Oakmont Of Valencia · License #197610183 · 24070 Copper Hill Drive, Valencia, CA · (661) 568-6080 Record printed from covelightcare.com — data as of the dates shown on each item.
Oakmont Of Valencia is a residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Valencia, Los Angeles County, California — state license #197610183, licensed for 144 residents, listed as licensed in the CDSS record we retrieved August 2, 2026. It does not appear on the DHCS Assisted Living Waiver participant list checked August 9, 2026 — that list covers the state waiver only, not a home's own payment arrangements. California has 56 dated inspection and complaint documents on file for this home going back to 2021, the most recent dated June 30, 2026 — published below in full, verbatim and unscored.
Many small homes have no website — that says nothing about the care inside.
Contact facts come from the state roster, a county Area Agency on Aging roster, the home’s Google listing, or the operator — each labelled, never blended. Operators: add or correct yours, free →
✓Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryApproved for 144 residents
✓Dementia / memory careVerified in record
✓Hospice careApproved for 15 residents
✓Bedridden careApproved for 8 residents
“Not on file” is not a no — approvals can be bed- or room-specific, so confirm current scope with the home on a tour. Where a number is shown it is the state’s own wording for how many residents the approval covers, not how many places are open today; where none is shown, the record simply does not state one.
Specific medical needs — insulin, oxygen, a catheter, an ostomy — aren’t in the state license record; ask the home directly. A feeding tube, tracheostomy, or advanced wound care usually needs skilled nursing →
AGE RANGE 60 AND OVER. 144 NON-AMBULATORY, OF WHICH 8 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 15.State service designations940 - ADULTS · 983 - RCFE / DEMENTIAthe CDSS license record, verbatim · checked August 2, 2026
“RCFE / Dementia” is the state’s designation for a home with an approved Dementia Care Plan of Operation — it’s recorded separately from the comments above, which is why the memory-care approval may not appear in that text.
Since 2021, the state has visited this home 69 times and filed 56 documents. The most recent is a facility evaluation report, dated June 30, 2026.
Most recent state visit
July 13, 2026
Occupancy at the June 15, 2023 visit
97 of 144 beds
The state's published file for this home includes 25 documents with transcribed findings, dated November 3, 2021 to June 15, 2023. 25 of the 25 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (10), “Unsubstantiated” (15). 25 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word.
Summary composed by computer from the 25 documents below — every count derives from them, and the documents themselves are the state's records, verbatim. We never grade, score, or color a record.
What the state’s words mean
Substantiatedthe state found the allegation more likely true than notUnsubstantiatedinvestigated, but couldn’t be confirmed either way — not a finding of wrongdoingUnfoundedthe state concluded it was false or couldn’t have happenedType A citationthe most serious: an immediate health-or-safety risk, usually fixed on the spot or on a short deadlineType B citationless serious, with a deadline to fix
Jun 30, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Jun 11, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Jun 11, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
May 5, 2026Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
May 5, 2026Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Apr 28, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Apr 9, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
202512 state visits · 12 documents
Oct 2, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Sep 23, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Sep 16, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Jul 31, 2025Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Jun 19, 2025Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
May 15, 2025Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
May 8, 2025Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Apr 17, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Apr 8, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Mar 27, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Mar 10, 2025Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Feb 6, 2025Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
20247 state visits · 8 documents
Dec 2, 2024Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Oct 30, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Oct 30, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Aug 28, 2024Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Jun 24, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Apr 30, 2024Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Mar 20, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Mar 18, 2024Complaint investigation reportReport on file
Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.
Beside homes the same size
Type A citations15typical 1
Type B citations9typical 1
Substantiated complaints22typical 2
Total complaints32typical 7
State visits on file69typical 19
“Typical” is the statewide median across the 1,244 licensed larger communities (16+ beds) in the state record — larger, longer-licensed homes accumulate more visits and reports, so compare like with like. One complaint can contain several allegations. Counts cover this license since 2021.
