Meadowbrook Post Acute
461 E. Johnston Avenue, Hemet, CA 92543 · Riverside County · 64 certified beds · avg 55 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Nov 9, 2021 · F-0812
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.
Why it matters: Unsafe food handling is one of the most common causes of food poisoning, which can be dangerous for frail residents.
Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Dec 23, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Nov 9, 2021 · F-0684
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
Severity (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Dec 23, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 30, 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Jan 29, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 9, 2021 · F-0600
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.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
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: Dec 23, 2021 (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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 7, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 7, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · from a complaint |
| Apr 7, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint |
| Mar 30, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 30, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Nov 18, 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. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Nov 18, 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. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not bring in qualified outside professionals to provide a required service when it didn't have a qualified professional on staff. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2025 | 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. |
| Jul 17, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · from a complaint |
| Jun 25, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jun 25, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 6, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 6, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · from a complaint |
| Jun 6, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 27, 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 20, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jun 20, 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 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility charged residents' personal funds for items or services that Medicare or Medicaid already pays for. Facilities may not bill residents for covered items. · from a complaint |
| Mar 20, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 31, 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. · from a complaint |
| Jan 31, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jan 31, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Oct 24, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 25, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Sep 25, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Nov 9, 2021 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | D · Potential for 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. |
| Nov 9, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 11).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 14 | 3 | K ▲ |
| 2023 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 18 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 4 | 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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
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) | 4.23 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 42% in California; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.35 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 22% in California; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.75 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 50% in California; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.29 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 31% in California; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 0.0 | 36.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.39, RN 0.37, weekend 3.89. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marasigan, Mario | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 08/01/2020 |
| Marasigan, Mario | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2020 |
| Marasigan, Mario | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2020 |
| Ruiz, Miguel | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/06/2023 |
| Ruiz, Miguel | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/06/2023 |
| Yeh, Weilee | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
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 did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "How are therapy services provided here, and how quickly does therapy start after a doctor orders it?"
- "Can you show me the call buttons in the bathrooms and bathing areas, and tell me your average response time when one is pressed?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ramona Rehabilitation and Post Acute Care Center | 0.6 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Hemet Hills Post Acute | 1.2 mi | Hemet, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| San Jacinto Valley Post Acute | 1.4 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Devonshire Care Center | 1.4 mi | Hemet, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Hemet Valley Healthcare Center | 1.5 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| The Village Healthcare Center | 1.9 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Bradley Gardens | 3.3 mi | San Jacinto, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Menifee Lakes Post Acute | 12.7 mi | Sun City, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Vista Real Post Acute | 13.8 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sundance Creek Post Acute | 13.9 mi | Banning, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sunrise Post Acute | 14.2 mi | Banning, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Highland Springs Care Center | 14.8 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055401.