1618 Laurel Ave, Redlands, CA 92373 (opens Google Maps) · San Bernardino County · (909) 792-6050· 243 certified beds · avg 229 residents/day · certified since Apr 7, 1989 · 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: ★★★☆☆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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 27, 2025 · 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 (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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 27, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 42 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint F-0925
The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint F-0908
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
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 3, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925 |
| Feb 9, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · from a complaint · F-0908 |
| Sep 17, 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 |
| Sep 17, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not post the names, addresses, and phone numbers of state agencies and advocacy groups, along with a notice that residents may file complaints with the state survey agency. · F-0575 |
| Sep 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Sep 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0550 |
| Sep 17, 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 |
| Sep 17, 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 |
| Sep 17, 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 |
| Sep 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0759 |
| Sep 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 27, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Mar 19, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Aug 28, 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 27, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Jun 5, 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 25, 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 |
| Apr 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not notify the appropriate authorities when a resident with a mental disorder or intellectual disability had a significant change in condition. · F-0646 |
| Apr 25, 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 |
| Apr 25, 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 |
| Apr 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Apr 25, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 25, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · F-0710 |
| Apr 25, 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0640 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0550 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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. · F-0584 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Oct 19, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (9 → 9).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 17 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 2 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $9,110, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
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 27, 2025 | Fine | $9,110 |
| Aug 27, 2025 | Payment Denial | 3 days from Sep 27, 2025 |
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) | 3.69 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 20% in California; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.24 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 4% in California; bottom 5% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.49 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 30% in California; top 43% 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 (%) | 31.5 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 35% in California; top 17% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 52.6 | 38.1 | 42.9 | bottom 23% in California; bottom 32% 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 4.76, RN 0.31, weekend 4.50.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.76 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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Madison Grove 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laurel Avenue LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 04/05/2015 |
| Madison Creek Partners LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 04/05/2015 |
| Christensen, Covey | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/05/2015 |
| Christensen, Covey | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/05/2015 |
All 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redlands Healthcare Center | 0.1 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Redlands Comm Hosp D/P SNF | 0.1 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 | |
| Brookside Healthcare Center | 0.7 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Plymouth Village | 1.8 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Asistencia Villa Healthcare Center | 1.9 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Highland Care Center of Redlands | 2.3 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Heritage Gardens Health Care Center | 2.9 mi | Loma Linda, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Loma Linda Post Acute | 3.0 mi | Loma Linda, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Totally Kids Rehabilitation Hospital - D/P SNF | 3.2 mi | Loma Linda, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Canyons Post-Acute | 5.2 mi | Colton, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Highland Palms Healthcare Center | 5.4 mi | Highland, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| University Post Acute | 5.5 mi | Mentone, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
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 555350.
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