An “unsubstantiated” complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing — it means the state investigated and could not confirm the allegation. Outcome words are the state’s own; we never grade, score, or color a record.Operate this home? Respond to or correct any document here, free. Respond or correct →
our estimate — Los Angeles County band, market research June 2026; not this home’s quoted price
$3,500 · statewide low$9,000 · statewide high
California’s public record holds no per-home price, so we never invent one. Ask the home for its rate sheet, or
Ways families pay here
Private pay — ask what the base rate includes and what’s billed separately.SSI/SSP — California’s board-and-care payment standard is $1,626.07/mo(2026): $1,444.07 to the home, $182 stays with the resident.Medi-Cal ALW — this home isn’t on the DHCS waiver list (checked August 9, 2026). Details →
Free for families · We never sell your information · Homes never pay to appear, and rankings are never affected by fees.
No Google listing is on file for this home. When one exists, its rating, review themes, and hours appear here — attributed to Google, never blended with the state record, and never part of how we rank homes.
This home hasn’t added its own details yet. When the operator claims this page, their photos, tour video, activities, languages, and staffing answers appear here — always labeled as theirs, never blended with the state record. Operators: claim your home, free →
What dementia training does staff have, and is the area secured?
Non-ambulatory approval — whole home or specific rooms, and is a spot open?
How is medication handled and logged day to day?
What’s in the base monthly rate, and what’s billed separately?
Staff-to-resident ratio on day and night shifts?
How are medical emergencies handled after hours?
The first two come straight from this home’s record — a brochure won’t answer them.
Yes — Oakmont Of Valencia is a licensed residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Valencia (Los Angeles County): California license #197610183, shown as licensed in the CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026, licensed for 144 residents. State records list 56 inspection and complaint documents since 2021; the most recent, a facility evaluation report dated June 30, 2026, appears in the inspection record on this page.
Can Oakmont Of Valencia care for dementia, hospice, bedridden, or non-ambulatory residents?
From the CDSS license record, checked August 2, 2026.
The CDSS license record checked August 2, 2026 lists Oakmont Of Valencia with clearances for wheelchair / non-ambulatory, dementia / memory care, hospice care, and bedridden. Clearances describe what the license permits, not day-to-day staffing — confirm current scope and availability with the home directly on a tour.
From the California state record. Some approvals are bed- or room-specific — always confirm current scope with the facility.
What the state record says, word for word
Verbatim, from the CDSS license recordAGE RANGE 60 AND OVER. 144 NON-AMBULATORY, OF WHICH 8 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 15.
How much does Oakmont Of Valencia cost?
California's public licensing record does not include Oakmont Of Valencia's monthly price, so we never show or estimate one for a specific home. As county-level context only, assisted living in Los Angeles County typically runs $5,000–$7,500/mo and small board-and-care homes $4,000–$6,500/mo (market research compiled June 2026 — ranges, not quotes; California's 2026 SSI/SSP board-and-care payment standard is $1,626.07/month, of which $1,444.07 is the room-and-board portion paid to the home). Ask the home for its own rate sheet and what the base rate includes — or use the cost section at the top of this page.
Does Oakmont Of Valencia accept Medi-Cal or the Assisted Living Waiver?
Oakmont Of Valencia is not in the DHCS Assisted Living Waiver participant record we checked August 9, 2026 — that list covers only the state's ALW program, not a home's own payment policies, so ask the home directly about private Medi-Cal arrangements. The waiver pays for assisted-living care services (not room and board) at participating homes; every DHCS-listed home appears on our statewide Medi-Cal page.
97 of 144 beds occupied (67%) when the state visited on June 15, 2023. Availability changes constantly — confirm a current opening with the home.
What do state inspections show for Oakmont Of Valencia?
Verbatim from CDSS complaint-investigation reports — the state's own words, never summarized by us. Record checked August 2, 2026.
The CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026 lists 69 state visits and 56 dated documents since 2021 for Oakmont Of Valencia; 25 complaint-investigation narratives are transcribed verbatim below. The most recent, dated June 15, 2023, records an allegation the state marked “Substantiated”. Open any entry to read the state's full finding, word for word.
Most licensed homes receive some findings over 36 months; what matters is what was found and whether it was corrected. Counts here are shown compared with homes of similar size, and the state's own words appear in full below.
