Oakmont Of Orange is a residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Orange, Orange County, California — state license #306005740, licensed for 155 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 27 dated inspection and complaint documents on file for this home going back to 2022, the most recent dated July 7, 2026 — published below in full, verbatim and unscored.

See an error in this summary? Report it — free →

1 home in view

Oakmont Of Orange

No photo on file yet

No photo of this home is on file — we show real, attributed images only, never a stock photo of someone else’s building.

Residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) · Large community, 155 residents · Orange, CA · Orange County
LicensedWheelchairMemory careHospiceBedridden
No openings reportedBeds change hands in days ·
License #306005740, held since 2020 · read from the California state record on August 2, 2026 ·See on State Site →
630 The City Drive South · Orange, Orange County
Phone
(714) 880-8624
from the state licensing roster · August 2, 2026
No Google listing is on file for this home.
Website
None on file
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 →
Print tour sheet →

Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryApproved for 155 residents
Dementia / memory careVerified in record
Hospice careApproved for 16 residents
Bedridden careVerified in record

“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 →

See an error in these clearances? Report it — free →

What the state record says, word for word
AGE RANGE 60 AND OVER. 155 NON-AMBULATORY, 8 OF WHOM MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. APPROVED FOR DELAYED EGRESS. 1ST FLOOR APPROVED FOR BEDRIDDEN. 1ST AND 2ND FLOORS APROVED FOR NON-AMBULATORY. HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 16.State service designation983 - 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 2022, the state has visited this home 30 times and filed 27 documents. The most recent is a complaint investigation report, dated July 7, 2026.

Most recent state visit
July 7, 2026
Occupancy at the June 4, 2026 visit
92 of 155 beds

The state's published file for this home includes 17 documents with transcribed findings, dated February 1, 2023 to June 4, 2026. 17 of the 17 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (2), “Unfounded” (1), “Unsubstantiated” (14). 17 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word.

Summary composed by computer from the 17 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
The last 36 months — 23 of 27 documentsFull record on the state’s site →
202610 state visits · 12 documents
Jul 7, 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.

Jun 17, 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 4, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility did not respond to a resident's call light in a timely manner Facility did not call medical services in a timely manner

An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Regarding allegations, Facility did not respond to a resident's call light in a timely manner and Facility did not call medical services in a timely manner, the following was revealed: It is alleged facility staff did not respond to Resident 1’s (R1’s) call light in a timely manner or call medical services for R1 in a timely manner. During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained a copy of Charting Notes for R1 signed by Staff 1 (S1) which indicated that on October 16, 2025 at 4:00 a.m., R1 had an unwitnessed fall while walking to the restroom and hit their head. Per Charting Notes, R1 pressed their bathroom alarm but cleared themselves while they kept pressing on it. Charting Notes do not specify the time lapse between R1’s fallthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 4, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260114075555
May 28, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility staff did not assist resident with incontinence care as needed. Facility staff did not assist resident with showering as needed. Facility staff handled the resident in a rough manner.

On May 28, 2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jessica Cho made an unannounced visit for the purpose of concluding the investigation into the above allegations. LPA met with Health Services Director (HSD) Angela Boyd and stated the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, the Department toured the facility, interviewed eight residents, three staff, and obtained documentation for review: Resident Rosters, Personnel Rosters, Face Sheets, Physician's Reports, Individualized Service Plans, and Resident Care Notes. The investigation is as follows: On June 25, 2024, the Department received the complaint. The investigation was initiated by LPA Jenifer Tirre on July 3, 2024. LPA Tirre toured the physical plant of the facility including resident rooms. LPA Cho continued the investigation on today's date, conducted interviews, and review of records. Regarding the allegation, Facility staff did not assist resident with incontinence care as needed, it is alleged that Residenthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 28, 2026 · control 22-AS-20240625085618
May 21, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained multiple falls while in care due to staff neglect

An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Resident 1 (R1) sustained multiple falls while in care due to staff neglect. During the course of the investigation, interviews were conducted with R1, one witness, and two staff. During their interview, R1’s responsible party, Witness 1 (W1), was unable to confirm or deny if R1 had sustained multiple falls due to staff neglect. Per W1, R1 may have sustained a fall in May 2024 and October 2024, however, stated they could not recall any of the details regarding the falls. W1 stated that per R1's Care Plan, staff should be conducting routine checks, which consist of staff checking on R1 on a regular basis and reporting back to W1 in the event of a fall. (Cont. LIC9099-C) Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 21, 2026 · control 22-AS-20241010090602
May 21, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not prevent resident from smoking in the facility

