Skip to main content
CovelightCare
  • Start your search

    • MapExplore homes by area and what matters to you.
    • Directory
    • Guided search
    • Medi-Cal care homes

    Take a closer look

    • Check a home
    • Compare homes
    • Ask homes for me
  • Step by step

    • All care guidesEvery guide, in the order you’ll need them.
    • 1Step 1: Learn the kinds of care homes
    • 2Step 2: Ways to pay for care
    • 3Step 3: Find homes and check them
    • 4Step 4: Visit, and get the papers before you sign
    • 5Step 5: Move in
    • 6Step 6: The first months, and your rights

    Start with a question

    • Who pays for a care home?
    • Does Medi-Cal pay for a care home?
    • Board and care or assisted living?
    • Leaving the hospital soon?
    • Can a care home make someone leave?
    • Print a visit checklist
    • Check a home’s license
  • Professional tools

    • All professional tools
    • Discharge planning
    • Care management
    • Fiduciaries
    • Elder-law attorneys
    • Public-record worklist

    Care home operators

    • Manage your home’s profileYour home’s information and family inquiries.
    • Claim a home
    • Operator sign in
  • Get to know Covelight

    • How we work
    • Our data & sources
    • What’s new
    • Suggest a correction
    • Contact us
Saved homesGuided search
  • Start your search

    • MapExplore homes by area and what matters to you.
    • Directory
    • Guided search
    • Medi-Cal care homes

    Take a closer look

    • Check a home
    • Compare homes
    • Ask homes for me
  • Step by step

    • All care guidesEvery guide, in the order you’ll need them.
    • 1Step 1: Learn the kinds of care homes
    • 2Step 2: Ways to pay for care
    • 3Step 3: Find homes and check them
    • 4Step 4: Visit, and get the papers before you sign
    • 5Step 5: Move in
    • 6Step 6: The first months, and your rights

    Start with a question

    • Who pays for a care home?
    • Does Medi-Cal pay for a care home?
    • Board and care or assisted living?
    • Leaving the hospital soon?
    • Can a care home make someone leave?
    • Print a visit checklist
    • Check a home’s license
  • Professional tools

    • All professional tools
    • Discharge planning
    • Care management
    • Fiduciaries
    • Elder-law attorneys
    • Public-record worklist

    Care home operators

    • Manage your home’s profileYour home’s information and family inquiries.
    • Claim a home
    • Operator sign in
  • Get to know Covelight

    • How we work
    • Our data & sources
    • What’s new
    • Suggest a correction
    • Contact us
Guided search
Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory CareLicense #405850010 · Covelight Care
Covelight CareCreston Village Assisted Living and Memory CareLicense #405850010 · 1919 Creston Rd, Paso Robles, CA · (805) 239-1313Record printed from covelightcare.com — data as of the dates shown on each item.
Home/California/San Luis Obispo County/Paso Robles/Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care
Map · 1919 Creston Rd

© Protomaps © OpenStreetMap

Typical starting rate$4,700/mo

Typical in San Luis Obispo County · likely $3,150–$7,000 · See costs

Check availability

Request a tour

More days
  • AskThe cost, or your own question
  • (805) 239-1313

    From the state licensing record · October 26, 2026

  • pegasusseniorliving.com↗

Free for families. A home gets your number only if you say yes.

CV

Call Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care

Paso Robles · Licensed for 130

(805) 239-1313

From the state licensing record · October 26, 2026

From the home’s website, pegasusseniorliving.com:

(214) 306-7674 · main line · seen October 27, 2026

or

Let us do the legwork

  • We ask about availability, price and the care you describe.
  • If it’s a fit, you choose whether they call you. Either way, you get every answer.
Check availabilityFree

Large community · Licensed for 130 · Paso Robles

Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care

1919 Creston Rd, Paso Robles, CA 93446 · Licensed since 2019

  • Overview
  • Care
  • Costs
  • Daily life
  • Location
  • State record

Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care

Overview

Typical starting rate

$4,700 a month

Typical in San Luis Obispo County · likely $3,150–$7,000 See costs

No openings reported

  • Approved by the state: Wheelchair · Dementia · Hospice · BedriddenState licensing record · October 26, 2026
  • Languages spoken: EnglishReported on AssistedLiving.com · September 9, 2026
  • Licensed for 130: a large care communityThe state license record

Ask this home

Check availability

Request a tour

More days
  • AskThe cost, or your own question

Free for families. A home gets your number only if you say yes.

Care and support

  • Wheelchairup to 75 residents
  • Dementia
  • Hospiceup to 18 residents
  • Bedriddenup to 5 residents

Approved by the state · State licensing record · October 26, 2026. An approval may cover specific rooms or residents; it does not establish an opening.

Read the state’s own wording
AGE RANGE 60 AND OVER. 50 AMBULATORY AND 75 NON-AMBULATORY, OF WHICH 5 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. ROOMS 109-113 CLEARED FOR BEDRIDDEN RESIDENTS. APPROVED FOR DELAYED EGRESS ON THE FIRST FLOOR IN THE MEMORY CARE UNIT. HO SPICE WAIVER FOR 18.

983 - RCFE / DEMENTIA

CDSS record, verbatim · October 26, 2026

Care services

These are the home’s own statements about its day-to-day practice — they are not part of the state licensing record, and the state has not approved or reviewed them.

  • Assisted living

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Help with bathing or showering

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Staff walk with residents / ambulation support

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Therapies availableTherapy services

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Diabetes care

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Incontinence care

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Mental wellbeing programmingDementia support groups · Brain Health Initiative · Connections memory care programWe don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.

    Dementia support groups — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Brain Health Initiative · Connections memory care program — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Respite / short-term stays

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Help with dressing and grooming

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Building is wheelchair accessible

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Medication management

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Works with residents’ own health care providers

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Activities of daily living the home lists help withHelp with daily tasks · Activities of daily living · Incontinence care/management · Dining needs · Personal care · Bathing · and 7 more

    Help with daily tasks · Activities of daily living · Incontinence care/management · Dining needs — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Personal care — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated April 30, 2026.

    Bathing · Dressing · Grooming · Mobility · Other activities of daily living — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 3, 2026.