Allegation the state reviewedResident choked another resident in care.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
This is an Amendment to the original report, issued on 06/15/23, to correct the section number indicated in the deficiency box and update the typographical error made under the section number 87411(a)(2). On 6/15/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Melissa Ruiz arrived at the facility to conduct an initial complaint investigation. Upon arrival, LPA was greeted by staff and the Executive Director, Myla Belson. An entrance interview was conducted, and the purpose of the visit was explained. Allegation: Resident choked another resident in care. It is alleged that on 6/6/23, resident #1 (R1) was sent to the emergency department at the hospital, because R1 was choked by another resident (R2). To investigate this allegation, LPA conducted an interview with the Executive Director at 10:30 a.m. and the Executive Director confirmed that on 6/6/23, there was an Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, June 15, 2023 · control 31-AS-20230608081726
Allegation the state reviewedResident died due to staff administering the wrong medication
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced subsequent visit to this facility to deliver the final report. LPA met with Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. On 11/10/2022, the Woodland Hills South Adult and Senior Care Regional Office received a complaint regarding the allegation, “Resident died due to staff administering the wrong medication.” The complaint was referred to Community Care Licensing Division’s Investigations Branch. The complaint was assigned to investigator Christine Ferris. On 11/14/22 LPA Panushkina initiated the complaint. LPA conducted tour of the facility and obtained copies of pertinent information which include but not limited to physician’s report 09/24/2019, progress notes, Medications Administration Record (MAR) for October 2022. Medications Management -General Policy related to the complaint. Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, March 29, 2023 · control 31-AS-20221110135757
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained an unexplained injury in care. Resident sustained multiple falls due to lack of supervision. Facility is not meeting resident's nighttime supervision needs.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
An unannounced subsequent complaint visit was conducted on this day by licensing program analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina to issue the findings of the above listed allegation. LPA met with the Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. On 10/06/2022, the Woodland Hills South Adult and Senior Care Regional Office received a complaint regarding the allegations: "Resident sustained an unexplained injury in care." "Resident sustained multiple falls due to lack of supervision." "Facility is not meeting resident's nighttime supervision needs." On 10/07/22 an initial visit was conducted by LPA Panushkina. On that day LPA conducted tour of the facility, interviewed with facility staff and obtained copies of pertinent information related to the allegation. This complaint investigation was conducted by Laarni Santiago, Investigator from Community Care Licensing Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, March 29, 2023 · control 31-AS-20221006103434
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained multiple falls while in care
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
An unannounced subsequent complaint visit was conducted on this day by licensing program analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina to issue the findings of the above listed allegation. LPA met with the Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. On 11/22/22 LPAs Panushkina and Cava conducted an initial visit and during that visit LPAs interviewed with the Regional Operations Specialist, five (5) out of five (5) staff members, three (3) MedTechs, Chef, one (1) cook, ten (10) out of ten (10) residents and reviewed facility records from 12:00pm to 4:00pm. LPAs also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. A similar complaint (#31-AS-20221006103434), regarding the same Resident #1 (R1), was received by the Regional Office (RO) on 10/06/22 and referred to Community Care Licensing Division’s Investigations Branch (IB) on 10/07/22. Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, March 29, 2023 · control 31-AS-20221118155410
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff are not providing resident with their records
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Tuesday Cabiness met with Executive Director (ED) Myla Belson and informed her the reason of the visit. On March 01, 2023, LPA contacted the complainant pertaining to the allegation mentioned above. It was revealed to LPA, that the records requested were no longer needed, and to retract the complaint. During today's visit, LPA interviewed the ED, who reported, that the records being requested were from an attorney's office, and there protocols and procedures, that if any attorney office requests, must be handled by the facility's corporate legal team, and they would communicate to the party that is requesting the documents. ED informed LPA, that she received an email from the attorney's office, that the documents requested are no longer needed. Therefore, based on interviews and documentation, the allegation is Unsubstantiated at this time. Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, March 3, 2023 · control 31-AS-20230227163839
Allegation the state reviewedStaff are not assisting resident in a timely manner Staff do not answer the phone when residents call for assistance
