California ›Victorville

Spring Valley Post Acute LLC

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

14973 Hesperia Rd, Victorville, CA 92395 (opens Google Maps) · San Bernardino County · (760) 245-6477· 126 certified beds · avg 111 residents/day · certified since Feb 19, 1971 · 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★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 5, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 26, 2025
$57,810
Fines, last 3 years
5.06
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Sep 26, 2025 · F-0604 · triggered by a complaint

The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.

Why it matters: Unneeded restraints can cause injuries, muscle loss, and deep emotional distress.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Feb 4, 2022 · 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 (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Apr 5, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 31 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

View all 31 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Mar 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Mar 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Mar 5, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 26, 2025▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint · F-0604
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 21, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Nov 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607
Nov 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609
Nov 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 13, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 12, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Oct 9, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 26, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Aug 31, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 23, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint · F-0604
Feb 4, 2022▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespreadThe 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 4, 2022F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814
Feb 4, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Feb 4, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Feb 4, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 4, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 4, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 4, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
Feb 4, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 6).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2023
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022111L ▲
202340D
202480E
202521K ▲
202660D

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

11 fines totaling $57,810.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Sep 26, 2025Fine$11,940
Nov 6, 2023Fine$4,587
Oct 17, 2023Fine$4,587
Oct 10, 2023Fine$4,587
Oct 2, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 25, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 18, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 11, 2023Fine$4,587
Sep 5, 2023Fine$4,587
Aug 28, 2023Fine$4,587
Aug 21, 2023Fine$4,587

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityCalifornia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.06
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.46
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.31
California average: 3.90
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityCalifornia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.064.313.95top 14% in California; top 12% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.460.610.69bottom 47% in California; bottom 32% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.313.903.50top 20% in California; top 15% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.290.510.48bottom 30% in California; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)41.436.745.8bottom 34% in California; top 40% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)30.038.142.9top 38% in California; top 29% 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 4.66, RN 0.43, weekend 3.97.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.66 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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Spring Valley Post Acute LLC. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Chambers, ThomasIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/08/2013
Johnson, DavidIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/08/2013
Chambers, ThomasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/08/2013
Chambers, ThomasIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/08/2013
Johnson, DavidIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/08/2013
Meridian Management Services LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/20/2013
Reddy, HariIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Reddy, HariIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Soni, PreyasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/16/2023
Soni, PreyasIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/16/2023
Spring Valley Post Acute LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/20/2013
Spring Valley Post Acute LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/15/2025

All 12 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 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.

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

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "How soon after admission is a full assessment completed, and how are the findings shared with the family?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you coordinate and monitor care for residents who receive dialysis?"
  • "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 41% 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Knolls West Post Acute LLC1.7 miVictorville, CA★★★☆☆3/5
Desert Ridge Transitional Care Center, LP2.9 miVictorville, CA—/5
Apple Valley Care Center5.1 miApple Valley, CA★★★★★5/5
Mountains Community Hosp DP/SNF19.2 miLake Arrowhead, CA★★★★☆5/5

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.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Victorville →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 055076.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details