    Personal grooming · Hygiene — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Daily living tasks — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Physical therapy delivered on site

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • 24-hour supervision claimedYes — “assisted living”

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Nurse coverageLicensed nurse

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Training topics namedCare · Activities · Family communication

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Safety and wellness checks

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Companion care

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Continuing education cadenceOngoing unspecified

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Fire sprinklers

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

As needs change

  • Medicines

    Who handles medications: nursing staff

    pegasusseniorliving.com · January 5, 2026

  • Staying through hospice

    Hospice waiver on file · covers up to 18 — care may continue at the end of life

    State licensing record · October 26, 2026

  • If memory loss develops

    Dementia-care designation on file

    State licensing record · October 26, 2026

We’ll ask for you. Not on file for Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care: two-person transfers or a lift and who is awake overnight. When we check availability, we ask about these too.

Check availability

What it costs here

Typical starting rate

$4,700a month to start

Likely $3,150–$7,000

From homes this size in San Luis Obispo County · this home’s rate is not on file

Costs & moving in

  • What the base rate includesHousing · Meals · Care · Activities · Support · Apartment · and 4 more

    Housing · Meals · Care · Activities · Support — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 3, 2026.

    Apartment · All meals · Housekeeping · Maintenance · Transportation — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

Monthly cost breakdownWith a studio and basic help · room, care and fees$4,700likely a month
Room
Daily care
Sharing the room
  • Starting monthly rate$4,700likely $3,150–$7,000

    Too few nearby homes publish a rate, so this is the typical starting rate 5 communities with 50 or more beds publish in San Luis Obispo County, with a wider likely range. This home’s own rate is not on file.

  • Basic help with daily careUsually includedup to $600

    Basic help is usually part of the starting rate. Homes that price care by level start around $600 a month (44 California homes publish a care-level range, seen in September 2026).

  • One-time move-in fee$2,500one time · likely $0–$4,000

    Homes that list a one-time entry or community fee charge a median of $2,500 (133 California listings; middle half $1,000–$4,000). Many homes list none — ask.

Likely monthly totalLikely $3,150–$7,100
$4,700
First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $4,250–$10,050
$7,200
How people payPrivate pay, Medi-Cal waiver, SSI/SSP, veterans, insurance
  • MedicareDoes not pay for room and board in a care home. It can still cover hospice or home-health visits inside one.
  • Private payMost residents pay from savings, a home sale or family help. Ask for the rate and what it includes in writing.
  • Medi-Cal Assisted Living WaiverThis home is not on the DHCS participation list dated October 1, 2026. Ask the program about current options. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.
  • SSI/SSPCalifornia’s 2026 standard is $1,626.07 a month; $1,444.07 of it goes to the home and $182 stays with the resident. Whether this home accepts it is not on file — ask.
  • VeteransVA Aid & Attendance can add to a veteran’s or surviving spouse’s pension. Ask whether residents here have used it.
  • Long-term care insuranceMost policies pay for licensed care homes. Ask what paperwork the home provides for claims.
If the money runs out, what Medi-Cal covers
Rates at nearby homes4 nearby homes publish starting rates of $3,530 to $7,500

$3,150$7,500

TypicalLikely rangeA nearby home’s published starting rate

  • The Oaks at Paso RoblesPaso Robles · 1.2 mi · Large community
    $4,695Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
  • Welcome Home AtascaderoAtascadero · 13 mi · Large community
    $7,500Listed on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026
  • The Village at Sydney CreekSan Luis Obispo · 24 mi · Large community
    $6,985Listed on Seniorly · memory care private room · seen September 9, 2026. We don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.
  • Wyndham ResidenceArroyo Grande · 34 mi · Large community
    $3,530Listed on Seniorly · assisted living · seen September 9, 2026
How this estimate worksWhy this is a county figure

Too few nearby homes publish a rate, so this is the typical starting rate 5 communities with 50 or more beds publish in San Luis Obispo County, with a wider likely range. This home’s own rate is not on file.

  • Only prices a home put out itself count: its own website, a listing it supplied, or a price Seniorly says the home confirmed. Prices a listing site shows without saying where they came from are left out.
  • Nearby homes are the nearest of the same size that publish a rate, widening from 3 to 40 miles until at least 8 do. The estimate starts from what they charge, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices.
  • Room, care-level, second-person and move-in lines come from what California homes publish on listing sites. Memory care uses Covelight’s researched premium over assisted living.
  • Totals add each line’s figure and combine the lines’ ranges as separate charges, because a home is rarely at the top, or the bottom, of every line at once.
  • We tested this estimate on 1,546 California homes that publish their own starting rate. It was within 10% of the real rate for 3 in 10 homes and within 25% for 7 in 10; the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 (September 12, 2026).
  • It cannot see this home’s specials, how it assesses care, or which rooms are open.
Avoid surprises on the billWhat changes the price, and what to ask
  • The care level

    Some homes charge one all-inclusive rate. Others add levels or points as needs grow. Ask how the level is set, who decides, and what the next level costs.

  • What is billed separately

    Medication management, incontinence supplies, transportation and a second person in the room are often extra. Ask for the list in writing.

  • Move-in costs

    A one-time move-in fee or deposit is common. Ask what it covers and whether any of it comes back if the stay is short.

  • Increases

    California requires at least 90 days’ written notice, with reasons, before a rate rises (Health & Safety Code §1569.655). A change in the resident’s care level is the section’s own exception and can be billed sooner.

Ask for the price

An estimate for planning, not a quote. A home sets the price after hearing about the care needed.

Daily life

Rooms, meals, activities and house rules, in the home’s own words. Open any detail to see where it came from.