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At approximately, 10:00am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Angela Panushkina arrived to Oakmont of Valencia in response to the above mentioned allegations. LPA met with the Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. LPA conducted a physical plant walk through, at approximately 10:45am, to ensure that the facility is in compliance with rules and regulations under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6. LPA did not observe any immediate health and safety issues during the visit. LPA conducted interview with the Executive Director, four (4) staff members, one (1) MedTech, eight (8) out of thirteen (13) residents between 10:15am to 1:30pm and reviewed facility records from 1:35pm to 2:00pm. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, January 6, 2023 · control 31-AS-20221230145902
Allegation the state reviewedStaff are not meeting resident's showering needs.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At 10:00am, Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Angela Pnaushkina conducted an unannounced complaint visit to investigate the above noted allegation. LPA met with the Executive Director and discussed the reason for the visit. LPA conducted a physical plant walk though and interviewed the Executive Director, Resident Care Coordinator, two (2) staff members, two (2) MedTechs and five (5) residents. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. --- Staff are not meeting resident's showering needs. It was alleged that R1 did not shower for weeks. To investigate this allegation, LPA conducted a physical inspection of randomly selected rooms and interviewed staff between 10:30am-1:15pm. LPA observation, Continue on 9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, December 14, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221208085425
Allegation the state reviewedFacility does not have adequate staffing Staff administered medications to residents without physician's orders Resident sustained an injury from being over medicated
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At approximately, 9:00am Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs), Angela Panushkina and Michael Cava arrived to Oakmont of Valencia in response to the above mentioned allegations. LPAs met with the Regional Operations Specialist and explained the reason for the visit. LPAs conducted a physical plant walk through, at approximately 10:30am, to ensure that the facility is in compliance with rules and regulations under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6. LPAs did not observe any immediate health and safety issues during the visit. LPAs conducted interview with the Regional Operations Specialist, five (5) out of five (5) staff members, three (3) MedTechs, Chef, one (1) cook, ten (10) out of ten (10) residents and reviewed facility records from 12:00pm to 4:00pm. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, November 22, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221118155410
Allegation the state reviewedStaff do not assist residents with incontinence needs Staff are not following resident admission agreement Staff not trained before caring for residents Staff do not ensure resident is wearing hearing aide support Staff are not showering residents Staff are feeding residents meals late Facility does not have a full time employee for food service Facility is not following menu plan Facility does not purchase enough food
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At approximately, 9:00am Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs), Angela Panushkina and Michael Cava arrived to Oakmont of Valencia in response to the above mentioned allegations. LPAs met with the Regional Operations Specialist and explained the reason for the visit. LPAs conducted a physical plant walk through, at approximately 10:30am, to ensure that the facility is in compliance with rules and regulations under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6. LPAs did not observe any immediate health and safety issues during the visit. LPAs conducted interview with the Regional Operations Specialist, five (5) out of five (5) staff members, three (3) MedTechs, Chef, one (1) cook, ten (10) out of ten (10) residents and reviewed facility records from 12:00pm to 4:00pm. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, November 22, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221118124324
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained severe fracture while in care
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
An unannounced subsequent complaint visit was conducted on this day by licensing program analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina to issue the findings of the above listed allegation. On 06/28/22, the Woodland Hills South Adult and Senior Care Regional Office received a complaint regarding the allegation: Resident sustained severe fracture while in care. On 06/29/22 an initial visit was conducted by LPA W. Smith. On that day LPA Smith conducted tour of the facility, interviewed with facility staff and obtained copies of pertinent information related to the allegation. This complaint investigation was conducted by Dennis Sang, Investigator from Community Care Licensing Division’s Investigations Branch (IB). The investigation consisted of interviews with R1’s family member, facility staff, facility Administrator, facility former residents and R1’s Medical Records. Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, November 15, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220628085847
Allegation the state reviewedLack of supervision resulted in resident getting assaulted by another resident while in care.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
