Rose Arbor Village is a residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Sacramento, Sacramento County, California — state license #345920216, with a licensed capacity of 108, listed as closed, change of ownership 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 19 dated inspection and complaint documents on file for this home going back to 2024, the most recent dated May 6, 2026 — published below in full, verbatim and unscored.

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

300 homes in view

Rose Arbor Village

The state record lists this licence as “Closed, Change of Ownership”. A closed licence cannot admit residents. We keep closed licences published because “is this place licensed?” deserves an honest answer.

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, 108 residents · Sacramento, CA · Sacramento County
Closed in state recordWheelchairMemory careHospiceBedridden
No openings reportedBeds change hands in days · we confirm by phone before any referral
License #345920216, held since 2024 · read from the California state record on August 2, 2026 ·See on State Site →
2001 Rose Arbor Drive · Sacramento, Sacramento County
Phone
(916) 216-8958
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 →

Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryApproved for 108 residents
Dementia / memory careVerified in record
Hospice careApproved for 20 residents
Bedridden careApproved for 10 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 →

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

What the state record says, word for word
AGE RANGE 60 AND OVER. APPROVED FIRE CLEARANCE FOR 108 NON-AMBULATORY OF WHICH, 10 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. BEDRIDDEN CLEARED IN ANY ROOM. WAIVER/GRANTED FOR HOSPICE CARE FOR (20). NEW MANAGEMENT COMPANY, ALTA SENIOR LIVING, INC, EFFECTIVE 10/01/2024.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 2024, the state has visited this home 21 times and filed 19 documents. The most recent is a facility evaluation report, dated May 6, 2026.

Most recent state visit
May 6, 2026
Occupancy at the February 25, 2026 visit
52 of 108 beds

The state's published file for this home includes 3 documents with transcribed findings, dated February 13, 2025 to April 22, 2026. 3 of the 3 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (1), “Unfounded” (2). 3 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word.

Summary composed by computer from the 3 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 — 19 of 19 documentsFull record on the state’s site →
20263 state visits · 3 documents
May 6, 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 22, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Staff not providing records to the authorized representative

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Hiratsuka, conducted this unannounced complaint visit to deliver the results of the allegation above. LPA reviewed records and conducted interviews. The durable power-of-attorney paperwork stated the person in question gave the rights of decision making to a designated person prior to the person in question was diagnosed with dementia and the durable power-of-attorney paperwork stays in effect. The person designated as durable power-of-attorney is still charge. Based on the durable power-of-attorney paperwork the allegation is unfounded. Based on information obtained, the allegation is unfounded. The complaint is UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted and report provided. Unfoundedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 22, 2026 · control 59-AS-20260330132510
Feb 25, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Facility staff hit resident while in care.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived at the facility to conduct an investigation regarding the allegation cited above. LPA met with Health Wellness Director and explained the purpose of the visit. Allegation of: Facility staff hit resident while in care, the Department conducted interviews with Health and Wellness Director, which revealed R1 has been cognitively declining and stated S1 has hit R1 while brushing R1's hair. Interview conducted with S1 revealed that S1 did not hit R1, but it was mentioned that R1 had knots in their hair and when brushing, the brush tugged on it. Interview conducted with R1's power of attorney revealed that R1 has been drastically declining and being very agitated. Interview further revealed that R1 has been confused, thinking R1 is in San Francisco. Facility is in the process of relocating R1 to a higher level of care. R1's power of attorney denied ever seeing any staff hitting or treating R1 negatively and stated staff’s care has been excethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 25, 2026 · control 59-AS-20260220113515
202512 state visits · 14 documents
Nov 5, 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.

Oct 29, 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.

Oct 29, 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.

Oct 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.

Oct 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.

Oct 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.

Sep 19, 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 3, 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 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.

Aug 31, 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.

Aug 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.

Jun 11, 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.

Feb 21, 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.

Feb 13, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility does not have adequate staffing resulting in residents’ needs not being met.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Michael Hood arrived at the facility and met with Administrator, Antonette Edwards, to conclude a complaint investigation into the allegation listed above. During the investigation, LPA conducted interviews, toured the facility, and reviewed documentation pertinent to the investigation. The results of the investigation are as follows: Allegation: Facility does not have adequate staffing resulting in residents’ needs not being met. ** Report continued on 9099-C ** Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 13, 2025 · control 59-AS-20241217164228
20242 state visits · 2 documents
Sep 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.

