Solaris 36 is a residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Poway, San Diego County, California — state license #374603815, with a licensed capacity of 6, 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 21 dated inspection and complaint documents on file for this home going back to 2022, the most recent dated July 16, 2025 — published below in full, verbatim and unscored.

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

300 homes in view

Solaris 36

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) · Small home, 6 residents · Poway, CA · San Diego County
Closed in state recordWheelchairMemory careHospiceBedridden not on file
No openings reportedBeds change hands in days · we confirm by phone before any referral
License #374603815, held since 2017 · read from the California state record on August 2, 2026 ·See on State Site →
14536 Garden Rd · Poway, San Diego County
Phone
(858) 842-4246
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 6 residents
Dementia / memory careVerified in record
Hospice careApproved for 6 residents
Bedridden careNot on file — ask the home

“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. 6 NON-AMBULATORY. HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 6.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 19 times and filed 21 documents. The most recent is a facility evaluation report, dated July 16, 2025.

Most recent state visit
July 16, 2025
Occupancy at the June 9, 2025 visit
4 of 6 beds

The state's published file for this home includes 9 documents with transcribed findings, dated June 30, 2022 to June 9, 2025. 9 of the 9 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (4), “Unsubstantiated” (5). 9 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word.

Summary composed by computer from the 9 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 — 14 of 21 documentsFull record on the state’s site →
20256 state visits · 7 documents
Jul 16, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Jun 9, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Licensee has abandoned the facility. Licensee has lost control of property. Licensee did not report sale of facility.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Liliana Silveira conducted a virtual meeting on Microsoft Teams with Licensee Xiaoqing “Leslie” Wang to deliver complaint findings. LPA stated the purpose of the meeting with Leslie. The investigation consisted of observations, interviews and a records review. On January 30, 2025, it was alleged that the Licensee had abandoned the facility. A Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) from the Department conducted an unannounced Health & Safety check on January 31, 2025. The LPA observed that there were caregivers present, changing residents and preparing dinner for the residents. The LPA also observed that the facility was clean. Interviews with the current acting Administrator revealed that in June 2024, two Administrators had quite and left the residents with care staff. Interviews with three (3) care staff who worked at the facility during June 2024, revealed that even though the Administrators quit, care staff remained working at the facility until the Licensethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 9, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250130155352
May 7, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff is not following universal precautions when assisting sick residents

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angelica Boyles conducted an unannounced subsequent visit to deliver a finding regarding the above prior complaint allegations. LPA was welcomed by, identified herself to, and discussed the purpose of the visit with Administrator Justin Mendoza. On January 7, 2025 the Department received this complaint which alleged staff were not following universal precautions when assisting sick residents. Specifically, this complaint alleged a staff member did not wear a mask while caring for a resdient with COVID. The Department’s investigation included a facility tour, record reviews, as well as interviews with residents, staff and outside sources. LPA interviews and records reviewed corroborated that there is not, nor has there been any staff that goes by the name of the alleged staff that was alleged to have not worn a mask when caring for a resident with COVID. (Continue on LIC9099-C) Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 7, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250107102819
Mar 18, 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 26, 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 26, 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 7, 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.

20245 state visits · 5 documents
May 21, 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.

May 20, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Mar 20, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Mar 15, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Licensee did not provide resident's authorized representative with resident's records

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Iby Strong conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings in a complaint investigation on the above complaint allegation. LPA identified herself and discussed the purpose of the visit with Assistant Administrator Von Rivera. On February 27, 2024, Community Care Licensing (CCL) received a complaint alleging the responsible party did not receive a copy of admissions agreement with itemized items at signing on February 14, 2024. During the investigation, LPA Strong collected pertinent resident records as well as facility documentation and conducted interviews. Interview with outside source revealed that R1 was moved into the facility late on February 14, 2024. Interview with Administrator confirmed that R1 was moved into the facility after hours and Administrator was unable to provide responsible party with admissions agreement. Interview with responsible party confirmed that they did not receive a copy of agreement at time of signing. Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 15, 2024 · control 08-AS-20240227155411
Jan 25, 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
Oct 30, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff neglect contributed to resident developing pressure injury(ies).0