At approximately 9:00am, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina arrived at Oakmont of Valencia in response to the above mentioned allegation. LPA met with the Regional Operations Specialist and explained the reason for the visit. At 10:30am, LPA conducted a physical plant tour of the facility including the Memory Care Unit. LPA interviewed the Regional Operations Specialitst, Memory Care Director, five (5) out of five (5) staff members, one (1) MedTech and five (5) residents between 10:45am to 3:00pm. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. Allegation: Lack of supervision resulted in resident getting assaulted by another resident while in care. Interviews with five (5) out of five (5) staff members revealed that R1 became more aggressive about one (1) month ago. LPA was informed that R1 wanders around the facility and tries to enter random rooms Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, November 15, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221110143440
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained injuries from falls while in care
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At 10:10am, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina made an unannounced subsequent visit to finish investigation into the allegation above. LPA met with an Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. LPA made the initial complaint visit on 10/22/22 and conducted interviews with Memory Care Director, five (5) out of five (5) staff, one (MedTech) and reviewed facility records. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. During today’s visit, LPA interviewed Executive Director. Regarding the allegation that Resident sustained injuries from falls while in care, it was alleged that on 10/18/22, at 1:30pm, R1 was left in a Memory Care Unit (TV room) and sustained more injuries due to fall. Review of Unusual Incident/Injury Report (incident occurred at 1:15pm) submitted by the facility on 10/18/22 indicated that R1 had an unwitnessed fall and no injuries were noted. Second (unwitnessed) incident that Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstanti— CDSS inspection report, October 26, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221019110538
Allegation the state reviewedStaff are inappropriately administering medication to resident
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced complaint visit to this facility to investigate the above allegation. LPA met with the Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA conducted physical plant tour at 11:00 AM, requested facility records relevant to the investigation at 11:20 AM and conducted interviews with staff between 11:00 AM to 12:30 PM. To investigate this allegation: Staff are inappropriately administering medication to resident, LPA conducted interviews with Executive Director and three (3) out of five (5) MedTechs. Interview with an Executive Director revealed that MedTech’s are the only authorized people to dispense and administer medications. Interviews with three (3) out out of five (5) MedTechs revealed that every time they receive a new medication it has to be recorded in Centrally Stored Medications and Destruction Record (CSMDR). LPA was also informed by all Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, October 26, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221024135652
Allegation the state reviewedStaff are retaliating against resident.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced complaint visit to this facility to investigate the above allegation. LPA met with the Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA conducted physical plant tour at 11:00 AM, requested facility records relevant to the investigation at 11:20 AM and conducted interview with staff between 11:00 AM to 12:30 PM. To investigate this allegation: Staff are retaliating against resident, LPA interviewed with an Executive Director at around 11:00am and was informed that the facility did not issue an Eviction Letter nor retaliated against the resident. Interview also revealed that R1’s needs and level of service have changed and the facility was responsible to bring it up to residents/familys attention. In addition, during the random visits conducted by LPA Panushkina on 10/07/22 and 10/22/22, LPA attempted to interview Resident #1 (R1) but was unable due Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, October 26, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221024094536
Allegation the state reviewedFacility is malodorous
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
This is an amended report which excludes confidential names of residents and staff. Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced complaint visit to this facility to investigate the above allegations. LPA met with Memory Care Director and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA conducted physical plant tour at 10:00 AM, requested facility records relevant to the investigation at 11:00 AM and conducted interview with staff and residents between 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM. To investigate this allegation: Facility is malodorous, LPA conducted interviews with Memory Care Director, five (5) out of five (5) staff and one (MedTech). Interviews revealed that the facility had not have recent sewer issues and no one smelled nor received any complaints regarding a bad smell. During today’s visit LPA did not observe any bad smell at the facility. Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, October 22, 2022 · control 31-AS-20221019110538
Allegation the state reviewedFacility not following Covid-19 protocol
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At 10:00am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced complaint visit to investigate the allegations above. LPA met with an Executive Director and explained a reason for the visit. Upon arrival, LPA observed all facility staff members and some of the residents wearing masks. LPA conducted a physical plant tour of the facility, to ensure no immediate health and safety issues were present. Interview with the Executive Director confirmed that on 09/19/22 an unannounced visit was made by a credible witness and the facility was no longer taking the temperatures of visitors to the facility as part of the facility's routine COVID screening. Executive Director informed LPA that the facility was following a new Provider Continue on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, September 28, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220927140356