An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Staff did not prevent Resident 1 (R1) from smoking in the facility. During the course of the investigation, interviews were conducted with ten facility residents, including R1, and four staff. During their interview, R1 stated that upon their admission to the facility on March 31, 2026, they had smoked a cigarette in their bedroom on two occasions. Per R1, they were immediately informed by Staff 1 (S1) they could not smoke in their room and that a designated smoking area was available outside. R1 denied smoking inside the facility since being informed they could not smoke inside and stated they have since quit smoking. During their interview, S1 stated they had not personally witnessed R1 smoking inside, however, thethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 21, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260515103726
May 18, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained multiple falls while in care Staff neglected resident while in care

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jenifer Tirre conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on an investigation. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility by staff and explained the reason of the visit with Executive Director Dennis Robeniol During course of the investigation, the Department reviewed & obtained records including Physician’s report, fall risk evaluation assessment, Resident assessment, charting notes, hospital records and service plan. Department also interviewed staff and witness. The investigation revealed the following regarding allegations: Resident sustained multiple falls while in care and Staff neglected resident while in care: Regarding Resident sustained multiple falls while in care: Based on resident records, Resident was fully independent of mobility back on 5/29/2020 upon admission to facility. R1 had a Fall Risk Evaluation assessment back on 3/22/22 where resident scored 8 indicating high risk of falling. At the time service plan interventionthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 18, 2026 · control 22-AS-20230706083051
May 14, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility staff did not provide adequate supervision resulting in resident being injured.

An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Staff did not check on Resident 1 (R1) for approximately two hours, resulting in R1 sustaining a fall and being injured. During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained a copy of Resident Care Notes for R1 signed by Staff 1 (S1) which indicated that on June 27, 2024, R1 had been found on the floor by their bed with lacerations by their right eye and skin tear to right wrist, 911 was called, and R1 was transported to the hospital. The Care Notes, however, do not specify if there was a lapse in time between R1’s fall and R1 being found, and do not indicate the time R1 was last checked on by staff prior to being found on the floor. R1 could not be interviewed due to their passing on July 10, 2024. (Cont. LIC9099-C)the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 14, 2026 · control 22-AS-20240709164259
May 14, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not seek timely medical care for resident in care

An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Staff did not seek timely medical care for Resident 1 (R1). During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained a copy of Charting Notes indicated that on November 26, 2024 at approximately 12 p.m., R1 had reported pain to left hip and leg and was unable to bare any weight on their left leg. An ambulance was called and arrived at approximately 12:15 p.m. to transport R1 to the hospital. Interviews were conducted with one witness and eight facility residents, including R1. During their interview, R1 was unable to confirm or deny the allegation. During their interview, R1’s responsible party, Witness 1 (W1), stated that on the morning of November 26, 2024, they received a call from a staff member who informed them R1the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 14, 2026 · control 22-AS-20241126135236
Apr 22, 2026Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not follow physician's order to monitor resident's blood pressure Staff falsified resident records

An unannounced complaint investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez regarding the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and Health Services Director (HSD) Angela Boyd. Regarding the allegation, Staff did not follow physician's order to monitor resident's blood pressure, the following was revealed: It is alleged that Staff did not follow physician's order to monitor Resident 1’s (R1’s) blood pressure. An interview was conducted with R1’s responsible party, Witness 1 (W1), who stated that the facility had informed them they could not accept a verbal request to monitor R1’s blood pressure. Per W1, on January 13, 2026, they provided a printout of the physician’s order, which also had a medical stamp with R1’s care provider information, however, the facility would still not accept it and stated physician’s hand signature was required. Per W1, they were then provided with the incorrect fax number fothe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 22, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260114213328
Apr 1, 2026Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff mismanaged resident's medications. Staff did not respond to resident's call button in a timely manner.

