How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
The Bradley Gardens
980 West Seventh Street, San Jacinto, CA 92582 (opens Google Maps) · Riverside County · (951) 654-9347· 44 certified beds · avg 43 residents/day · certified since May 29, 1968 · 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: GENERATIONS HEALTHCARE (27 facilities, chain avg rating 4.1★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 21, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.88
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: ★★★☆☆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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 48 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. F-0814
The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. F-0756
View all 48 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 21, 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 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605 |
| Aug 21, 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 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 21, 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 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 2, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0609 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint · F-0623 |
| Aug 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly. · from a complaint · F-0624 |
| Mar 29, 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 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0803 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 29, 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 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | 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 29, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0758 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Mar 29, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 29, 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 |
| Mar 11, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0806 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0803 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0580 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Aug 12, 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 |
| Aug 12, 2021 | 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 (15 → 11).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 19
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 12
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 17 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 19 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 12 | 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: 5.88
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.56
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.61
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) | 5.88 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 5% in California; top 5% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.56 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 38% in California; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.61 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 4% in California; top 3% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.28 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 29% in California; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 36.7 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 38.1 | 42.9 | — |
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 4.13, RN 0.39, weekend 3.94.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.13 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Bradley Gardens. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahmed, Neija | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/27/2024 |
| Calvani, Lauren | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Calvani, Lauren | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2025 |
| Life Generations Healthcare, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Life Generations Healthcare, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Mastrocola, Lois | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/31/2024 |
| Olds, Thomas | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Olds, Thomas | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/04/2026 |
| Olds, Thomas | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/31/2024 |
| San Jacinto Real Estate LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/31/2024 |
| Sandhu, Rajwant | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Smith, Fred | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/31/2024 |
| Wylie, Edward | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/29/2024 |
All 15 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 Generations Healthcare — 27 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.
- Vista Manor Nursing Center — San Jose, CA · overall 5/5
- Walnut Creek Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Cent — Walnut Creek, CA · overall 2/5
- Coronado Ridge Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Ce — Henderson, NV · overall 4/5
- Anberry Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Atwater, CA · overall 5/5
- Arbor Hills Nursing Center — La Mesa, CA · overall 5/5
- Bayberry Skilled Nursing & Healthcare Center — Concord, CA · overall 4/5
- Bradley Court — El Cajon, CA · overall 5/5
- Canyon Oaks Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Canoga Park, CA · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 26 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 did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can I see where garbage is stored and how often it's removed?"
- "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
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?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 15 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 21 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hemet Valley Healthcare Center | 2.2 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Devonshire Care Center | 2.3 mi | Hemet, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| San Jacinto Valley Post Acute | 2.3 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Village Healthcare Center | 2.8 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Ramona Rehabilitation and Post Acute Care Center | 3.3 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Meadowbrook Post Acute | 3.3 mi | Hemet, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hemet Hills Post Acute | 3.6 mi | Hemet, CA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Vista Real Post Acute | 10.7 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sundance Creek Post Acute | 10.8 mi | Banning, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sunrise Post Acute | 11.3 mi | Banning, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Highland Springs Care Center | 11.6 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Menifee Lakes Post Acute | 12.7 mi | Sun City, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
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.
- The Grove Care and Wellness — Riverside, CA · overall 5/5
- The Springs Health and Rehabilitation Center — Murrieta, CA · overall 4/5
- The Springs Healthcare Center at the Carlotta — Palm Desert, CA · overall 5/5
- Valencia Gardens Health Care Center — Riverside, CA · overall 5/5
- Villa Health Care Center — Riverside, CA · overall 5/5
- Vista Pacifica Center — Jurupa Valley, CA · overall 4/5
- Vista Pacifica Convalescent Hospital — Jurupa 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 055598.