Rooms & the spaces they will use (17)Private rooms · Outdoor space · Wifi
  • Private rooms

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Outdoor spaceOutdoor walking paths · Outdoor enclosed courtyard · Outdoor gardening areas with raised beds

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Wifi

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Room typesPrivate apartment · Studio · 1 Bedroom · 2 Bedrooms

    Private apartment — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Studio · 1 Bedroom · 2 Bedrooms — reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Common areasRecreation/activity room

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Staff help residents use devices

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Roll-in / accessible shower

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • LaundryDone by staff

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Monitoring technologyGPS-enabled wearables

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Air conditioning in the room

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Housekeeping frequencyWeekly

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Kitchenette in the unit

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Visitor parking

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Ground-floor units

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • AmenitiesSpa services · Washers and dryers · On-site physical, occupational, and speech therapy · Special Dining Programs · Fitness Center · Piano or Organ · and 5 more

    Spa services · Washers and dryers · On-site physical, occupational, and speech therapy — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Special Dining Programs · Fitness Center · Piano or Organ · Movie or Theater Room · Billiards Lounge · Game Room · Arts and Crafts Center · Beautician — reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Housekeeping

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Salon or barber

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

Meals, preferences & familiar food (13)Dining style · Special diets supported · Meals provided per day
  • Dining styleRestaurant style

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated September 4, 2026.

  • Special diets supportedNo Sugar · Low / No Sodium

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Meals provided per day3

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Texture-modified dietsPureed

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Snacks available

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Vegetarian or vegan optionsVegetarian

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Residents have input into the menu

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated September 4, 2026.

  • Meals served in the room

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Family may eat with the resident

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Meals provided

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Professional chef

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Places to eat on sitePrivate dining room · Full-service dining room · Dining room

    Private dining room · Full-service dining room — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Dining room — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

  • Dining atmosphereSocial dining experiences

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 3, 2026.

Activities & the rhythm of a day (9)The shape of an ordinary day, as the home describes it · Activity types offered · Exercise or fitness program
  • The shape of an ordinary day, as the home describes itResidents have opportunities to build social relationships every day.

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 14, 2026.

  • Activity types offeredArt projects for seniors · Art program · Physical movement · Learning or rediscovering skills · Scheduled activities · Outings · and 153 moreWe don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.

    Art projects for seniors · Art program · Physical movement · Learning or rediscovering skills · Art for expressing thoughts and emotions · Art for communication and self-expression · Group art projects · Reminiscing · Creating sleep satchels with fresh flowers · Creating sleep satchels — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Scheduled activities · Outings · Events · Shopping trips · Fitness classes · Outdoor excursions · Arts · Crafts · Social events · Art therapy — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Fun activities · Connections program · Reminiscence therapy · Boxing · Walking clubs · Fitness programs · Aromatherapy · Engagement with new information · Sensory stimulation · Music therapy · Group activities — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Inclusive programs for a wide range of interests · Puzzles · Pet therapy · Connect, Move, Learn sequence · Physical activity · Continued learning · Building new friendships · Engaging events · Connections memory care program · Familiar routines · Cognitive support · Building relationships · Interactive games · New friendships · Creative, enriching experiences — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 14, 2026.

    Engaging activities — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Books · Shared conversation · Stories · Shared discussion · Reading books together · Book discussions · Olympic-style competitions · Olympic-style Pegasus Playoff events · Pegasus Reading Circle — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 31, 2026.

    Engagement · Connection · Exercise · Entertainment — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 3, 2026.

    Movie nights · Art workshops · A variety of activities and events catering to diverse interests — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 1, 2026.

    Long-term wellness programs focused on physical and mental well-being — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 1, 2026.

    Multisensory sensory engagement activities intended to stimulate memory, reduce agitation, and provide calming experiences · Evidence-based programming designed to support remaining abilities with appropriate challenge and engagement — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated February 25, 2026.

    Group trivia · Puzzles and board games · Learning how to use new technology · Community walking club · Seated volleyball · Celebrations and parties · Singing and music · Group projects — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Virtual book clubs · Online exercise classes · Hands-on workshops teaching residents and families to use technology · Brain games · Virtual museum tours · Hands-on technology workshops for residents and families — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Memory walks · Educational seminars · Art exhibits showcasing resident creativity · Fundraisers supporting Alzheimer's research · Events that educate and inspire families and unite communities · Cognitive exercises tailored to individual abilities · Sensory activities · Art exhibits · Fundraisers · Cognitive exercises — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Birthday celebrations · Enrichment activities · Celebrating birthdays · Organizing enrichment activities · Socialization — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Seminars · Nutrition demonstrations · Memory games · Pub Trivia · Virtual games · Brain teasers · Equine therapy · Musical guests · Balance assessments · Smoothie tastings · Chef demonstrations · Drum circles · Workshops — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Social activities that build community and reduce isolation · Connect · Move · Learn · Brain Health Initiative · 2025 Brain Health Initiative · Meaningful social connections · Connect, Move, Learn · Social activities — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Social opportunities — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Cognitive stimulation therapy · Physical exercise · Social engagement · Personal expression through art and other creative activities · Individualized activities · Emotional engagement with neighbors, team members, and family · Approaches to stimulate neuroplasticity — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Engaging activities that promote socialization and brain health · Social learning through group activities that strengthen memory retention · Physical movement to support motor function and overall health · Cognitive exercises that encourage engagement and brain activity — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Social and recreational programming — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Health and wellness programs — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Mental activities · Physical activities — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Socialization and connection — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Therapeutic support · Learning · Realistic tasks · Hobbies · Walks · Fitness — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated December 16, 2025.

    Gardening Club · Happy Hour · Dances · Pet-focused Programs · Karaoke · BBQs or Picnics · Educational Speakers / Life Long Learning · Live Musical Performances · Art Classes · Live Well Programs · Brain fitness / Dakim · Live Dance or Theater Performances · Birthday Parties · Cards / Pinochle Club · Holiday Parties · Wine Tasting · Trivia Games · Activities On-site · Men's Club — reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Exercise or fitness programBoxing · Walking clubs · Other fitness programs · Physical activity (for memory care residents) · Fitness classes · Seated yoga · and 9 moreWe don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.

    Boxing · Walking clubs · Other fitness programs · Physical activity — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Fitness classes — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Seated yoga · Dancing — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Physical movement to support motor function and overall health — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Light exercise · Stretching sessions — reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

    Wii Bowling · Stretching Classes · Forever Fit · Walking Club · Yoga / Chair Yoga — reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Trips outside the home

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Resident-run activities

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated September 4, 2026.

  • Religious services off site

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Intergenerational programs

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Activities coordinator on staff

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Therapy animal visits

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 5, 2026.