On April 1, 2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Brandon Lopez made an unannouned visit to the facility to continue the investigation into the allegations listed above and to deliver the complaint findings. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility by staff after explaining the purpose for the visit. Health Services Director Angela Boyd was present and assisted on today's visit. During the course of the investigation, LPA conducted seven resident interviews, six staff interviews, reviewed and collected pertinent documents for this complaint. Regarding the allegation, staff mismanaged resident's medications, the following has been concluded: It was alleged that staff mismanaged Resident #1 (R1) medication on September 2023, April 2025, and August 2025. LPA reviewed the medication administration records for R1 for September 2023, April 2025, and August 2025. LPA observed that the facility did not provide R1 her presribed Vitamin D3 medication on September 13, 2023, due to thethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 1, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260122100814
Jan 16, 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.

20253 state visits · 5 documents
Nov 19, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Licensee is not ensuring that resident has the ability to make and receive confidential phone calls.

An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Anna Pastores and Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack and discussed the purpose of the inspection. Regarding the allegation, Licensee is not ensuring that resident has the ability to make and receive confidential phone calls, the following was revealed: It is alleged R1 does not have the ability to make and receive confidential phone calls. During the course of the investigation, interviews were conducted with R1, six additional facility residents, and two staff. During their interview, R1 stated they are able to make and receive and make private phone calls, however, was unable to indicate how the phone calls are made or received. During their interview, six of six additional facility residents stated they are able to make and receive private phone calls from their respective bedroom, using a landline or a personal cell phthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 19, 2025 · control 22-AS-20251114161246
Jul 30, 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 14, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Caregiver was rough with resident resulting in bruising

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cheyenne Ratajczak arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. The department conducted interviews with facility staff, resident and a facility observation was done to investigate this allegation. Interviews with staff indicated there had been no witnessed issues with staff members handling residents in a rough manner. Interviews indicated Resident #1 (R1) did bruise/discolor easily. During LPA visit on 07/14/2025 LPA observed staff to be engaging with residents and assisting residents in an appropriate manner. LPA was unable to obtain any additional information as the caregiver and resident are no longer at the facility. Based upon the information obtained during investigation, the above allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a prethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 14, 2025 · control 22-AS-20221122101417
Jul 14, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained fractures while in care due to neglect. Staff failed to seek resident medical attention in a timely manner. Insufficient staffing to meet residents' needs. Staff failed to respond to resident's call assistance button in a timely manner.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cheyenne Ratajczak arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. During the investigation, the department conducted interviews and reviewed documentation pertinent to the investigation. The results of the investigation are as follows: ***Report continued on 9099-C*** Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 14, 2025 · control 22-AS-20230130113643
Jul 14, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility staff refused to assist resident with toileting and changing

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cheyenne Ratajczak arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. The department conducted interviews with facility staff and residents. Interviews with residents revealed they feel like staff come when they call for assistance but it can take a while. Interview with staff revelaed that staff will assist in changing the resident and cleaning up the area. LPA was unable to interview involved staff as this complaint was made in March of 2023. Based upon the information obtained during investigation, the above allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted a copy of the report and appeal rights were left at the facility. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 14, 2025 · control 22-AS-20230301143239
20241 state visit · 1 document
Dec 5, 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.

20235 state visits · 5 documents
Dec 18, 2023Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident is not getting proper nutrition. Staff failed to provide care and supervision.

An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez regarding the allegations mentioned above and for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Wellness Director (WD) Alyson Caluza and explained the purpose of the inspection. Interviews were conducted with six facility staff and five residents regarding allegation resident is not getting proper nutrition. Interviews conducted with six out six staff could not corroborate this allegation, as all staff interviewed acknowledged R1 was on a special diet and reported assisting him as needed at mealtimes. Interviews conducted with five out of five residents also could not corroborate allegation. Four out of five residents reported no complaints regarding facility food or nutrition and stated they received sufficient food in quantity. One out of five residents was unable to confirm or deny allegation. Per Physician’s Fax report dated 5/04/22 facility reported to R1’s Physthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 18, 2023 · control 22-AS-20220705155653
Dec 7, 2023Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not safeguard resident's personal property. Resident sustained bruising while in care.