Sep 9, 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.

Beside homes the same size
Type A citations1typical 1
Type B citations0typical 1
Substantiated complaints1typical 2
Total complaints3typical 7
State visits on file21typical 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 2024.
Year-by-year trend
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated20263302025121412024220
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 — Sacramento 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.
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 →

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 →

Is Rose Arbor Village licensed?

No — not currently. The CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026 lists Rose Arbor Village in Sacramento (Sacramento County), California license #345920216, as “Closed, Change Of Ownership, formerly licensed for 108 residents. State records list 19 inspection and complaint documents since 2024; the most recent, a facility evaluation report dated May 6, 2026, appears in the inspection record on this page.

Can Rose Arbor Village 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 Rose Arbor Village 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. APPROVED FIRE CLEARANCE FOR 108 NON-AMBULATORY OF WHICH, 10 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. BEDRIDDEN CLEARED IN ANY ROOM. WAIVER/GRANTED FOR HOSPICE CARE FOR (20). NEW MANAGEMENT COMPANY, ALTA SENIOR LIVING, INC, EFFECTIVE 10/01/2024.

How much does Rose Arbor Village cost?

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

Rose Arbor Village 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

52 of 108 beds occupied (48%) when the state visited on February 25, 2026. Availability changes constantly — confirm a current opening with the home.

What do state inspections show for Rose Arbor Village?

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 21 state visits and 19 dated documents since 2024 for Rose Arbor Village; 3 complaint-investigation narratives are transcribed verbatim below. The most recent, dated April 22, 2026, records an allegation the state marked “Unfounded. 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.

3 transcribed reports on file

2026

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unfounded
Allegation the state reviewedStaff not providing records to the authorized representative
State's findingUnfoundedThe state investigated and found the allegation to be false.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Hiratsuka, conducted this unannounced complaint visit to deliver the results of the allegation above. LPA reviewed records and conducted interviews. The durable power-of-attorney paperwork stated the person in question gave the rights of decision making to a designated person prior to the person in question was diagnosed with dementia and the durable power-of-attorney paperwork stays in effect. The person designated as durable power-of-attorney is still charge. Based on the durable power-of-attorney paperwork the allegation is unfounded. Based on information obtained, the allegation is unfounded. The complaint is UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted and report provided. UnfoundedCDSS inspection report, April 22, 2026 · control 59-AS-20260330132510
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unfounded
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff hit resident while in care.
State's findingUnfoundedThe state investigated and found the allegation to be false.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived at the facility to conduct an investigation regarding the allegation cited above. LPA met with Health Wellness Director and explained the purpose of the visit. Allegation of: Facility staff hit resident while in care, the Department conducted interviews with Health and Wellness Director, which revealed R1 has been cognitively declining and stated S1 has hit R1 while brushing R1's hair. Interview conducted with S1 revealed that S1 did not hit R1, but it was mentioned that R1 had knots in their hair and when brushing, the brush tugged on it. Interview conducted with R1's power of attorney revealed that R1 has been drastically declining and being very agitated. Interview further revealed that R1 has been confused, thinking R1 is in San Francisco. Facility is in the process of relocating R1 to a higher level of care. R1's power of attorney denied ever seeing any staff hitting or treating R1 negatively and stated staff’s care has been exceCDSS inspection report, February 25, 2026 · control 59-AS-20260220113515

2025

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility does not have adequate staffing resulting in residents’ needs not being met.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Michael Hood arrived at the facility and met with Administrator, Antonette Edwards, to conclude a complaint investigation into the allegation listed above. During the investigation, LPA conducted interviews, toured the facility, and reviewed documentation pertinent to the investigation. The results of the investigation are as follows: Allegation: Facility does not have adequate staffing resulting in residents’ needs not being met. ** Report continued on 9099-C ** SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, February 13, 2025 · control 59-AS-20241217164228

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

What the state has logged

California has logged 21 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
1
typical for this size: 1
Type B citations
0
typical for this size: 1
Substantiated complaints
1
typical for this size: 2
Total complaints
3
typical for this size: 7
State visits on file
21
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.

(916) 216-8958
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 Rose Arbor Village? Claim this listing — free — add photos, activities, languages, and today’s availability.