Faith, culture & language (4)Religious observance supported · Languages spoken by caregivers · LGBTQ-welcoming stated
  • Religious observance supportedBible Study Group

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Languages spoken by caregiversEnglish

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • LGBTQ-welcoming stated

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 4, 2026.

  • Interpretation service available

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated January 4, 2026.

Pets, routines & independence (3)Pet types allowed · Family may bring a pet to visit · Pet weight limit
  • Pet types allowedDogs · Cats

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Family may bring a pet to visit

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Pet weight limit

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Visiting & staying involved (9)Transport to medical appointments · Office or phone hours as published · Setting
  • Transport to medical appointments

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 3, 2026.

  • Office or phone hours as publishedOpen over Thanksgiving weekendMemory careWe don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • SettingResidential neighborhood

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

  • Transport for shopping and errands

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 3, 2026.

  • Contact form

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

    Open on the website ↗
  • Public transit access claimed

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Transportation costs extraReported no

    Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Transport for group outings

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated March 3, 2026.

  • Transportation

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

About the home (2)Brand or trade name · Management company
  • Brand or trade namePegasus Senior Living

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated September 4, 2026.

  • Management companyPegasus Senior LivingMemory careWe don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.

    Reported on pegasusseniorliving.com · source dated May 1, 2026.

Where it is

1919 Creston Rd, Paso Robles, CA 93446Address from the public record · October 26, 2026. Confirm the entrance with the home before visiting.

Opening the neighborhood map…

Open directions ↗

The state record

California inspects every licensed home and publishes what it found. A citation does not make a home unsafe, and an empty file does not make a home good.

CDSS public record, read October 26, 2026 · License #405850010 · See the state’s own record ↗

The last 36 months — 16 of 32 documents

Complaint outcomes in these 36 months, in the state’s words: 4 “Substantiated” and 6 “Unsubstantiated”.

20265 state visits · 6 documents

Aug 25, 2026Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff falsify records

At 9:20am, on 8/25/2026 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Haner-Tomasko arrived at the facility unannounced to investigate the allegation of this complaint. LPA met with the Business Office Director Emma Perry, announced who he was and the reason for the visit. Administrator Adam Bramwell was not available due to being away for coorporate training. During today’s visit LPA conducted interviews and reviewed records. On the allegation, staff falsify records; it was alleged that the facility is using the signature of Person #1 (P1), a former employee, to obtain physician orders. Interviews and record review reveal P1 was employed as the Health and Wellness Director with their last date of employment at the facility as 4/18/2026. (Continued on LIC9099-C) Substantiated Staff interviews revealed that prior to admission the Sales Director provides a packet to the prospective resident’s family and/or primary care physician. The packet includes a cover sheet, Physician’s Report (LIC602A), resident orders, PRN authorization, orders for special diet, and a California Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (CA POLST). The cover sheet is one (1) page, lists the requested documents, and at the bottom of the page has a line for the names of both the Health and Wellness Director and Executive Director. LPA review of select resident records that have moved into the facility after P1’s last day and the original digital copy of the cover sheet on the Sales Director’s company computer have a digital signature of P1’s name and nursing degree of LVN above the line titled Health and Wellness Director. Above the line titled Executive Director in typed font is Adam Bramwell; Adam is the facilities designated Administrator as well. The PRN authorization page has fields for facility staff to complete requesting the form be completed by a physician. The fields include a signature and the staffs title. LPA review of select resident records that have moved into the facility after P1’s last day and the original digital copy of the PRN authorization form on the Sales Director’s company computer have a digital signature of P1’s name and nursing degree of LVN in the signature field and Health and Wellness Director in the title field. Interviews revealed that the Sales Director updates the digital signature on these forms when a new Health and Wellness Director is hired using PDF editing software. Staff stated they did not ask P1 for permission to place their digital signature on the form when they were updated but they recall verbally notifying P1 later that it was added and that P1 was responsible for reviewing the forms during their time at the facility. According to interviews P1’s name has not been removed since they left the facility because a new Health and Wellness Director has not been hired. Interviews and records indicate the facility has not hired a new Health and Wellness Director since P1 left and is still actively trying to fill the position. On 5/13/2026 the facility hired a Health and Wellness Coordinator who is a licensed vocational nurse. Staff stated that when the forms are received completed by a physician they are provided to the Executive Director/Administrator Adam Bramwell and Sangeeta Devi the Regional Vice President of Health and Wellness, who is a licensed vocational nurse, for review to determine if the facility can meet the needs of the potential resident. If the resident’s admission is approved these forms are provided currently to the Health and Wellness Coordinator to place in the resident’s paper file. The Regional Vice President of Health and Wellness states, “I do not always receive the cover sheet or PRN authorization form for review. I mostly focus on reviewing the LIC602.” (Continued on LIC9099-C) Record review reveals at least thirteen (13) residents currently residing in the facility were admitted after P1 left on 4/18/2026. Staff interviews revealed the forms with P1’s digital signature have been used for every admission during the four (4) months P1 has not worked at the facility. Although the staff may not have had ill intent by leaving P1’s digital signature on the forms, it is a misleading representation to the public of the staff currently employed at the facility having nursing certification. Additionally, this was not addressed during review of these documents by the Executive Director/Administrator, Regional Vice President of Health and Wellness, and the Health and Wellness Coordinator. Exit interview conducted, deficiency cited on LIC9099-D page, report signed, appeal rights and report provided to the Business Office Director.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 25, 2026 · control 29-AS-20260819205105

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87207 · Plan of correction due date: Sep 8, 2026

False Claims - No licensee, officer or employee of a licensee shall make or disseminate any false or misleading statement regarding the facility or any of the services provided by the facility. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee did not comply when they mislead the public by using a former employee’s digital signature and nursing certification on forms which poses a potential health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 25, 2026

Plan of correction: Regional VP Health and Wellness Director states they will work with the Administrator to create a written plan to ensure updated forms are used and the use of former employees identification is not used to conduct company business. The plan and updated forms will be emailed to LPA on or before 9/8/2026. Business Office Director present for creation of this POC.

