekend 3.95.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.50 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Extended Care Hospital of Riverside. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
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.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F & B Healthcare | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/25/1993 |
| 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 |
| Ellsworth, Adam | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/16/2022 |
| Ellsworth, Adam | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/16/2022 |
| F & B Healthcare | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/1993 |
| F & B Healthcare | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/1993 |
| Farrales, Mary | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Farrales, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/25/1993 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/25/1993 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/25/1993 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| 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 | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2022 |
| Oxford, Micheal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/03/2022 |
| Panchal, Pravin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2018 |
| Panchal, Pravin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2018 |
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.
Other facilities in the same chain
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.
- French Park Care Center — Santa Ana, CA · overall 1/5
- Garden Park Care Center — Garden Grove, CA · overall 4/5
- Gordon Lane Care Center — Fullerton, CA · overall 2/5abuse
- Heritage Manor — Monterey Park, CA · overall 2/5
- Knolls West Post Acute LLC — Victorville, CA · overall 3/5
- Menifee Lakes Post Acute — Sun City, CA · overall 3/5
- Mission Care Center — Riverside, CA · overall 5/5
- Mission Carmichael Healthcare Center — Carmichael, CA · overall 3/5
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.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
- "Who on your staff manages IV therapy, and what training and monitoring is in place?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the California midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 42% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 23 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 67 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Woodcrest Post Acute & Rehabilitation | 0.0 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mission Care Center | 0.6 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Alta Vista Healthcare & Wellness Centre | 1.2 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Villa Health Care Center | 1.3 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Valencia Gardens Health Care Center | 1.6 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Citrus Grove Post Acute | 1.7 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Riverwalk Post Acute | 2.0 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Community Care and Rehabilitation Center | 2.2 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Community Care on Palm | 3.3 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Arlington Gardens Care Center | 3.4 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Riverside Behavioral Healthcare Center | 3.5 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Riverside Postacute Care | 4.3 mi | Riverside, CA | —/5 | abuseSFF |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Riverside, CA — 54 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Hemet Hills Post Acute — Hemet, CA · overall 1/5
- Hemet Valley Healthcare Center — Hemet, CA · overall 4/5
- Highland Springs Care Center — Beaumont, CA · overall 2/5
- Jurupa Hills Post Acute — Riverside, CA · overall 2/5
- Meadowbrook Post Acute — Hemet, CA · overall 2/5
- Menifee Lakes Post Acute — Sun City, CA · overall 3/5
- Monterey Palms Health Care Center — Palm Desert, CA · overall 3/5
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 056162.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).