Aspen Meadows Care Home by RNS

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Melissa Parks arrived on Wednesday July 15, 2026, to conduct the unannounced annual inspection. During today's annual inspection, the Compliance and Regulatory Enforcement Tool was used. LPA reviewed resident (3) and staff (3) files. Resident file contained the required paperwork. All staff files contained the required paperwork and training. LPA and Administrator Yas toured the facility together to ensure the health and safety of resident in care. The following areas were inspected: resident bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchen, laundry room, staff room, garage and backyard. Facility was current on fire drills. Facility had a fully stocked first aid kit. All required postings were observed. All chemicals and knives were kept locked and inaccessible to residents. Fire extinguisher had current inspection tag. LPA obtained a copy of the current liability insurance. Exit interview conducted. No deficiencies cited. A copy of this report was provided to the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 15, 2026

The state marks this report as 4 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 2. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

Allegation investigated: Staff is providing an unknown substance to resident. Staff does not ensure facility is free of mold.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Graham Gunby arrived unannounced on 03/26/2026 to complete and deliver findings to a complaint received on 07/28/2025. LPA met with Caregiver, Daniel Galang, and explained the purpose of the visit. Throughout the course of the investigation, the department conducted interviews and record reviews. Please continue to LIC9099C.. Unsubstantiated Staff is providing an unknown substance to resident. Through observations and interviews the facility is not providing an unknown substance to residents in care. R1 stated they feel tired after they eat. S1 stated that R1 likes to prepare their own meals, but will continue to monitor R1 as they have type 2 diabetes and food can affect his tiredness. S1 provided LPA with a copy of the menu along with R1’s medical assessment which stated that R1’s blood sugar needs to be monitored. R2 stated they do not believe anything is being added to the food. Staff does not ensure facility is free of mold. During a tour of the facility, no mold was observed on the premises. R1 explained their concern stemmed from the runoff valve from the AC unit. LPA inspected runoff and observed water on the side of the facility near a drain. AC unit has not been relocated and is original to the facility. LPA observed no concerns with mold at this facility. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred, and the findings are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was provided to administrator. Staff does not ensure resident's medical needs are being met. R1 moved into the facility on 07/09/25 and was not seen by home health until 08/07/25. R1 was placed in the facility through an agency that set up home health care. S1 stated they helped facilitate care for R1 through home health. S1 also stated that have been trained by home health in changing out bandages for wound care. Staff does not accord resident privacy. LPA observed R1 resides in a single room with no roommates. R1 states staff are entering their room without permission, but staff have stated they do not enter a room without knocking. Interviews with other residents have confirmed staff announced themselves before entering a bedroom. Staff does not ensure resident's call button is in good repair. LPA observed call buttons in the bedrooms of the residents. LPA was informed from S1 that the call buttons are not operable and have not been operable for several years. S1 explained they do not pay for the service anymore and informed R1 before moving in. R1 told LPA they were upset that the call buttons are in the room, but can’t be used. LPA reviewed admission agreement and it does not included information regarding the call button. Staff does not ensure facility has adequate laundry detergent supply. LPA observed 15 bottles of detergent in the garage of the facility. S1 stated that residents can do as much laundry as needed, but must be courteous to other residents that may need to use the washer and dryer. After reviewing the admission agreement, there are no rules that limit how many loads of laundry can be completed at the facility and they must provide detergent for residents to wash their clothes. Staff does not ensure facility plumbing is in good repair. In July of 2025 the facility experienced a clogged kitchen sink drain. The facility provided a copy of the plumbing bill to fix the clogged drain. S1 stated that as soon as they knew it was clogged, a plumber was called. Upon visit on 07/28/2025 LPA did not observe any clogged or backed up sink in the facility. Staff does not ensure a comfortable temperature for residents. R1 said it was too cold in the facility. The facility closed the vent in their room to help accommodate R1. Staff did not adjust the temperature since the 4 other residents felt comfortable. R2 stated that the temperature was comfortable and R1 was the only one complaining. LPA observed temperature at 73 degrees Fahrenheit on 08/07/2025. Through interviews with other residents and staff, this was a comfortable temperature for everyone. Staff does not safeguard resident's personal items. Through interviews it was determined that R1 did not have any personal items stolen and was upset there was no lock on the door. R1 wanted to add a lock, but S1 stated they could not due to safety concerns. R1 was wheelchair bound and incase of emergency, might not be able to unlock the door for entry. Staff does not ensure smoke detectors are in good repair. Through the initial tour on 07/31/2025 LPA observed smoke detectors located throughout the facility. S1 stated that they are being replaced with new batteries and will be reinstalled. LPA observed smoke detectors in all areas of the facility. LPA activated the alarm to ensure they are operational. LPA has no concerns with smoke detectors within the facility. Staff does not follow resident's admissions agreement. LPA reviewed R1’s admission agreement which listed the correct room. R1 originally was going to move into a smaller room, but decided not to because the room they are currently in has a personal bathroom. Administrator updated admission agreement to reflect this change and provided a copy for R1. Staff did not provide a copy of the admissions agreement to resident. Through interviews, R1 provided a copy of the admission agreement given to them from the Administrator. This allegation is unfounded as R1 did receive a copy of the admission agreement. A finding that the allegations are Unfounded means that the allegations are false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report has been provided to facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 26, 2026 · control 59-AS-20250728085620

Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure that the facility phone is operable. Staff did not ensure that food supply is sufficient

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Melissa Parks and Investigator Vincent Moleski arrived on Tuesday December 30, 2025, to conduct a complaint investigation. LPA and Investigator observed the contents of the refrigerator to include fresh fruit and vegetables, fruit cups, and yogurt. The freezer contained a variety of foods to include hash browns, orange chicken, chicken patties, tilapia, salmon, and frozen mango. Next to the kitchen cupboards were bins that included avocado, oranges, honey dew, sweet potato, and onions. LPA Parks learned that on December 8, staff smelled smoke in the living room. Staff then discovered that, at some point, water was poured on the router. Since this discovery, the phone has not worked as it relies on a internet connection. LPA confirmed with Administrator Yas that all staff have smart phones. Residents are able to utilize staff phones if needed while the internet is being repaired. Two residents have their own smart phones. Unfounded Based on the evidence provided, the preponderance of evidence standards was not met, therefore, the above allegations are found to be UNFOUNDED. An unfounded allegation means that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report was provided to the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 30, 2025 · control 59-AS-20251223160807

Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure the heater was not in disrepair Staff are not providing a comfortable temperature for residents

LPA Parks arrived on Tuesday December 2, 2025, to conduct a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA learned the following: LPA interviewed the Administrator and staff regarding the heat at the facility. LPA observed the thermostat to be set at 72 degrees. LPA observed the current temperature at 66 degrees. LPA learned that the HVAC was serviced for routine maintenance on October 24, 2025. However, the HVAC technician needed access to the roof which is in the master bedroom. R1 refused to allow the technician to enter their room. Per staff, there have been no complaints about the temperature from residents. Based on information obtained, LPA Finds the allegations to be 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. Unsubstantiated Based on the evidence provided, the preponderance of evidence standards was not met, therefore, the above allegations are found to be UNFOUNDED. An unfounded allegation means that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 2, 2025 · control 59-AS-20251124102832

Allegation investigated: Staff retaliated against resident. Staff were unable to effectively communicate with resident due to a language barrier. Staff did not adequately address resident’s inappropriate behaviors. Staff did not assist residents with personal hygiene needs in a timely manner. Staff spoke to resident in an inappropriate manner. Staff withheld resident's mail. Staff illegally evicted a resident in care.