Allegation the state reviewedResidents pull cords are in disrepair Staff do not respond to residents call buttons timely
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to deliver the finings for the above stated allegations. LPA met with Executive Director, Cyntia Drachenberg, and explained the reason for the visit. Entrance interview conducted. During the initial 10-day complaint visit conducted on 07/27/22, LPA Panushkina interviewed Executive Director, Activity Coordinator, MedTech, 4 out of 4 staff, 10 out of 10 residents and reviewed facility records. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. Also, during the initial visit, while interviewing a sample of 10 residents, LPA randomly tested resident’s pendant and emergency pull cords in the bathrooms. Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, September 28, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220721103906
Allegation the state reviewedStaff dispensed wrong medications not prescribed to resident Staff falsified resident medication logs
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At 10:00am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to deliver the finings for the above stated allegations. LPA met with the Administrator and explained the reason for the visit. During the visit made on 09/14/22, LPA Panushkina spoke with the Administrator and three (3) out of three (3) MedTech’s. LPA also reviewed the facility Centrally Stored Medication and Destruction Records (CSMDR) of random residents receiving medication assistance by the facility staff. Upon review of the medications LPA observed that three (3) out of three (3) randomly chosen prescribed medications were centrally stored by the facility. LPA also observed that each resident has an individual, labeled basket for their medications. Interviews with three (3) MedTech’s revealed that they dispense medications for one resident at a time. All MedTech’s informed LPA that once resident takes the medication, MedTech initials the Medication Administration Recor— CDSS inspection report, September 28, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220805133307
Allegation the state reviewedResident's room has fecal smears. Resident's 240 room is odoriferous.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At 9:00am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to deliver the finings for the above stated allegations. LPA met with the Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. LPA conducted physical plant tour around 9:20am and requested facility documents relevant to the investigation. LPA interviewed staff between 10:30am – 1:00pm and reviewed facility records 1:00pm to 2:30pm. LPA also visited rooms for five randomly chosen residents in a Memory Care Unit. During LPA’s tour, the facility and randomly chosen 5 resident’s room appeared clean and smelled fresh. Interviews with four (4) staff members revealed that the facility housekeeper is scheduled to clean four to five rooms per day, including the hallway, on Monday and Saturday from (6:00am-3:00pm). All staff members informed LPA that cleaning is done - daily and they had not received any complaint regarding the above mentioned allegations. Continue on LIC9099-C U— CDSS inspection report, September 17, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220103144127
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not prevent a resident from physically abusing another residents
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At 10:35am, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina made an unannounced subsequent visit to finish investigation into the allegation above. LPA met with an Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. It is alleged that Staff did not prevent a resident from physically abusing another resident. LPA made the initial complaint visit on 09/01/2022. On that day LPA conducted interviews with the Executive Director, Memory Care Director, MedTech, Activity Coordinator, Activity Assistant, 3 out of 3 staff, 2 out of 2 residents and reviewed facility records. LPA also obtained copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. During the initial visit to Oakmont of Valencia Memory Care Unit (Traditions 2), LPA was unable to identify any resident witnesses. Interviews with an Executive Director, Memory Care Director, MedTech, Activity Coordinator, Activity Assistant and three (3) staff members revealed that there was no abuse between Continue on LIC 9099-C Unsubs— CDSS inspection report, September 14, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220823163149
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not inform responsible party of an unusual incident Staff did not prevent resident from wandering away from facility
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
At 12:00pm LPA, Angela Panushkina, conducted an unannounced complaint visit to the above facility. Upon arrival, LPA was screened and asked to sign-in the visitors’ log. LPA met with the Executive Director, Cyntia Drachenberg and explained the reason for the visit. In conjunction with a Complaint visit made on 09/01/2022, LPA conducted a physical plant tour of the entire facility including the Memory Care Unit. During that time LPA tested five (5) out of five (5) facility egress system in a Memory Units. LPA observed the egress system to be properly working and fully operational. During the initial 10-day visit, made by LPA Avetisyan, on 08/10/22 interview with an Executive Director revealed that on 08/04/2022, at approximately, 4:05pm R1 eloped from the Memory Care Unit (Traditions 2) and was found by two staff members minutes later, in the same area as community, standing by a parked car. R1 was returned safely and the assessment showed no injuries. Executive Director also confirmed— CDSS inspection report, September 14, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220805133307