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Becky Kennedy conducted an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings regarding the above-mentioned allegation. LPA was met by Vely Vidal, Caregiver and was granted entry into the facility. LPM met with Anafe Rivera, Site Manager to discuss the purpose of the visit. Investigation consisted of interviews with residents, staff, outside sources, record review, and a tour of the facility. It was alleged that neglect resulted in serious bodily injury of Resident #1 (R1). A Confidential Names form was provided to Ms. Rivera. Investigation revealed R1 was admitted to the facility in January 2020. Record review and interviews revealed R1 was receiving hospice services from admission until April 2, 2020, at which point hey discharged and were followed by a home health agency from April 3, 2020, through their move out date on April 27, 2020. Review of R1’s medical assessment, dated January 11, 2020, revealed R1 had a history of skin breakdown. R1 was incontinthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 30, 2023 · control 08-AS-20200428113435
Oct 30, 2023Complaint investigation reportReport on file

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

Beside homes the same size
Type A citations0typical 0
Type B citations0typical 0
Substantiated complaints1typical 0
Total complaints5typical 0
State visits on file19typical 6
“Typical” is the statewide median across the 5,773 licensed small board-and-care homes (6 or fewer 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 2017.
Year-by-year trend
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated2025670202455120233412022552
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 →

$4,000$6,500 /mo
our estimate — San Diego County band, market research June 2026; not this home’s quoted price
$3,000 · statewide low$8,000 · 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 Solaris 36 licensed?

No — not currently. The CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026 lists Solaris 36 in Poway (San Diego County), California license #374603815, as “Closed, Change Of Ownership, formerly licensed for 6 residents. State records list 21 inspection and complaint documents since 2022; the most recent, a facility evaluation report dated July 16, 2025, appears in the inspection record on this page.

Can Solaris 36 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 Solaris 36 with clearances for wheelchair / non-ambulatory, dementia / memory care, and hospice care; it does not list bedridden. A clearance that is not on file is not a “no” — it may simply be unrecorded, so if your family needs one of these, ask the home directly and confirm its current scope 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. 6 NON-AMBULATORY. HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 6.

How much does Solaris 36 cost?

California's public licensing record does not include Solaris 36's monthly price, so we never show or estimate one for a specific home. As county-level context only, assisted living in San Diego 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 Solaris 36 accept Medi-Cal or the Assisted Living Waiver?

Solaris 36 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

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

What do state inspections show for Solaris 36?

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 19 state visits and 21 dated documents since 2022 for Solaris 36; 9 complaint-investigation narratives are transcribed verbatim below. The most recent, dated June 9, 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.

9 transcribed reports on file

2025

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedLicensee has abandoned the facility. Licensee has lost control of property. Licensee did not report sale of facility.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Liliana Silveira conducted a virtual meeting on Microsoft Teams with Licensee Xiaoqing “Leslie” Wang to deliver complaint findings. LPA stated the purpose of the meeting with Leslie. The investigation consisted of observations, interviews and a records review. On January 30, 2025, it was alleged that the Licensee had abandoned the facility. A Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) from the Department conducted an unannounced Health & Safety check on January 31, 2025. The LPA observed that there were caregivers present, changing residents and preparing dinner for the residents. The LPA also observed that the facility was clean. Interviews with the current acting Administrator revealed that in June 2024, two Administrators had quite and left the residents with care staff. Interviews with three (3) care staff who worked at the facility during June 2024, revealed that even though the Administrators quit, care staff remained working at the facility until the LicenseCDSS inspection report, June 9, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250130155352
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff is not following universal precautions when assisting sick residents
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angelica Boyles conducted an unannounced subsequent visit to deliver a finding regarding the above prior complaint allegations. LPA was welcomed by, identified herself to, and discussed the purpose of the visit with Administrator Justin Mendoza. On January 7, 2025 the Department received this complaint which alleged staff were not following universal precautions when assisting sick residents. Specifically, this complaint alleged a staff member did not wear a mask while caring for a resdient with COVID. The Department’s investigation included a facility tour, record reviews, as well as interviews with residents, staff and outside sources. LPA interviews and records reviewed corroborated that there is not, nor has there been any staff that goes by the name of the alleged staff that was alleged to have not worn a mask when caring for a resident with COVID. (Continue on LIC9099-C) UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, May 7, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250107102819