LPA Parks arrived on Wednesday October 22, 2025, to conduct a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA learned the following: Throughout the course of the investigation, LPA interviewed the reporting party, R1-R4, staff, private caregiver and the Administrator. Allegation: Staff retaliated against resident. LPA interviewed the Administrator who stated that staff have never retaliated against a resident. LPA could not find any evidence that the staff have retaliated against R1. Allegation: Staff were unable to effectively communicate with resident due to a language barrier. Residents interviewed stated that they do not have any issues in communicating with staff. LPA has also interviewed staff at the facility and did not experience any issues. Unfounded Allegation: Staff did not adequately address resident’s inappropriate behaviors. LPA interviewed R2 who stated that staff will address any concerns promptly. R2 has been addressing concerns regarding R1 with the Administrator and staff. R2 stated that staff are doing everything they can to address issues as they arise. Allegation: Staff did not assist residents with personal hygiene needs in a timely manner. LPA observed R3 and R4’s rooms. LPA observed the rooms to be clean and orderly. LPA spoke with both residents who appeared to be in clean clothes and hygiene needs were being met. LPA interviewed staff who stated that R3 is assisted with showers twice per week. R4 is showered daily and as needed. Allegation: Staff spoke to resident in an inappropriate manner. LPA interviewed residents who stated that they are spoken to respectfully. LPA additionally interviewed the private caregiver for R5 who stated that they have not seen any inappropriate conversations between staff and residents. Allegation: Staff withheld resident's mail. Staff stated that they deliver all packages and mail to residents. Resident interviews also acknowledged that they receive their mail timely. Allegation: Staff illegally evicted a resident in care. LPA obtained a copy of the eviction letter. LPA determined that the letter is lawful due to containing all the required elements. Based on the evidence provided, the preponderance of evidence standards was not met, therefore, the above allegations are found to be UNFOUNDED. An unfounded allegation means that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 22, 2025 · control 59-AS-20251020124158

Allegation investigated: Staff does not ensure food served to residents is of good quality Staff do not ensure food is stored properly at the correct temperatures Staff do not ensure food sanitation practices are followed Staff do not prevent residents’ personal food items from being taken by other persons in the facility Staff does not ensure residents is spoken to in an appropriate manner Staff does not ensure medications are properly managed Staff do not ensure the facility is kept free of pests

LPA Parks arrived on Friday October 3, 2025, to deliver findings for a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. Throughout the course of the investigation, LPA interviewed the reporting party, R1-R3, staff, and the Administrator. LPA reviewed the following documents: pest control contract and invoices, and R1's paperwork including admission agreement and care plan. LPA reviewed the facility’s current supply of perishable and nonperishable foods. LPA observed the refrigerator and freezer’s temperature. Additionally, LPA toured the facility for any signs of pests. LPA learned the following: Allegation: Staff does not ensure food served to residents is of good quality LPA observed and photographed the facility’s perishable and nonperishable food. LPA observed the refrigerator to be filled with fresh produce, fruit, and food. The freezer contained a variety of frozen foods. There was fresh fruit on the counter. Additionally, LPA learned that the facility shops for its food every Unfounded week on Wednesdays (LPA made the initial complaint visit on a Tuesday). Furthermore, LPA obtained the week’s grocery shopping list which showed a mixture of fresh produce and processed foods. LPA interviewed R2 and R3 who both stated that they enjoyed the food and had no complaints. Allegation: Staff do not ensure food is stored properly at the correct temperatures LPA observed that the refrigerator and freezer had built in thermometers. LPA observed and photographed the refrigerator temperature at 37 degrees and the freezer at 0 degrees. These temperatures are within the required range. Allegation: Staff do not ensure food sanitation practices are followed LPA interviewed staff who stated that they always change their gloves between tasks and residents. No staff interviews acknowledged leaving food out for an extended period of time or witnessing other staff doing so. LPA did not observe any perishable food on the counter during visits. Additionally, LPA observed leftover food in the refrigerator, covered, and dated. Allegation: Staff do not prevent residents’ personal food items from being taken by other people in the facility LPA interviewed staff who stated that R1 would share their food with other residents at the facility. Additionally, there are residents at the facility with cognitive impairment who would not be aware they are eating a resident’s personal food. The food in the kitchen is unlocked, therefore available to all residents. Additionally, no staff acknowledged eating any food belonging to a resident. Allegation: Staff does not ensure residents is spoken to in an appropriate manner LPA interviewed R2 and R3. Neither of the residents had any instances of staff speaking inappropriately to them. Additionally, staff interviewed stated they speak respectfully to all residents. Allegation: Staff does not ensure medications are properly managed LPA reviewed medication administration records (MARs) for each resident. MARs matched current doctors orders. LPA interviewed R2 and R3 who stated that they have not had instances of their medications being mismanaged. Allegation: Staff do not ensure the facility is kept free of pests LPA toured the facility and found no evidence of pests. LPA observed and photographed two sticky traps which showed no evidence of pests. LPA obtained the facility’s contract with a local pest control company which shows the facility receives monthly service. Additionally, LPA interviewed R2 and R3 who had no complaints of pests inside the facility. Staff interviews did not reveal any concerns about pests. Based on the evidence provided, the preponderance of evidence standards was not met, therefore, the above allegations are found to be UNFOUNDED. An unfounded allegation means that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 3, 2025 · control 59-AS-20250905083356

