How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Grand Terrace Health Care Center
12000 Mount Vernon Ave, Grand Terrace, CA 92313 (opens Google Maps) · San Bernardino County · (909) 825-5221· 59 certified beds · avg 52 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1973 · 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: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 5, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.96
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: ★★★★★5/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 27 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 provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. F-0755
The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. F-0911
View all 27 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 5, 2026 | 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 5, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. · F-0911 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · F-0636 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | 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 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0757 |
| Nov 22, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. · F-0911 |
| Oct 14, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Apr 7, 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 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 |
| Apr 7, 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. · F-0690 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or obtain laboratory tests when a doctor ordered them, or did not promptly report the results back to the doctor who ordered them. · F-0773 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms holding more people than allowed — no more than 4 residents per room, and no more than 2 per room in buildings constructed after November 28, 2016. · F-0911 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 3).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 3
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 14 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 10 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 3 | 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.
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: 3.96
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.40
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.52
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) | 3.96 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 38% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.40 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 33% in California; bottom 22% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.52 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 32% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.31 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 38% in California; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 32.4 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 38% in California; top 19% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 28.6 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 33% in California; top 26% 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 4.69, RN 0.48, weekend 4.16.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.69 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Grand Terrace Health Care Center. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/08/2022 |
| Fitch, Craig | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/08/2022 |
| Haroldsen, Brian | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Sato, Ami | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/09/2024 |
| Scott, Matthew | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Sharobiem, Andro | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/02/2024 |
| The Ensign Group INC | Organization | Limited Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
| Willits, Adam | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
All 8 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain The Ensign Group — 342 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.
- Grossmont Post Acute Care — La Mesa, CA · overall 4/5
- Lake Balboa Care Center — Van Nuys, CA · overall 4/5
- Lemon Grove Care and Rehabilitation Center — Lemon Grove, CA · overall 3/5
- Lomita Post-Acute Care Center — Lomita, CA · overall 3/5
- Madera Post Acute Center — El Monte, CA · overall 1/5
- Magnolia Post Acute Care — El Cajon, CA · overall 3/5abuse
- Mainplace Post Acute — Orange, CA · overall 2/5
- Mission Care Center — Rosemead, CA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 341 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.
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "How many residents share each room, and what options are there for more privacy?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How soon after admission is a full assessment completed, and how are the findings shared with the family?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
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 32% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 65 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meadows Ridge Care Center | 1.0 mi | Colton, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| The Canyons Post-Acute | 1.3 mi | Colton, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Heritage Gardens Health Care Center | 3.5 mi | Loma Linda, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Loma Linda Post Acute | 3.6 mi | Loma Linda, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Rialto Post Acute Center | 4.3 mi | Rialto, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Asistencia Villa Healthcare Center | 4.7 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Totally Kids Rehabilitation Hospital - D/P SNF | 4.7 mi | Loma Linda, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Grove Care and Wellness | 4.9 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Brookside Healthcare Center | 5.8 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Riverside Behavioral Healthcare Center | 6.1 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Community Convalescent Center of San Bernardino | 6.1 mi | San Bernardino, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Community Hospital of San Bernardino DP SNF | 6.1 mi | San Bernardino, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
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.
- Haven Post Acute — San Bernardino, CA · overall 4/5
- Heritage Park Nursing Center — Upland, CA · overall 5/5
- Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF — Joshua Tree, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- Highland Care Center of Redlands — Redlands, CA · overall 3/5
- Highland Palms Healthcare Center — Highland, CA · overall 4/5
- Hillcrest Nursing Home — San Bernardino, CA · overall 5/5
- Indian Canyon Post Acute — Yucca Valley, CA · overall 4/5
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 055129.