Jul 7, 2026Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff are not wearing gloves during diaper changes. Staff made an inappropriate comment to residents in care.

At 9:20am, on 7/7/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Haner-Tomasko arrived at the facility unannounced to deliver final findings to the allegations above. LPA met with Administrator Adam Bramwell, announced who he was and the reason for the visit. During a visit on 3/3/2026 LPA conducted interviews, toured select areas of the facility, and collected relevant documentation and on 7/2/2026 conducted additional interviews. On the allegation, staff are not wearing gloves during diaper changes; it is alleged that Staff #1 (S1) does not wear gloves when assisting residents with toileting needs and when handling food. (Continued on LIC9099-C) Substantiated Interviews revealed that multiple staff members have recently observed S1 providing resident care, including toileting and brief changes, without wearing gloves, with incidents reported as recently as March 2026. Staff also reported that S1 does not wash their hands in between providing care and that they have not observed S1 wash their hands prior to handling resident food. Several staff stated that they have offered S1 gloves or asked them to wear gloves during care tasks, but S1 declined, stating they did not need to use them. Staff reported that gloves of all sizes are available and are stored in the staff room on the first floor of assisted living and in the memory care kitchen area. Staff acknowledged they wish the facility had additional glove locations. Due to limited locations, staff often carry extra gloves in their pockets to avoid walking back to supply areas. S1 admitted that there have been times they have provided bathing and toileting care without wearing gloves, stating this occurred when the correct glove size was not immediately available. S1 also admitted they were not wearing gloves while plating food for residents in memory care until they were instructed to do so during a recent training. A review of S1’s personnel file revealed that they were counseled in February 2026 for not properly wearing gloves during resident care. Records further show that S1 received additional training in March 2026 from the Health and Wellness Director regarding proper glove use. The Administrator confirmed they were aware there had been issues regarding S1’s glove use but did not recall whether formal disciplinary action had been taken. The facility’s Plan of Operation states that all staff must maintain infection control practices, including hand hygiene and the use of gloves as protective barriers to prevent infection transmission. It further specifies that personal protective equipment (PPE) must be used during direct care tasks, including bathing and incontinence care. Staff confirmed they receive online video training that includes instruction on when PPE is required. Based on all interviews conducted and documents obtained, S1 did not wear gloves as required and at this time the above allegation was found to be substantiated, there is a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. (Continued on LIC9099-C) On the allegation, staff made an inappropriate comment to residents in care; it is alleged that S1 makes undignified comments to residents in care. It is also alleged that on one occasion a resident expressed desire to go to their home and S1 stated they could not go home because there are cleaning materials in their home that could cause them to die. Interviews revealed multiple instances of inappropriate communication by S1. One witness observed S1 sitting in the memory care unit looking at their personal phone while a resident repeatedly asked S1 if they could use their phone to call their spouse. The witness reported that S1 responded in a firm tone, stating to the resident that their spouse was dead and therefore could not call them. On another occasion, a witness observed a resident stating they wanted to go home. The witness reported that S1 got close to the resident’s face and raised their voice, stating that the resident could not go home because the house was being fumigated and they would die. The witness clarified that S1’s tone was not raised for the resident to hear because this resident was not hard of hearing, but that S1’s voice was aggressive in nature, and after the interaction the resident became visibly anxious and tearful. A different witness reported an incident in which a resident attempted to get up from their chair during a meal to use the restroom. S1 reportedly told the resident, in an aggressive tone, that they could not go because they had not finished eating and that they should go to the bathroom in their brief instead. During interview, S1 acknowledged that staff and residents have told them they sound aggressive when they speak, and they said they do not know how to correct this. S1 stated they used to tell residents the truth about situations such as informing them that their spouse had died, but denied intentionally being aggressive. Witnesses also stated they have observed S1 grab residents in a rough manner. Witnesses additionally reported an incident in March 2026 involving Resident #1 (R1). Staff found R1 sitting on the floor in the memory care kitchen area. S1 was reportedly on their personal phone in the dining room in a position where they should have been able to observe R1. When staff checked on R1, the resident was unresponsive to verbal cues. Staff asked S1 to assist them with R1 and when S1 came over they kicked R1’s leg, causing the resident to say “ow.” (Continued on LIC9099-C) Later, after R1 was placed in a chair and again appeared unresponsive, witnesses observed S1 repeatedly pinching R1’s nose closed. Staff state that R1 appeared to have irregular breathing and was not breathing through their mouth as their mouth was closed. Staff are not sure why S1 did this and they asked S1 to stop multiple times. Staff interviews revealed they are trained to gently attempt to get a resident to respond either verbally or by physically rubbing their shoulder, arm, or leg, not by pinching their nose shut. S1 stated they did not recall pinching R1’s nose and believed they may have placed their hands on R1’s cheeks. S1 also stated they used their foot to move R1’s leg to create space to assist in lifting R1 from the floor. S1 said they did not recall R1 responding when they moved R1’s leg. S1 further stated that they later learned they should not have moved R1, but believed they were following the med-tech’s direction at the time. Multiple witnesses reported they had informed the Administrator and the Health and Wellness Director about these incidents involving S1 but did not feel the concerns were addressed. A review of S1’s personnel file revealed a typed note indicating that S1 does not appropriately redirect residents, does not do so professionally, speaks to residents in a manner perceived as mean, and does not remain calm. The note states that S1 needs additional training. No disciplinary action or follow-up training was documented. The Administrator stated they were unaware of the note until reviewing the file during this investigation. The Administrator explained that minor issues are typically handled by department managers, and they only become involved if issues escalate or reoccur. The Administrator recalled that when S1 first started, some residents in assisted living had concerns about S1 but not regarding the way they spoke to them or treated them. The Administrator recalls the previous Health and Wellness Director briefly mentioned something about the way S1 spoke to the residents but understood that they were handling it. The Administrator does not recall further concerns being brought to their attention. Based on all interviews conducted and documents obtained, at this time the above allegation was found to be substantiated, there is a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted, deficiencies cited on LIC9099-D pages, report signed, appeal rights and report provided to the Administrator. Interviews revealed no firsthand observation of S1 sleeping in any resident’s room. No witnesses confirmed personally seeing S1 asleep in a resident’s bed or elsewhere in resident rooms. S1 denied ever sleeping in resident rooms. During the investigation, multiple staff reported concerns unrelated to sleeping. Staff stated that S1 spends a significant amount of work time on their personal phone, leaving other staff to perform resident care and assigned tasks. Staff reported that although S1 will assist when asked, S1 often remains distracted by their phone, including while helping coworkers. A review of S1’s personnel file revealed that S1 has been counseled on three separate occasions for excessive personal phone use while on duty: in October 2025, December 2025, and March 2026. Based on all interviews conducted, at this time the above allegation was found to be unsubstantiated, meaning that the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Technical assistance was provided and LPA reviewed with the Administrator the impact that distracted staff for extended periods of time can have on the care and safety of residents. Exit interview conducted, report signed, and report provided to the Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 7, 2026 · control 29-AS-20260225145026

