Rose Valley Redlands Ii is a residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Redlands, San Bernardino County, California — state license #361880517, licensed for 9 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 10 dated inspection and complaint documents on file for this home going back to 2023, the most recent dated December 12, 2025 — published below in full, verbatim and unscored.

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

9 homes in view

Rose Valley Redlands Ii

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) · Mid-size home, 9 residents · Redlands, CA · San Bernardino County
LicensedWheelchairMemory careHospiceBedridden
No openings reportedBeds change hands in days ·
License #361880517, held since 2018 · read from the California state record on August 2, 2026 ·See on State Site →
1309 Farview Ln · Redlands, San Bernardino County
Phone
(909) 283-4894
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 6 residents
Dementia / memory careVerified in record
Hospice careApproved for 6 residents
Bedridden careApproved for 1 resident

“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
3 AMBULATORY 6 NON- AMBULATORY OF WHICH 1 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN.HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 6State 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 2023, the state has visited this home 12 times and filed 10 documents. The most recent is a facility evaluation report, dated December 12, 2025.

Most recent state visit
December 12, 2025
Occupancy at the December 2, 2025 visit
6 of 9 beds

The state's published file for this home includes 4 documents with transcribed findings, dated February 21, 2025 to December 2, 2025. 4 of the 4 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Unfounded” (1), “Unsubstantiated” (3). 4 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word.

Summary composed by computer from the 4 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 — 9 of 10 documentsFull record on the state’s site →
20254 state visits · 6 documents
Dec 12, 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.

Dec 2, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not maintain accurate medication records for residents Staff do not store residents’ medication in original container Staff do not ensure facility is free from odors

On 12/02/2025 at 4:15PM Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Renese Howell-Small conducted an unannounced visit to the residence in order to deliver findings for the above allegations. LPA discussed the purpose of the visit with Administrator, Marsie Marcos. The investigation consisted of interviews, record review and observation. In regards to the allegation of staff do not maintain accurate medication records for residents: LPA interviewed three (3) staff. LPA reviewed the Medication Administration Record(s) (MAR) for five (5) residents in care and audited medications. Staff denied the allegation. Based on interviews and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. In regards to the allegation of staff do not store residents’ medication in original container: LPA observed all resident medication(s) to be in their original containers. Staff denied the allegation. Based upon observation and interview, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 2, 2025 · control 56-AS-20240321113158
Mar 18, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Staff do not ensure a fire safety measure is being followed

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegation. LPA met with Aministrator Marsie Marcos, and discussed the purpose of the visit. LPA observed a smoke alarm detached from its mount. Although the smoke alarm is detached from its mount, it is functional. LPA proceeded to test another smoke alarm in facility hallway as well as facility’s carbon monoxide detector, both of which were found to be in proper working order. Based on the evidence gathered, the allegation is deemed UNFOUNDED. A finding that the complaint allegation is UNFOUNDED means that the allegation was without a reasonable basis. Therefore, the allegation dismissed. An exit interview was conducted where this report LIC9099 was discussed and provided to Administrator Marsie Marcos. Unfoundedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 18, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250313151448
Mar 18, 2025Complaint investigation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Feb 21, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained serious injury due to staff neglect Facility staff did not provide assistance in meeting resident's medical needs

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Administrator Marsie Marcos and explained the purpose of the visit. The Department's investigation involved interviews and records review. The allegation alleged that a resident (R1) sustained serious injury due to staff neglect. After a comprehensive review of medical records, interviews with facility staff, outside parties, it was determined that R1 arrived at Rose Valley Redlands II on August 6, 2024, and had two reported falls subsequently. The treating Orthopedic Surgeon estimated the fracture treated on September 23, 2024, was approximately two months old, indicating it occurred before R1 placement at Rose Valley Redlands II. Therefore, it cannot be conclusively demonstrated that the fracture happened at this facility or resulted from staff neglect. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 21, 2025 · control 56-AS-20240925161927
Feb 21, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff are financially abusing resident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on the allegation mentioned above. LPA met with Marsie Marcos and explained the purpose of the visit. Regarding the allegation Staff are financially abusing resident, LPA interviewed 5 residents. 3 out of 5 residents informed LPA their families handle their finances and no one in the facility has access, 2 out of 5 residents informed LPA they handle their own finances. R1 was not interviewed due to no longer living at the facility. LPA interviewed 3 staff. 3 out of 3 staff informed LPA they do not handle resident’s finances. Administrator informed LPA they never safeguard cash or cards for residents, if residents need anything they notify or call their responsible parties. Administrator stated they never had possession of R1's cards, R1's belongings were never opened. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 21, 2025 · control 56-AS-20241001084826
20241 state visit · 1 document
Dec 19, 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.

20231 state visit · 2 documents
Nov 13, 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.

Nov 13, 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 citations1typical 0
Type B citations3typical 0
Substantiated complaints3typical 0
Total complaints4typical 1
State visits on file12typical 8
“Typical” is the statewide median across the 307 licensed mid-size homes (7–15 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 2018.
Year-by-year trend
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated202546020241102023230
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 →

$3,500$5,500 /mo
our estimate — San Bernardino 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 (909) 283-4894

Is Rose Valley Redlands Ii licensed?