On this day, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kevin Saborit-Guasch made an unannounced visit to the facility for the purpose of delivering findings into the investigation of the two allegations listed above. LPA was greeted and granted entry by front desk staff after introducing himself and stating the purpose of the visit. Executive Director Anna Pastores was notified and present during the visit. The initial complaint investigation was conducted on November 6, 2023. Records for resident R1, including the admission agreement and a waiver to inventory personal property upon admission were reviewed. LPA verified the required posting of the facility's theft and loss policy and reviewed the theft and loss log maintained by facility staff at the front desk. Documentation of staff training on theft and loss was also provided. One staff interview, one witness interview and one resident interview were also conducted during the visit. CONTINUED ON LIC9099-C Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 7, 2023 · control 22-AS-20231101104331
Sep 21, 2023Facility 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 5, 2023Facility 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 24, 2023Facility 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.

Beside homes the same size
Type A citations5typical 1
Type B citations2typical 1
Substantiated complaints7typical 2
Total complaints18typical 7
State visits on file30typical 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 2020.
Year-by-year trend
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated2026101222025350202411020236702022220
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 →

See an error in these counts? Report it — free →

$5,000$7,500 /mo
our estimate — Orange 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.

Cost range look wrong? Report it — 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.

Operate this home? This page is generated from CDSS public records — respond or correct it, free.
Claim your home → · See something wrong? → · How we source every fact →
Call (714) 880-8624

Is Oakmont Of Orange licensed?

Yes — Oakmont Of Orange is a licensed residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Orange (Orange County): California license #306005740, shown as licensed in the CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026, licensed for 155 residents. State records list 27 inspection and complaint documents since 2022; the most recent, a complaint investigation report dated July 7, 2026, appears in the inspection record on this page.

Can Oakmont Of Orange 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 Orange 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.

Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryDementia / memory careHospice careBedridden

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. 155 NON-AMBULATORY, 8 OF WHOM MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. APPROVED FOR DELAYED EGRESS. 1ST FLOOR APPROVED FOR BEDRIDDEN. 1ST AND 2ND FLOORS APROVED FOR NON-AMBULATORY. HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 16.

How much does Oakmont Of Orange cost?

California's public licensing record does not include Oakmont Of Orange's monthly price, so we never show or estimate one for a specific home. As county-level context only, assisted living in Orange 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 Orange accept Medi-Cal or the Assisted Living Waiver?

Oakmont Of Orange 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.

Assisted living on Medi-Cal in California →See the DHCS list →

How full it was at the last state visit

92 of 155 beds occupied (59%) when the state visited on June 4, 2026. Availability changes constantly — confirm a current opening with the home.

What do state inspections show for Oakmont Of Orange?

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 30 state visits and 27 dated documents since 2022 for Oakmont Of Orange; 17 complaint-investigation narratives are transcribed verbatim below. The most recent, dated June 4, 2026, records an allegation the state marked “Unsubstantiated. 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.