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87470(a)(4)(A)(3) · Plan of correction due date: Jul 21, 2026

(a) A licensee shall ensure that infection control practices are maintained as follows: (4) All facility staff...shall use gloves...as specified below. (A) Gloves shall always be worn when: 3. Assisting with direct resident care... This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interview and record review, the licensee did not ensure S1 wears gloves per regulation and the facilities plan of operation which poses a potential health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 7, 2026

Plan of correction: Administrator states they will provide the next level of corrective action to S1. Administrator also states that on 7/1/2026 training was provided to care staff on when to wear gloves/PPE. Administrator will email LPA training minutes, signed staff roster and corrective action taken for S1 on or before 7/21/2026.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Jul 21, 2026

Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (1) To be accorded dignity in their personal relationships with staff, residents, and other persons. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interview and record review, the licensee did not ensure S1 treated residents with dignity and respect which posed a potential health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 7, 2026

Plan of correction: Administrator states there will be corrective action taken for S1. Administrator states during the all staff meeting scheduled for tomorrow 7/8/2026, they will include resident rights including treating them with dignity and respect. Administrator will email LPA training minutes, signed staff roster and corrective action taken for S1, on or before 7/21/2026.

Jul 7, 2026Facility evaluation reportCase Management - IncidentDeficiency page: Type A

Type of visit: Case Management - Incident

At 9:20am, on 7/7/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Haner-Tomasko arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct a Case Management – Incident visit. LPA met with Administrator Adam Bramwell, announced who he was and the reason for the visit. On 2/27/2026 at 11:43 p.m., the Administrator emailed the LPA to report that, during an audit conducted earlier that day by Omnicare pharmacy staff, multiple bottles of liquid narcotic medications were found to be missing. The Administrator stated that a full investigation was underway with the involvement of local law enforcement. On 3/2/2026 at 10:20 a.m., the LPA spoke by phone with the Administrator and the previous Health and Wellness Director about their internal investigation. They reported that eight (8) bottles of liquid narcotic medication were missing from the locked medication refrigerator in the medication room located on the first-floor. These medication bottles are kept inside their original packaging box with the pharmacy label. According to their investigation, a hospice nurse managed medications for two of the residents with missing medications and confirmed they observed the two medication bottles they managed were present on 2/26/2026 at around 11:00 a.m. Later that same day, at about 7:00 p.m., Staff #2 (S2) checked all eight medications for refill needs and confirmed that all eight bottles were present in their labeled boxes. On 2/27/2026 at about 11:00 a.m., Omnicare pharmacy staff discovered that the eight bottles were missing during a scheduled audit. The boxes with pharmacy labels were still in the refrigerator, but the medication bottles were not inside. At approximately 4:00 p.m. that day, the Administrator contacted local law enforcement. (Continued on LIC9099-C) During a visit conducted by the LPA on 3/3/2026, the LPA conducted interviews and collected documentation, including med management documents. LPA later obtained police reports. LPA interviews and record review revealed that the facility has a policy requiring narcotic counts at each medication technician (med-tech) shift change, typically at 6:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m., and 10:00 p.m. Three medication carts are used in the facility, and each cart is typically assigned to a different med-tech per shift. During narcotic counts, outgoing med-techs confirm the presence of each narcotic in their assigned medication cart with incoming med-techs and document this on the facility’s “Controlled Substances Shift Change Count-Check-Sheet.” This count includes the liquid narcotics stored in the medication room refrigerator. Liquid narcotic medications for all three carts are stored together in the same refrigerator, and med-techs are responsible for verifying the medications assigned to their cart. Staff reported that during the narcotic counts conducted on 2/26/2026 and on 2/27/2026 at 6:00 a.m., they did not check to ensure all the bottles were physically in the boxes. Interviews also revealed that during the 6:00 a.m. narcotic counts on 2/26/2026 and 2/27/2026, Staff #1 (S1) was acting unusually, attempting to rush the counting process and stating they needed to be somewhere. A routine medication audit had been scheduled for the morning of 2/27/2026 to be conducted by Omnicare pharmacy, which supplies most resident medications. During the audit, at approximately 11:00 a.m., Omnicare staff discovered the eight (8) bottles of liquid narcotics were missing. The eight (8) missing medications are two (2) bottles of liquid lorazepam 2mg/mL (one bottle had approximately 24mL left and the other unused at 30mL) and two (2) bottles of liquid oxycodone 30mg/mL (one bottle had approximately 24.75mL remaining and the other unused at 30mL) belonging to Resident #1 (R1); two (2) full bottles (30mL) of liquid lorazepam (2mg/mL) belonging to Resident #2 (R2); one (1) open bottle with approximately 28.75mL remaining of liquid lorazepam (2mg/mL) belonging to Resident #3 (R3); and one (1) open bottle with approximately 27.5mL remaining of liquid lorazepam (2mg/mL) belonging to Resident #4 (R4). (Continued on LIC9099-C) At approximately 11:30 a.m., the previous Health and Wellness Director notified the Administrator, who instructed staff to verify that the bottles were in fact missing. Interviews revealed that by the 2:00 p.m. shift change the medications had been confirmed missing, law enforcement had not yet been contacted, and med-tech staff did not want to conduct another narcotic count until the missing medications were reported to law enforcement. Interviews revealed that the Administrator did not get directly involved until this point. Administrator states that when they were notified of the missing medications they were caring for a short staffed kitchen since it was lunch time and wanted to ensure an internal investigation was conducted to make sure the medications were indeed missing before notifying local law enforcement. They were in communication with the corporate office notifying them of the missing meds and had additional administrative tasks to handle, a management position interview and resident care meeting. Records show that at approximately 4:00 p.m., the Administrator contacted local law enforcement. Staff stated that on the night of 2/27/2026 to 2/28/2026 there were three staff there that night a care staff in assisted living, a care staff in memory care and a med-tech. Witnesses stated that at approximately 1:00 a.m. on 2/28/2026, S1 arrived at the facility, they were not acting themselves, and asked the other staff for the medication cart keys. Staff did not provide S1 the keys and asked S1 to go home, but they stayed. S1 was also reportedly focused on a small brown bottle in the med-tech room labeled nitroglycerin. Staff removed the bottle from S1, and it was later discovered to contain eleven (11) clonazepam 2mg tablets. Staff stated that S1 did not attempt to harm anyone or perform resident care; however, during the shift, S1 began slurring their speech, became unsteady, and eventually fell asleep in a chair outside the med-tech room. At approximately 7:00 a.m., staff notified the Health and Wellness Director that S1 was asleep in the chair and could not be awakened. At approximately 7:45 a.m., the Health and Wellness Director contacted local law enforcement. When law enforcement arrived, S1 had awakened and was in the memory care unit of the facility. Law enforcement escorted S1 out of the facility and it was later determined that S1 was in possession of the missing medications. Exit interview conducted, deficiencies cited on LIC809-D pages, report signed, appeal rights and report provided to the Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 7, 2026

