Yucaipa Hills Post Acute
13542 2nd St., Yucaipa, CA 92399 · San Bernardino County · 82 certified beds · avg 79 residents/day · certified since Nov 6, 1972
Part of chain: ROCKWELL HEALTHCARE (5 facilities, chain avg rating 4.0★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5
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, one-off · Oct 18, 2024 · 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 (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: Nov 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 13, 2023 · 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: Oct 17, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (30)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2026 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Jan 8, 2026 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2026 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2026 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
| Jan 13, 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 18, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 18, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Oct 18, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 18, 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. |
| Oct 18, 2024 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 26, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 18, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 23, 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 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | ▲ 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 |
| Aug 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint |
| Feb 24, 2023 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2023 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 6).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 12 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 6 | 0 | E |
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)
2 fines totaling $31,899, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 2024 | Fine | $22,932 |
| Oct 18, 2024 | Payment Denial | 11 days from Nov 15, 2024 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | Fine | $8,967 |
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) | 4.05 | 4.31 | 3.95 | bottom 46% in California; top 37% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.28 | 0.61 | 0.69 | bottom 9% in California; bottom 8% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.74 | 3.90 | 3.50 | bottom 49% in California; top 32% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.15 | 0.51 | 0.48 | bottom 3% in California; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 44.4 | 36.7 | 45.8 | bottom 27% in California; top 49% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 1% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
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 3.86, RN 0.27, weekend 3.56. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rockwell Healthcare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 07/01/2021 |
| Hernandez, Graciela | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/24/2023 |
| Powell, Evangeline | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Powell, Evangeline | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Powell, Sawyer | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Powell, Sawyer | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
| Rockwell Healthcare LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2021 |
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 is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "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?"
- "How do you track that every resident's quarterly assessment happens on time?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creekside Post Acute | 0.2 mi | Yucaipa, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Cedar Mountain Post Acute | 2.1 mi | Yucaipa, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Oak Glen Post Acute | 4.8 mi | Cherry Valley, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| University Post Acute | 5.7 mi | Mentone, CA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Highland Springs Care Center | 5.8 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Vista Real Post Acute | 7.3 mi | Beaumont, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Highland Care Center of Redlands | 7.3 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sundance Creek Post Acute | 7.7 mi | Banning, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Plymouth Village | 7.9 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Sunrise Post Acute | 9.1 mi | Banning, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Rancho Bellagio Post Acute | 9.4 mi | Moreno Valley, CA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Redlands Comm Hosp D/P SNF | 9.4 mi | Redlands, CA | ★★★★☆ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 056365.