2024

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedLicensee did not provide resident's authorized representative with resident's records
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Iby Strong conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings in a complaint investigation on the above complaint allegation. LPA identified herself and discussed the purpose of the visit with Assistant Administrator Von Rivera. On February 27, 2024, Community Care Licensing (CCL) received a complaint alleging the responsible party did not receive a copy of admissions agreement with itemized items at signing on February 14, 2024. During the investigation, LPA Strong collected pertinent resident records as well as facility documentation and conducted interviews. Interview with outside source revealed that R1 was moved into the facility late on February 14, 2024. Interview with Administrator confirmed that R1 was moved into the facility after hours and Administrator was unable to provide responsible party with admissions agreement. Interview with responsible party confirmed that they did not receive a copy of agreement at time of signing. SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, March 15, 2024 · control 08-AS-20240227155411

2023

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff neglect contributed to resident developing pressure injury(ies).0
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Becky Kennedy conducted an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings regarding the above-mentioned allegation. LPA was met by Vely Vidal, Caregiver and was granted entry into the facility. LPM met with Anafe Rivera, Site Manager to discuss the purpose of the visit. Investigation consisted of interviews with residents, staff, outside sources, record review, and a tour of the facility. It was alleged that neglect resulted in serious bodily injury of Resident #1 (R1). A Confidential Names form was provided to Ms. Rivera. Investigation revealed R1 was admitted to the facility in January 2020. Record review and interviews revealed R1 was receiving hospice services from admission until April 2, 2020, at which point hey discharged and were followed by a home health agency from April 3, 2020, through their move out date on April 27, 2020. Review of R1’s medical assessment, dated January 11, 2020, revealed R1 had a history of skin breakdown. R1 was incontinCDSS inspection report, October 30, 2023 · control 08-AS-20200428113435
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not accord dignity to resident. Staff did not provide resident with personal privacy.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Esther Miller conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit to the facility in order to deliver findings on the above allegations. LPA was granted entry to the facility by Roderick Arca, Assistant Manager, after identifying herself and explaining the reason for the visit. On January 19, 2023, it was alleged that staff did not accord dignity to resident and staff did not provide resident with personal privacy. The Department’s investigation consisted of review of facility records, outside source records, and interviews of facility staff and outside sources. Resident 1 (R1) accused Staff 1 (S1) of forcing R1 to sleep on a couch in the living room and of exposing their breasts to R1. Police contacted R1 and visited the facility on January 19, 2023. Police reports indicated that R1's "statements seemed very vague, and they lacked details." Police relied heavily on [Continued on LIC9099-C, Page 1 of 2] UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, July 24, 2023 · control 08-AS-20230119155124
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff neglected resident resulting in hospitalization. Staff neglected resident resulting in pressure injuries.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Esther Miller conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit to the facility in order to deliver findings on the above allegations. LPA was granted entry to the facility by Jushua "Justin" Mendoza, Caregiver, after identifying herself and explaining the reason for the visit. On July 5, 2022, it was alleged that staff neglected resident resulting in hospitalization, specifically for malnutrition, and that staff neglected resident resulting in pressure injuries. The Department’s investigation consisted of review of facility records, outside source records, and interviews of facility staff and outside sources. Facility records indicate that Resident 1 (R1) was admitted into the facility on February 13, 2022. Interviews and outside sources indicated that R1 was able to verbalize their needs and was bedbound. [Continued on LIC9099-C, Page 1 of 2] UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, April 27, 2023 · control 08-AS-20220705170058

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

What the state has logged

California has logged 19 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 small board-and-care homes (6 or fewer beds), computed across all 5,773 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
0
typical for this size: 0
Type B citations
0
typical for this size: 0
Substantiated complaints
1
typical for this size: 0
Total complaints
5
typical for this size: 0
State visits on file
19
typical for this size: 6
See the full inspection record on the state's site →

Who runs Solaris 36?

From the CDSS ownership record, checked August 9, 2026.

Licensed to Wealthplus Management Group Llc, who operates 6 licensed California homes in total. Running more than one home is common and is neither good nor bad on its own.

Talk to this home directly

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

(858) 842-4246
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 Solaris 36? Claim this listing — free — add photos, activities, languages, and today’s availability.