Yes — Rose Valley Redlands Ii is a licensed residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Redlands (San Bernardino County): California license #361880517, shown as licensed in the CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026, licensed for 9 residents. State records list 10 inspection and complaint documents since 2023; the most recent, a facility evaluation report dated December 12, 2025, appears in the inspection record on this page.

Can Rose Valley Redlands Ii 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 Valley Redlands Ii 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 record3 AMBULATORY 6 NON- AMBULATORY OF WHICH 1 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN.HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 6

How much does Rose Valley Redlands Ii cost?

California's public licensing record does not include Rose Valley Redlands Ii's monthly price, so we never show or estimate one for a specific home. As county-level context only, assisted living in San Bernardino County typically runs $3,500–$5,500/mo and small board-and-care homes $3,000–$5,000/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 Valley Redlands Ii accept Medi-Cal or the Assisted Living Waiver?

Rose Valley Redlands Ii 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

6 of 9 beds occupied (67%) when the state visited on December 2, 2025. Availability changes constantly — confirm a current opening with the home.

What do state inspections show for Rose Valley Redlands Ii?

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 12 state visits and 10 dated documents since 2023 for Rose Valley Redlands Ii; 4 complaint-investigation narratives are transcribed verbatim below. The most recent, dated December 2, 2025, 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.

4 transcribed reports on file

2025

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff do not maintain accurate medication records for residents Staff do not store residents’ medication in original container Staff do not ensure facility is free from odors
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
On 12/02/2025 at 4:15PM Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Renese Howell-Small conducted an unannounced visit to the residence in order to deliver findings for the above allegations. LPA discussed the purpose of the visit with Administrator, Marsie Marcos. The investigation consisted of interviews, record review and observation. In regards to the allegation of staff do not maintain accurate medication records for residents: LPA interviewed three (3) staff. LPA reviewed the Medication Administration Record(s) (MAR) for five (5) residents in care and audited medications. Staff denied the allegation. Based on interviews and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. In regards to the allegation of staff do not store residents’ medication in original container: LPA observed all resident medication(s) to be in their original containers. Staff denied the allegation. Based upon observation and interview, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, December 2, 2025 · control 56-AS-20240321113158
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unfounded
Allegation the state reviewedStaff do not ensure a fire safety measure is being followed
State's findingUnfoundedThe state investigated and found the allegation to be false.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegation. LPA met with Aministrator Marsie Marcos, and discussed the purpose of the visit. LPA observed a smoke alarm detached from its mount. Although the smoke alarm is detached from its mount, it is functional. LPA proceeded to test another smoke alarm in facility hallway as well as facility’s carbon monoxide detector, both of which were found to be in proper working order. Based on the evidence gathered, the allegation is deemed UNFOUNDED. A finding that the complaint allegation is UNFOUNDED means that the allegation was without a reasonable basis. Therefore, the allegation dismissed. An exit interview was conducted where this report LIC9099 was discussed and provided to Administrator Marsie Marcos. UnfoundedCDSS inspection report, March 18, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250313151448
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained serious injury due to staff neglect Facility staff did not provide assistance in meeting resident's medical needs
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Administrator Marsie Marcos and explained the purpose of the visit. The Department's investigation involved interviews and records review. The allegation alleged that a resident (R1) sustained serious injury due to staff neglect. After a comprehensive review of medical records, interviews with facility staff, outside parties, it was determined that R1 arrived at Rose Valley Redlands II on August 6, 2024, and had two reported falls subsequently. The treating Orthopedic Surgeon estimated the fracture treated on September 23, 2024, was approximately two months old, indicating it occurred before R1 placement at Rose Valley Redlands II. Therefore, it cannot be conclusively demonstrated that the fracture happened at this facility or resulted from staff neglect. UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, February 21, 2025 · control 56-AS-20240925161927
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff are financially abusing resident
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on the allegation mentioned above. LPA met with Marsie Marcos and explained the purpose of the visit. Regarding the allegation Staff are financially abusing resident, LPA interviewed 5 residents. 3 out of 5 residents informed LPA their families handle their finances and no one in the facility has access, 2 out of 5 residents informed LPA they handle their own finances. R1 was not interviewed due to no longer living at the facility. LPA interviewed 3 staff. 3 out of 3 staff informed LPA they do not handle resident’s finances. Administrator informed LPA they never safeguard cash or cards for residents, if residents need anything they notify or call their responsible parties. Administrator stated they never had possession of R1's cards, R1's belongings were never opened. UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, February 21, 2025 · control 56-AS-20241001084826

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

What the state has logged

California has logged 12 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 mid-size homes (7–15 beds), computed across all 307 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: 0
Type B citations
3
typical for this size: 0
Substantiated complaints
3
typical for this size: 0
Total complaints
4
typical for this size: 1
State visits on file
12
typical for this size: 8
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.

(909) 283-4894
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 Valley Redlands Ii? Claim this listing — free — add photos, activities, languages, and today’s availability.