Allegation investigated: Staff do not provide resident with respect of his personal privacy and property Staff retaliated against resident for filing complaints on the facility.

LPA Parks arrived on Friday October 3, 2025, to deliver findings for a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. Throughout the course of the investigation, LPA interviewed the reporting party, R1-R3, staff, and the Administrator. LPA learned the following: Allegation: Staff do not provide resident with respect of his personal privacy and property LPA interviewed staff who stated that they only went into R1’s room when it was time for weekly cleaning. Once R1 became upset, they stopped going into R1’s room. R1 does not receive any assistance with ADLs, therefore staff do not go into their room. Unfounded Allegation: Staff retaliated against resident for filing complaints on the facility. LPA interviewed S1 – S4 who stated that they treat all residents with respect. R2 and R3 had not witnessed staff treating any residents inappropriate or differently. Based on the evidence provided, the preponderance of evidence standards was not met, therefore, the above allegations are found to be UNFOUNDED. An unfounded allegation means that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 3, 2025 · control 59-AS-20250821153043

Allegation investigated: Staff yell at resident.

LPA Parks arrived on Friday October 3, 2025, to deliver findings for a complaint investigation regarding the above allegation. Throughout the course of the investigation, LPA interviewed the reporting party, R1-R3, staff, and the Administrator. LPA learned the following: Allegation: Staff yell at resident. LPA interviewed R2 and R3 who had not experienced nor witnessed staff yelling at residents. LPA interviewed S1 – S4. No staff acknowledged yelling nor witnessing staff yelling at residents. Unfounded Based on the evidence provided, the preponderance of evidence standards was not met, therefore, the above allegation is found to be UNFOUNDED. An unfounded allegation means that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 3, 2025 · control 59-AS-20250812085722

Allegation investigated: staff are spitting in residents coffee facility forced resident to move rooms

LPA Parks arrived on Friday October 3, 2025, to deliver findings for a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA learned the following: Throughout the course of the investigation, LPA interviewed the reporting party, R1-R2, staff, and the Administrator. Allegation: Staff are spitting in residents coffee Staff denied spitting in coffee for the residents. R2 denied having any concerns that staff were spitting in their coffee. Allegation: facility forced resident to move rooms LPA interviewed staff who stated that R1 has resided in the master bedroom alone, since they moved in. Residents and staff interviewed stated that they were never asked to move rooms for R1 nor were they aware that R1 was asked to move rooms. Unfounded Based on the evidence provided, the preponderance of evidence standards was not met, therefore, the above allegations are found to be UNFOUNDED. An unfounded allegation means that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 3, 2025 · control 59-AS-20251001090519

Allegation investigated: Staff did not accord resident dignity in their personal interactions Licensee did not ensure staff were appropriately trained to provide care to residents

Licensed Program Analyst (LPA) Cassandra Mikkelson arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Administrator Yasser Patawaran to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. During the investigation, LPA conducted interviews, conducted a tour of the facility, and reviewed documentation pertinent to the investigation. The results of the investigation are as follows: *** Report continued on 9099-C*** Unfounded Staff did not accord resident dignity in their personal interactions. Interviews conducted with residents in care indicated that they feel they are accorded dignity in their personal interactions with each other and staff members. Observations of staff during visits indicated that the staff are treating residents with dignity and respect during their interactions. Staff are assisting residents in care and are following proper trainings and protocols for their interactions with the residents in care. Therefore, the allegation staff did not accord resident dignity in their personal interactions is unfounded. Licensee did not ensure staff were appropriately trained to provide care to residents. Interviews conducted with administrator indicated that staff are trained according to Title 22 regulations and are capable of completing tasks related to resident care. Records reviewed indicated that staff are properly trained and have received the required trainings for the current year as required by the Department. Observations indicated that staff are using their training in their interactions with the residents in care. Therefore, the allegation licensee did not ensure staff were appropriately trained to provide care to residents is unfounded. Based on records reviewed and interviews, LPA finds the above allegations to be UNFOUNDED- meaning that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted with the Administrator. Copy of report was given to facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 27, 2025 · control 59-AS-20250729110912