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.2(a)(25) · Plan of correction due date: Jul 8, 2026

Personal Rights (a) Residents in privately operated residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (25) To protection of their property from theft or loss... This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interview and record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited when S1 stole multiple resident’s medications including narcotic medications, which posed an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 7, 2026

Plan of correction: Administrator states S1 has not returned to the facility since 2/28/2026 and their continued employment is dependent on the outcome of this and law enforcement investigations. The locks on the med-room and refrigerator have been changed. The facility changed their policy to only store... liquid narcotic medications that a resident is actively taking. The Administrator states they will review the theft and loss program at the the next all staff meeting on 7/8/2026 and email the LPA the meeting minutes and staff roster on or before 7/10/2026.

Mar 25, 2026Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not maintain a clean/sanitary facility

At 9:25am, on 3/25/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Haner-Tomasko arrived at the facility unannounced to deliver final findings to the above allegation of this complaint. LPA met with Administrator Adam Bramwell, announced who he was and the reason for the visit. During a previous visit to the facility on 01/06/2026, LPA toured the facility, interviewed staff, residents, the administrator, and obtained relevant documents. On the allegation, staff do not maintain a clean/sanitary facility; it was alleged that on a day in October 2025 Resident #1’s (R1’s) bathroom had feces on the toilet and walls. (Continued on LIC9099-C) Substantiated During LPA visit on 1/6/2025 LPA and Administrator Adam Bramwell toured the facility noting R1’s bathroom with yellow and brown dried substances on the toilet seat, brown dried spots on the bathroom floor, and the bathroom had a strong urine and fecal odor. Additionally in R1’s room multiple kitchenette cabinets had dried substances on the inside shelving, one drawer had a large spot of orange liquid spilled in it, another drawer contained a stained brown decorative pillow, the sink had dried food debris in it, and in the cabinet under the sink drainpipe the wood was stained, warping, and had multiple light grey, dark grey, and black spots. Upon inspecting all of the rooms in the Connections Neighborhood, memory care unit, the LPA and Administrator observed three additional resident rooms with grab bars, light switches and toilet seats with dried yellow and brown substances, all having a strong urine/fecal odor. Multiple stains were noted in the public hallway carpet in memory care with staff interviews revealing one of the carpet stains, brown in color, to be feces. Interviews revealed multiple staff had reported that specific stain to leadership on 1/5/2026. LPA photographed all the mentioned areas. Based on observation and all interviews conducted, at this time the above allegation was found to be substantiated, there is a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted, deficiencies cited on LIC9099-D page, report signed, appeal rights and report provided to the Administrator. LPA review of R1’s record revealed R1 is diagnosed with dementia, struggles to communicate, has a contracted hand, is a one staff assist when toileting, has a private bedroom, and has a history of urinating in various spots of the facility. Regarding R1's toileting needs. Staff stated R1 will take themself to use the bathroom if the staff are helping other residents, R1 has a history of putting their hands in their feces, and staff monitor R1 for hygiene because of this. Staff are not aware of a recent time R1 had feces on their hands. Regarding R1's clothing, interviews revealed R1 will sometimes remove their pants independently, they will attempt to help R1 put the clothing back on, and there have been times when R1 has removed their pants, were sitting in their private room, and staff have offered R1 a blanket to cover their legs. Regarding R1's over-grown fingernails, staff interviews revealed they are not allowed to cut finger or toenails, but once month or every two months a podiatrist visits the facility, the facility has a beauty salon that residents or their responsible person can make appointments for them to have their nails cut, and care staff document on each residents shower sheet if they notice the need to have their nails cut. Staff also stated that due to R1's contracted hand it is difficult to open the hand for the nails to be cut, R1's family has been taking them out of the facility to have their nails cut on a regular basis, and currently a home health nurse has been monitoring and cutting the nails on the contracted hand, but the nurse is not always successful. Based on interviews and record review R1 does require assistance with their toileting, dressing and nail care needs and that the facility, home health, and R1's family are making efforts to provide R1 the care they need. Based on all interviews conducted and documents obtained, at this time the above allegation was found to be unsubstantiated, meaning that the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted, report signed, and report provided to the Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 25, 2026 · control 29-AS-20251230091104

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87303(a) · Plan of correction due date: Apr 8, 2026

Maintenance and Operation (a) 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 was not met as evidenced by: Based on observation and interview, the licensee did not ensure the facility was clean and sanitary which poses a potential Health, Safety, and Personal Rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 25, 2026

Plan of correction: Administrator has already started checking the memory care unit more often for cleaniness and will conducted in-service training with staff on cleaning and sanitization of the facility and submit training documents and signed staff roster to LPA on or before 4/8/2026.

