How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
The Terraces at San Joaquin Gardens Village
5551 N. Fresno St, Fresno, CA 93710 (opens Google Maps) · Fresno County · (559) 430-8202· 54 certified beds · avg 47 residents/day · certified since Nov 15, 1967 · 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: HUMANGOOD (17 facilities, chain avg rating 4.5★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 21, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent May 10, 2022
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.44
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: 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, widespread · May 10, 2022 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
▲ Actual harm, widespread · May 10, 2022 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
Severity (I): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jun 9, 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.
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 F-0658
The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. F-0921
The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. F-0655
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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 23, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 21, 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 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | 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 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · F-0790 |
| Mar 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Sep 3, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Sep 3, 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 |
| May 30, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 12, 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 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| May 10, 2022 | ▲ I · Actual harm, widespread | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| May 10, 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 |
| May 10, 2022 | 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 |
| May 10, 2022 | 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 |
| May 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| May 10, 2022 | 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 |
| May 10, 2022 | 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 |
| May 10, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its staff were vaccinated for COVID-19 in accordance with the federal requirements in effect at the time. · F-0888 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 11).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 11
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 8 | 1 | I ▲ |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 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: 5.44
California average: 4.31
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.08
California average: 0.61
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.72
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) | 5.44 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 8% in California; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.08 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 9% in California; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.72 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 10% in California; top 9% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.80 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 11% in California; top 11% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 30.3 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 30% in California; top 15% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 16.7 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 13% in California; top 9% 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 5.13, RN 1.02, weekend 4.45.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.13 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Terraces at San Joaquin Gardens Village. 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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Humangood | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 05/01/2016 |
| Humangood Fresno | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 08/01/2012 |
| Baker Tilly Advisory Group LP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/21/2025 |
| Baker Tilly Us LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/15/2024 |
| Baker, Judith | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/25/2012 |
| Battison, William | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/03/2011 |
| Brown, Herman | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2016 |
| Brown, Herman | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2016 |
| Case, Alexis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/21/2022 |
| Case, Alexis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/21/2022 |
| Chahal, Parmveer | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/04/2023 |
| Chahal, Parmveer | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/04/2023 |
| Cochrane, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/10/2009 |
| Cochrane, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/10/2009 |
| Coleman, Esmeralda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2023 |
| Coleman, Esmeralda | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2023 |
| Dowell, Robert | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/15/2024 |
| Ghassemi, Bethany | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/21/2019 |
| Ghassemi, Bethany | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/21/2019 |
| Griffith, Alan | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2019 |
Showing 20 of 41 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 21 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 Humangood — 17 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.
- The Terraces of Los Gatos — Los Gatos, CA · overall 5/5
- Valle Verde Health Facility — Santa Barbara, CA · overall 5/5
- Terraces of Boise, the — Boise, ID · overall 2/5abuse
- Las Ventanas Retirement Comm SNF — Las Vegas, NV · overall 5/5
- Village at Hillside — McMinnville, OR · overall 5/5
- Rydal Park of Philadelphia Presbytery Homes, INC — Rydal, PA · overall 4/5
- Judson Park Health Center — Des Moines, WA · overall 5/5
- Summitview Rehab and Health Center — Yakima, WA · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 16 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.
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
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 30% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 41 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 26 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Point Healthcare & Wellness Centre LP | 0.3 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Keystone Post-Acute | 2.4 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Horizon Health & Subacute Center | 2.6 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Oakwood Gardens Care Center | 2.7 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Covenant Post Acute | 2.7 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Community Subacute and Transitional Care Center | 2.8 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Willow Creek Healthcare Center | 3.3 mi | Clovis, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Morning Star Post Acute | 3.9 mi | Clovis, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Healthcare Centre of Fresno | 5.3 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Orchard Post Acute | 5.9 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Fresno Postacute Care | 6.3 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Evergreen Care Center | 6.4 mi | Fresno, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Fresno, CA — 31 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Veterans Home of California - Fresno — Fresno, CA · overall 5/5
- Vineyard Care Center — Reedley, CA · overall 4/5
- Vineyards at Fowler — Fowler, CA · overall 2/5
- Bethel Lutheran Home — Selma, CA · overall 3/5
- California Home for the Aged — Fresno, CA · overall 5/5
- Coalinga Regional Medical Ctr DP/SNF — Coalinga, CA · overall 1/5abuse
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 055846.