Allegation investigated: Staff did not assist resident with care needs in a timely manner. Staff recorded resident without consent.

Licensed Program Analyst (LPA) Cassandra Mikkelson arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Administrator Yasser Patawaran to deliver findings for the above complaint allegations. During the investigation, LPA conducted interviews, conducted a tour of the facility, and reviewed documentation pertinent to the investigation. The results of the investigation are as follows: *** Report continued on 9099-C*** Unfounded Staff did not assist resident with care needs in a timely manner Interviews conducted with Resident R1 indicated that they feel staff are not attending to calls for assistance. Observations indicated that residents are being monitored by care staff while in their individual rooms and in common areas. Staff were observed to checking on residents and listening for residents in case of needed assistance. Observations indicated staff assisting residents to and from their rooms for meals, outside to sit, with meal times, and to the restroom as needed or requested. Records reviewed indicated that staff are following proper procedures for residents in care. Staff are assisting residents in care according to their care plans. Records reviewed indicated what each resident need was and how the facility staff can assist in care. Therefore, the allegation staff did not assist resident with care needs in a timely manner is unfounded. Staff recorded resident without consent Interviews conducted with Resident R1 indicated that they feel that the dash camera in the vehicle which is parked in the garage is recording them. Interviews with administrator indicate that the device in the vehicle is used while driving only and does not record any part of the facility or residents who reside in the facility. Observations indicated that there are no visible cameras or recording devices in the facility in the hallways or common areas. Records reviewed indicated that facility does not have any consent forms on file for residents in care regarding records devices in the home and there is nothing listed in the admission agreement which would indicate the use of cameras or recording devices in the facility. Therefore the allegation staff recorded resident without consent is unfounded. Based on records reviewed and interviews, LPA finds the above allegations to be UNFOUNDED- meaning that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted with the Administrator. Copy of report was given to facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 27, 2025 · control 59-AS-20250801122227

Allegation investigated: Staff not providing adequate food service to resident.

Licensed Program Analyst (LPA) Cassandra Mikkelson arrived at the facility unannounced and met with Administrator Yasser Patawaran to deliver findings for the above complaint allegation. During the investigation, LPA conducted interviews, conducted a tour of the facility, and reviewed documentation pertinent to the investigation. The results of the investigation are as follows: *** Report continued on 9099-C*** Unfounded Staff not providing adequate food service to resident. Records reviewed indicated that staff are providing adequate food services to residents in care. Observations at the facility indicated that there were snacks, including fruits and vegetables available to residents in care. Staff also prepare all meals for residents in care. Interviews with resident R1 indicated that they are happy with the food provided. Interviews with Administrator indicated that facility staff provide adequate meals daily for the residents in care. The facility gives options for each meal and residents can indicate what is preferred. Therefore, the allegation staff not providing adequate food service to residents is unfounded. Based on records reviewed and interviews, LPA finds the above allegations to be UNFOUNDED- meaning that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted with the Administrator. Copy of report was given to facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 21, 2025 · control 59-AS-20250804093858

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

On 08/21/25 Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Troy Ordonez, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Graham Gunby and LPA Cassandra Mikkelson arrived unannounced at the facility to investigate a complaint. LPA met with Administrator, Yasser Patawaren, to explain the purpose of the visit. During this visit LPM and LPAs observed a broken window to a residents bedroom. The window appeared to be taped on the edged, but when removing the blinds, the window fell to the ground. Administrator removed broken window and LPAs did not observe any broken glass in the room.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 21, 2025