17 transcribed reports on file

2026

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility did not respond to a resident's call light in a timely manner Facility did not call medical services in a timely manner
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Regarding allegations, Facility did not respond to a resident's call light in a timely manner and Facility did not call medical services in a timely manner, the following was revealed: It is alleged facility staff did not respond to Resident 1’s (R1’s) call light in a timely manner or call medical services for R1 in a timely manner. During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained a copy of Charting Notes for R1 signed by Staff 1 (S1) which indicated that on October 16, 2025 at 4:00 a.m., R1 had an unwitnessed fall while walking to the restroom and hit their head. Per Charting Notes, R1 pressed their bathroom alarm but cleared themselves while they kept pressing on it. Charting Notes do not specify the time lapse between R1’s fallCDSS inspection report, June 4, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260114075555
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff did not assist resident with incontinence care as needed. Facility staff did not assist resident with showering as needed. Facility staff handled the resident in a rough manner.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
On May 28, 2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jessica Cho made an unannounced visit for the purpose of concluding the investigation into the above allegations. LPA met with Health Services Director (HSD) Angela Boyd and stated the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, the Department toured the facility, interviewed eight residents, three staff, and obtained documentation for review: Resident Rosters, Personnel Rosters, Face Sheets, Physician's Reports, Individualized Service Plans, and Resident Care Notes. The investigation is as follows: On June 25, 2024, the Department received the complaint. The investigation was initiated by LPA Jenifer Tirre on July 3, 2024. LPA Tirre toured the physical plant of the facility including resident rooms. LPA Cho continued the investigation on today's date, conducted interviews, and review of records. Regarding the allegation, Facility staff did not assist resident with incontinence care as needed, it is alleged that ResidenCDSS inspection report, May 28, 2026 · control 22-AS-20240625085618
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained multiple falls while in care due to staff neglect
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Resident 1 (R1) sustained multiple falls while in care due to staff neglect. During the course of the investigation, interviews were conducted with R1, one witness, and two staff. During their interview, R1’s responsible party, Witness 1 (W1), was unable to confirm or deny if R1 had sustained multiple falls due to staff neglect. Per W1, R1 may have sustained a fall in May 2024 and October 2024, however, stated they could not recall any of the details regarding the falls. W1 stated that per R1's Care Plan, staff should be conducting routine checks, which consist of staff checking on R1 on a regular basis and reporting back to W1 in the event of a fall. (Cont. LIC9099-C) UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, May 21, 2026 · control 22-AS-20241010090602
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not prevent resident from smoking in the facility
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Staff did not prevent Resident 1 (R1) from smoking in the facility. During the course of the investigation, interviews were conducted with ten facility residents, including R1, and four staff. During their interview, R1 stated that upon their admission to the facility on March 31, 2026, they had smoked a cigarette in their bedroom on two occasions. Per R1, they were immediately informed by Staff 1 (S1) they could not smoke in their room and that a designated smoking area was available outside. R1 denied smoking inside the facility since being informed they could not smoke inside and stated they have since quit smoking. During their interview, S1 stated they had not personally witnessed R1 smoking inside, however, theCDSS inspection report, May 21, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260515103726
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained multiple falls while in care Staff neglected resident while in care
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jenifer Tirre conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on an investigation. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility by staff and explained the reason of the visit with Executive Director Dennis Robeniol During course of the investigation, the Department reviewed & obtained records including Physician’s report, fall risk evaluation assessment, Resident assessment, charting notes, hospital records and service plan. Department also interviewed staff and witness. The investigation revealed the following regarding allegations: Resident sustained multiple falls while in care and Staff neglected resident while in care: Regarding Resident sustained multiple falls while in care: Based on resident records, Resident was fully independent of mobility back on 5/29/2020 upon admission to facility. R1 had a Fall Risk Evaluation assessment back on 3/22/22 where resident scored 8 indicating high risk of falling. At the time service plan interventionCDSS inspection report, May 18, 2026 · control 22-AS-20230706083051
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff did not provide adequate supervision resulting in resident being injured.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Staff did not check on Resident 1 (R1) for approximately two hours, resulting in R1 sustaining a fall and being injured. During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained a copy of Resident Care Notes for R1 signed by Staff 1 (S1) which indicated that on June 27, 2024, R1 had been found on the floor by their bed with lacerations by their right eye and skin tear to right wrist, 911 was called, and R1 was transported to the hospital. The Care Notes, however, do not specify if there was a lapse in time between R1’s fall and R1 being found, and do not indicate the time R1 was last checked on by staff prior to being found on the floor. R1 could not be interviewed due to their passing on July 10, 2024. (Cont. LIC9099-C)CDSS inspection report, May 14, 2026 · control 22-AS-20240709164259
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not seek timely medical care for resident in care
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and explained the purpose of the inspection. Complaint alleges Staff did not seek timely medical care for Resident 1 (R1). During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained a copy of Charting Notes indicated that on November 26, 2024 at approximately 12 p.m., R1 had reported pain to left hip and leg and was unable to bare any weight on their left leg. An ambulance was called and arrived at approximately 12:15 p.m. to transport R1 to the hospital. Interviews were conducted with one witness and eight facility residents, including R1. During their interview, R1 was unable to confirm or deny the allegation. During their interview, R1’s responsible party, Witness 1 (W1), stated that on the morning of November 26, 2024, they received a call from a staff member who informed them R1CDSS inspection report, May 14, 2026 · control 22-AS-20241126135236
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not follow physician's order to monitor resident's blood pressure Staff falsified resident records
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
An unannounced complaint investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez regarding the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Dennis Robeniol and Health Services Director (HSD) Angela Boyd. Regarding the allegation, Staff did not follow physician's order to monitor resident's blood pressure, the following was revealed: It is alleged that Staff did not follow physician's order to monitor Resident 1’s (R1’s) blood pressure. An interview was conducted with R1’s responsible party, Witness 1 (W1), who stated that the facility had informed them they could not accept a verbal request to monitor R1’s blood pressure. Per W1, on January 13, 2026, they provided a printout of the physician’s order, which also had a medical stamp with R1’s care provider information, however, the facility would still not accept it and stated physician’s hand signature was required. Per W1, they were then provided with the incorrect fax number foCDSS inspection report, April 22, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260114213328
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff mismanaged resident's medications. Staff did not respond to resident's call button in a timely manner.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
On April 1, 2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Brandon Lopez made an unannouned visit to the facility to continue the investigation into the allegations listed above and to deliver the complaint findings. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility by staff after explaining the purpose for the visit. Health Services Director Angela Boyd was present and assisted on today's visit. During the course of the investigation, LPA conducted seven resident interviews, six staff interviews, reviewed and collected pertinent documents for this complaint. Regarding the allegation, staff mismanaged resident's medications, the following has been concluded: It was alleged that staff mismanaged Resident #1 (R1) medication on September 2023, April 2025, and August 2025. LPA reviewed the medication administration records for R1 for September 2023, April 2025, and August 2025. LPA observed that the facility did not provide R1 her presribed Vitamin D3 medication on September 13, 2023, due to theCDSS inspection report, April 1, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260122100814

