How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Mission Care Center
8487 Magnolia Avenue, Riverside, CA 92504 (opens Google Maps) · Riverside County · (951) 688-2222· 40 certified beds · avg 39 residents/day · certified since Nov 19, 1991 · 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★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 7, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
2.59
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 20 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 F-0628
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
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
View all 20 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 20, 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). · from a complaint · F-0628 |
| May 7, 2026 | 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 |
| Feb 26, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Apr 16, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint · F-0622 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
| Jan 11, 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 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | 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. · F-0908 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| Jan 11, 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 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Jan 11, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 1).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 5
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 3 | 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)
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: 2.59
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.54
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.39
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) | 2.59 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 1% in California; bottom 5% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.54 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 40% in California; bottom 44% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.39 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 1% in California; bottom 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.24 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 5% in California; top 3% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 26.1 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 20% in California; top 8% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 29.4 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 37% in California; top 28% 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 6.45, RN 1.36, weekend 5.96.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (6.45 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Mission 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 - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chambers, Thomas | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/10/2008 |
| Johnson, David | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/10/2008 |
| Marmur, Eli | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 20% | 06/10/2008 |
| Marmur, Eli | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/10/2008 |
| Casa/Sierra California Associates LP | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2025 |
| Casa/Sierra California Associates LP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/11/2025 |
| 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 | 05/22/2025 |
| Estaban, Frederick | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/28/2016 |
| Farrales, Mary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Johnson, Frank | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2021 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Kochek, Joshua | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Maheshwari, Anoop | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2012 |
| Maheshwari, Anoop | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2012 |
| Riverside Equities LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/19/2008 |
| Riverside Equities LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/19/2008 |
Showing 20 of 22 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 2 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.
- Mission Carmichael Healthcare Center — Carmichael, CA · overall 3/5
- Monterey Park Conv Hosp — Monterey Park, CA · overall 5/5
- Mountain View Post Acute — Barstow, CA · overall 5/5
- North Valley Nursing Center — Tujunga, CA · overall 1/5abuse
- Ocean View Post Acute — Escondido, CA · overall 4/5
- Pacific Post Acute — Santa Monica, CA · overall 5/5
- Paramount Convalescent Hosp. — Paramount, CA · overall 3/5
- Park Regency Care Center — La Habra, CA · overall 4/5
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 written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "Under what circumstances would you discharge or transfer a resident, and what notice and appeal rights would we have?"
- "Can I see where garbage is stored and how often it's removed?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can I see the actual room my family member would live in before we decide?"
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 26% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 22 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alta Vista Healthcare & Wellness Centre | 0.6 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Extended Care Hospital of Riverside | 0.6 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Woodcrest Post Acute & Rehabilitation | 0.6 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Villa Health Care Center | 0.7 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Citrus Grove Post Acute | 1.2 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Riverwalk Post Acute | 1.4 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Valencia Gardens Health Care Center | 2.2 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Community Care and Rehabilitation Center | 2.7 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Arlington Gardens Care Center | 2.8 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Community Care on Palm | 3.9 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Riverside Behavioral Healthcare Center | 4.0 mi | Riverside, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Riverside Postacute Care | 4.0 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.
- Monterey Palms Health Care Center — Palm Desert, CA · overall 3/5
- Murrieta Health and Rehabilitation Center — Murrieta, CA · overall 2/5
- Oak Glen Post Acute — Cherry Valley, CA · overall 3/5
- Palm Springs Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center — Palm Springs, CA · overall 4/5
- Palm Terrace Care Center — Riverside, CA · overall 4/5
- Premier Care Center for Palm Springs — Palm Springs, CA · overall 1/5
- Ramona Rehabilitation and Post Acute Care Center — Hemet, CA · overall 3/5
- Rancho Bellagio Post Acute — Moreno 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 055542.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).