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced initial 10 day complaint visitr was condcuted on this dat by licensing progra analys (LPA) Yelena Avetisyan. Upon arrival LPA met with Executive Director, Cyntia Drachenberg and explained the reason for the visit. On 10/18/2021, the Woodland Hills South Adult and Senior Care Regional Office received a complaint regarding an allegation of a questionable death. It was alleged that facility Resident #1 (R1) died due to medical conditions developing from the severe facial injuries sustained at the facility. On 10/19/2021 an initial 10-day visit was conducted by LPA A. Panushkina to initiate the investigation. On that day LPA Panushkina conducted tour of the facility reviewed records and obtained copies of pertinent records. On 4/13/2022 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Yelena Avetisyan emailed subpoena for records to Tri Valley Hospice Care, Inc. Records were received on 4/22/2022. Hospice records reviewed revealed that after 10/9/2021 hospitalization R1 was discharged to Opt— CDSS inspection report, August 10, 2022 · control 31-AS-20211018141211
Allegation the state reviewedInsufficient staffing Facility failed to provide activities for the residents Facility staff failed to meet residents’ hygiene needs Facility staff failed to provide adequate food service Facility staff failed to provide a safe and comfortable environment Facility staff are not taking any precautions for COVID-19
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
At 9:15am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced complaint visit to this facility to investigate the allegations mentioned above. LPA was greeted by a staff member and screened for COVID-19. LPA was later greeted by the Executive Director, Tom Park. The purpose of this visit was explained. At 9:40am LPA requested LIC500 and room roster, weekly menue and an activity calendar. Allegation: Insufficient staffing. LPA conducted a tour and interviewed a sample of 11 residents from 10:45am to 1:00pm . During tour LPA randomly tested a resident’s pendant. LPA conducted sample interviews of (3) caregivers, Regional Memory Care Specialist, LVN, Activity Coordinator and Executive Director. Continue on LIC 9099-C Unsubstantiated— CDSS inspection report, February 2, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220124163550
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff did not give residents their medications correctly. Facility staff are not adequately trained. Facility's signage is not properly posted.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
At 4:40pm Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Panushkina conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to deliver the finings for the above stated allegations. LPA met with the Administraot, Tom Park, and explained the reason for the visit. Allegation: Facility staff did not give residents their medications correctly. On 01/11/22, LPA spoke with the Administrator and a MedTech. LPA also reviewed the facility CSMDR records of the random residents receiving medication assistance by the facility staff. Upon review of the medications LPA observed that three (3) out of three (3) randomly chosen prescribed medications were centrally stored by the facility, however, they were not properly documented on CSMDR. LPA observed R1’s two (2) medications were given as prescribed, however, both medications were not documented on CSMDR. Moreover, LPA observed R2’s prescribed blood pressure medication that was filled on 12/07/21 had only 6 tablets left in a bottle. However, CSMDR records for “D— CDSS inspection report, February 2, 2022 · control 31-AS-20220103144127
Allegation the state reviewedResident was allowed to leave the facility without staff supervision
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
At 09:40am LPA, Angela Panushkina, conducted an unannounced complaint visit to the above facility. Upon arrival, LPA was screened and asked to sign-in the visitors’ log. At approximately, 09:50am the Administrator arrived and LPA explained the reason for the visit. LPA conducted a physical plant tour of the entire facility including the Memory Care Unit. LPA tested four (4) out of four (4) facility egress system in a Memory Unit. LPA observed the egress system to be fully operational this day. LPA interviewed the Administrator, at approximately 10:20am, and the Administrator stated that on 10/20/21 R1 pushed the egress door and care staff responded within 30 seconds. However, another resident was found near the alarming door and was escorted back to his/her room. Meanwhile, R1 exited the side door Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated— CDSS inspection report, November 3, 2021 · control 31-AS-20211026133955
Transcribed from CDSS complaint-investigation reports · record checked August 2, 2026.
What the state has logged
California has logged 69 state visits for this home as of August 2, 2026. These are the home's own counts, straight from that record — shown beside the statewide median for larger communities (16+ beds), computed across all 1,244 licensed homes of that size, because larger and longer-licensed homes naturally accumulate more visits and reports. They are facts, not a grade — a citation may be minor and since corrected, and an “unsubstantiated” complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Resident reviews, the exact monthly price, and the languages staff speak aren't part of California's public licensing record, so we don't show them here. Ask the home directly — the tour questions above are a good start.
Operate this home? The record above comes from California's public licensing data. You can respond or correct it — free. Claim your home — free →