2025

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedLicensee is not ensuring that resident has the ability to make and receive confidential phone calls.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Anna Pastores and Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack and discussed the purpose of the inspection. Regarding the allegation, Licensee is not ensuring that resident has the ability to make and receive confidential phone calls, the following was revealed: It is alleged R1 does not have the ability to make and receive confidential phone calls. During the course of the investigation, interviews were conducted with R1, six additional facility residents, and two staff. During their interview, R1 stated they are able to make and receive and make private phone calls, however, was unable to indicate how the phone calls are made or received. During their interview, six of six additional facility residents stated they are able to make and receive private phone calls from their respective bedroom, using a landline or a personal cell phCDSS inspection report, November 19, 2025 · control 22-AS-20251114161246
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedCaregiver was rough with resident resulting in bruising
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cheyenne Ratajczak arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. The department conducted interviews with facility staff, resident and a facility observation was done to investigate this allegation. Interviews with staff indicated there had been no witnessed issues with staff members handling residents in a rough manner. Interviews indicated Resident #1 (R1) did bruise/discolor easily. During LPA visit on 07/14/2025 LPA observed staff to be engaging with residents and assisting residents in an appropriate manner. LPA was unable to obtain any additional information as the caregiver and resident are no longer at the facility. Based upon the information obtained during investigation, the above allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preCDSS inspection report, July 14, 2025 · control 22-AS-20221122101417
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained fractures while in care due to neglect. Staff failed to seek resident medical attention in a timely manner. Insufficient staffing to meet residents' needs. Staff failed to respond to resident's call assistance button in a timely manner.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cheyenne Ratajczak arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. During the investigation, the department conducted interviews and reviewed documentation pertinent to the investigation. The results of the investigation are as follows: ***Report continued on 9099-C*** UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, July 14, 2025 · control 22-AS-20230130113643
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff refused to assist resident with toileting and changing
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cheyenne Ratajczak arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Health Services Director (HSD) Alyson Womack to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. The department conducted interviews with facility staff and residents. Interviews with residents revealed they feel like staff come when they call for assistance but it can take a while. Interview with staff revelaed that staff will assist in changing the resident and cleaning up the area. LPA was unable to interview involved staff as this complaint was made in March of 2023. Based upon the information obtained during investigation, the above allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted a copy of the report and appeal rights were left at the facility. UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, July 14, 2025 · control 22-AS-20230301143239