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87303(a) · Plan of correction due date: Aug 21, 2025

The facility shall be clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair at all times. Maintenance shall include provision of maintenance services and procedures for the safety and well-being of residents, employees and visitors. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on observation, Room #3 has a broken window which poses a potential health risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 21, 2025

Plan of correction: Licensee will seal window frame with new plexiglass and submit proof by 08/28/2025

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

On 07/17/25 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Graham Gunby arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a required 1-year annual inspection. LPA met with Administrator, Yasser Patawaran, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA and Administrator conducted a tour of the interior and exterior of the facility. Areas toured included but not limited to: resident rooms, bathrooms, kitchen, dining room, common areas, and back yard. LPA observed medications, cleaners, and sharps to be locked and inaccessible to residents. The residence was found to be clean, safe, sanitary and in good condition. LPA observed the facility to have the mandated posters posted. Fire extinguishers are maintained and ready for emergency use. Facility has required food supplies. There are appropriate staff present to meet the needs of residents. LPA conducted a file review of five (5) resident files and three (3) staff files. Resident and staff files had all the required documents present in files. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was emailed to Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 17, 2025

Type of visit: Post Licensing

Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Graham Gunby and Cheyenne Ratajczak arrived unannounced to conduct a post-licensing inspection. LPAs met with caregiver, Daniel Galang and explained the purpose of the visit. LPAs requested for staff to notify Administrator, Yasser Patawaran of LPA's presence at the facility. Administrator was unable to meet at the facility and gave staff permission to assist LPA during today's visit. LPAs and staff conducted a tour of the interior of the facility and inspected the physical plant, kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, laundry area, and backyard area. LPA observed the facility to be free of odor, clean and in good repair. There is sufficient furniture and lighting throughout the facility. LPA observed required 7 day non-perishable and 2 day perishable food. LPA observed locked medications, knives and toxins to be inaccessible to residents. LPA observed two (2) resident files and two (2) staff files to be organized and complete. LPA observed all required documents to be posted in entry. Exit interview conducted. No deficiencies cited at this time.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 23, 2024

Type of visit: Prelicensing

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Melissa Parks arrived on Monday June 24, 2024 to conduct an announced prelicensing visit. This is a change of ownership with residents in care. The Compliance and Regulatory Enforcement Tool was used during today's inspection. This facility has a fire clearance for 6 nonambulatory residents, of which 1 may be bedridden, with a total capacity of 6. Facility fire clearance also approved 2 bedrooms which may be used for staff. Facility has all required postings in the entry way. LPA toured the facility with Administrator Yas. The following areas were inspected for compliance: kitchen, backyard, resident rooms, bathrooms, garage and common areas. Facility has a current fire extinguisher and a full first aid kit. Medications are kept locked in the kitchen. Cleaning chemicals and knives/sharps are kept locked and inaccessible to residents. Component III has been completed at this time. The facility appears to be in substantial compliance and ready for licensure. The license will be granted upon completion of a final review and approval from the Licensing Program Manager and the Central Applications Bureau. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator and a copy of this report will be left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 24, 2024

Type of visit: Office

Component II completion: Successful Facility Type: RCFE Application Type: CHOW Capacity: 6 Census (if any clients in care): 3 COMP II Participants: Name - Ron Ordona CEO/Yasser Patawaran Administrator Interview Method: Telephone interview On January 5, 2024, Applicant/Administrator participated in COMP II. Identification of the applicant and administrator was verified through interview questions based on photo ID and other identifying personal information. During COMP II, applicant and administrator confirmed that they have read and understand community care facility licensing laws included in the Health and Safety Codes and the California Code of Regulations Title 22. Signed LIC 809 with copy of photo ID have been obtained. During COMP II, CAB analyst confirmed Applicant/Administrator’s understanding of the following areas: 1. Facility operation: License type, client/resident populations, and program 2. Admission Policies 3. Staffing requirements & Training 4. Restrictive/Prohibited Health Conditions 5. General provisions 6. Emergency Preparedness 7. Complaints & Reporting 8. Pre-Licensing Readinessthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 5, 2024