2023

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedResident is not getting proper nutrition. Staff failed to provide care and supervision.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
An unannounced Complaint Investigation was conducted on this day by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez regarding the allegations mentioned above and for the purpose of delivering findings. LPA met with Wellness Director (WD) Alyson Caluza and explained the purpose of the inspection. Interviews were conducted with six facility staff and five residents regarding allegation resident is not getting proper nutrition. Interviews conducted with six out six staff could not corroborate this allegation, as all staff interviewed acknowledged R1 was on a special diet and reported assisting him as needed at mealtimes. Interviews conducted with five out of five residents also could not corroborate allegation. Four out of five residents reported no complaints regarding facility food or nutrition and stated they received sufficient food in quantity. One out of five residents was unable to confirm or deny allegation. Per Physician’s Fax report dated 5/04/22 facility reported to R1’s PhysCDSS inspection report, December 18, 2023 · control 22-AS-20220705155653
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not safeguard resident's personal property. Resident sustained bruising while in care.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
On this day, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kevin Saborit-Guasch made an unannounced visit to the facility for the purpose of delivering findings into the investigation of the two allegations listed above. LPA was greeted and granted entry by front desk staff after introducing himself and stating the purpose of the visit. Executive Director Anna Pastores was notified and present during the visit. The initial complaint investigation was conducted on November 6, 2023. Records for resident R1, including the admission agreement and a waiver to inventory personal property upon admission were reviewed. LPA verified the required posting of the facility's theft and loss policy and reviewed the theft and loss log maintained by facility staff at the front desk. Documentation of staff training on theft and loss was also provided. One staff interview, one witness interview and one resident interview were also conducted during the visit. CONTINUED ON LIC9099-C UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, December 7, 2023 · control 22-AS-20231101104331
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility raised resident's rates without proper notice Facility charged resident for services not rendered
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst Michelle Reed arrived at the facility to deliver the findings of this complaint investigation. Upon arrival, LPA met with Executive Director Anna Pastores. The investigation consisted of interviews with Executive Director Rosalie Sullivan, staff, and witnesses as well as documentation from the facility. The following was determined: Resident #1 was admitted into the facility on 5/1/2018. R1 needed assistance with all Activities of Daily Living. R1 was a two person physical assist with transfers and pushing in a wheelchair to attend meals and activities. On November 1, 2020 according to Ms. Sullivan, a notice of rate increase for assisted living residents was sent to R1's responsible party. The increase was to take effect on January 1, 2021. In February of 2021, R1's responsible party denied receiving notice of the increase and disputed the costs that R1 had been billed for. Facility staff worked with R1's responsible party and sent another notice of the increaCDSS inspection report, February 1, 2023 · control 22-AS-20210312144538
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unfounded
Allegation the state reviewedLack of care and supervision resulting in resident falling.
State's findingUnfoundedThe state investigated and found the allegation to be false.
Licensing Program Analyst Michelle Reed arrived at the facility to deliver the findings of this complaint investigation. Upon arrival, LPA met with Executive Director Anna Pastores. The investigation consisted of interviews with Executive Director Rosalie Sullivan, staff, and witnesses as well as documentation from the facility. The following was determined: Resident #1 was admitted into the facility on 6/9/21. R1 had Dementia, was wheelchair bound and needed two person assistance to transfer. On 1/5/22, R1 had an unwitnessed fall from her wheelchair in her apartment. Staff found her on the floor. R1 complained of right hip pain. R1 could communicate her needs and according to interviews, told staff that she tried to get up to use the restroom. Staff called 911 and R1 was taken to the hospital for further evaluation. R1 sustained a left hip fracture and a laceration above her left eye. UnfoundedCDSS inspection report, February 1, 2023 · control 22-AS-20220107082110

Transcribed from CDSS complaint-investigation reports · record checked August 2, 2026.

What the state has logged

California has logged 30 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.

Type A citations
5
typical for this size: 1
Type B citations
2
typical for this size: 1
Substantiated complaints
7
typical for this size: 2
Total complaints
18
typical for this size: 7
State visits on file
30
typical for this size: 19
See the full inspection record on the state's site →
Talk to this home directly

You can call them yourself, anytime — you never have to go through us.

(714) 880-8624
What isn't in the state record

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 →

See something wrong? Report an error — free → · How we source every fact →

This page is generated from CDSS Community Care Licensing public records. How we build these pages →

Do you run Oakmont Of Orange? Claim this listing — free — add photos, activities, languages, and today’s availability.