Mar 3, 2026Facility evaluation reportCase Management - OtherReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

On March 3, 2026 at 9:00am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Haner-Tomasko arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a case management - other visit to the facility. LPA met with Administrator Adam Bramwell and explained the purpose of the visit. On February 27, 2026 Administrator notified LPA via email that an audit conducted that day discovered missing medications. On March 2, 2026 LPA interviewed the Administrator and Wellness Director over the the phone for further details. During today's visit LPA gathered documentation, conducted interviews and toured select areas of the facility. No deficiencies issued during today's visit. LPA will return at a later date to conclude the investigation and issue citations. Exit interview conducted, report signed, and report delivered to the Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 3, 2026
Jan 6, 2026Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

On 1/6/2026, at 9:15am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Haner-Tomasko arrived unannounced to this facility to conduct the annual inspection. LPA met with facility Administrator Adam Bramwell, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. At approximately 10:00am, Administrator and LPA conducted a full facility walk through and tour. This is a two story facility with a section dedicated to memory care on the first floor. The facility is square in shape with an outdoor courtyard in the center and one wing off to the south-east. LPA noted upon entering the main entry a lobby with reception desk to the left; an entrance to the large communal dining room across from the main entry doors; and a resident snack bar, the main kitchen, staff laundry room, staff room, maintenance room and employee entrance are to the right. The communal dining room has a smaller banquet room for small private events. On the first floor past the reception desk are administrative offices, a gathering/activity space (with piano, fishtank, and self-contained fireplace for residents and visitors to enjoy), 32 resident rooms with en-suite bathrooms, medication room, a dedicated activity room, public restrooms, laundry room and maintenance/housekeeping closets locked for resident safety. The memory care unit is separated by coded egress doors with an additional 15 resident rooms that have en-suite bathrooms, multiple activity rooms, a dining room and a fenced outdoor area with tables and shade for residents and visitors. LPA noted meals are delivered from the main kitchen to the memory care unit and served from the memory care kitchen. On the second floor there are 49 resident rooms with en-suite bathrooms, physical therapy room, laundry room, snack bar area with seating, beauty shop, and a TV/activity space. LPA inspected a sample number of resident rooms and noted that the rooms had working lights, ample storage, working appliances and non-skid surfaces in the showers. LPA noted an emergency evacuation chair located at the top of the five stairwells and the elevator was serviced on 12/24/2024. (Continued on LIC809-C) The facility exterior has a walking path around the entirety of the facility and an outdoor courtyard in the middle of the facility which also has tables and shade. There is a designated smoking area just outside the west side of the dining-room. The facility has wired/battery operated dual smoke/carbon monoxide detectors in each resident room and smoke detectors in the hallways tested by Alpha Fire on 8/6/2025. LPA observed fire extinguishers throughout the facility tagged current and in the green compression range, being serviced during todays visit. LPA tested facility hot water at various locations measuring between 109 & 112*(f), within regulation temperatures 105*-120* (f). LPA noted that the facility has no obstructions in hallways, doorways or exits. Medications are locked in medication carts. LPA conducted a sample medication audit and reviewed the facilities Centrally Stored Medication and Destruction Records. Administrator and LPA conducted a partial review of the facility annual CARE tools module. LPA will need to return to finish the annual. At this time no deficiencies are being cited. Exit interview, report read, and report provided to the Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 6, 2026

20252 state visits · 4 documents

Mar 11, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not ensure that resident's incontinence needs are being met. Staff do not ensure that residents are assisted with bathing. Staff do not respond to resident's call for assistance. Staff are not assisting residents with medications in a timely manner. Staff did not respond to resident's fall.

At 1:20pm on 03/11/2025, Licensing Program Analysts (LPA’s) Jeffries and Haner-Tomasko arrived unannounced to deliver the final findings to all the allegations to this complaint. LPAs also conducted a subsequent case management visit on a report not related to this complaint during the same visit. LPAs met with Administrator, Adam Bramwell, announced who they are and the reason for the visit. As to the allegations of, “Staff do not ensure that resident's incontinence needs are being met.” and “Staff do not ensure that residents are assisted with bathing. “ It was alleged that Resident 1’s (R1) hair, and clothes were covered in own fecal matter and incontinence was not regularly changed by facility staff. It was discovered through observation and interviews on 11/21/2024 LPA Jeffries conducted a physical tour of facility memory care unit. LPA observed R1’s room to be clean and free of odor. LPA also attempted to interview R1 on 11/21/2024 however R1 interview did not result in a response to any of the questions asked. LPA also toured 4 resident rooms next to and across from R1’s rooms all clean in good repair and no odor. On 01/23/2025 LPA conducted a second physical inspection of R1’s room and person and noted no CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated obvious neglect of incontinence care. On 01/21/2025 LPA Jeffries conducted interviews with Staff 1 – 4 (S1, S2, S4, S4) all stated that R1 has incontinence issued with “digging” and are always addressed by staff when observed and as needed. LPA reviewed facility care plan for R1 that shows two showers per week. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegations of. “Staff do not ensure that resident’s incontinence needs are being met.” And “Staff do not ensure that residents are assisted with bathing. “ both are unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegations of, “Staff do not respond to residents call for assistance.” and “Staff are not assisting residents with medications in a timely manner. “It was alleged that R2 was yelling “Help me” and no staff responded. It was discovered through documentation, observations, and interviews that on 11/21/2024 LPA conducted a physical tour of facility and observed R2 in their room. R2 was vocal during the LPA observation stating “lord help me” LPA observed S4 attending to R2’s needs. On 11/21/2024 LPA Jeffries conducted an interview with S4 who stated that R2 baseline is continually requesting staff assistance by calling out or yelling for staff. S4 stated that Staff check on all residents, including R2 approximately every 15 minutes or less. Interviews on 11/21/2022 with S1, S2, S3, and S4 all stated that residents are continually checked for any changes in conditions of residents. All stated they have high confidence in all staff and no staff are neglecting residents needs. On 11/21/2024 LPA Jeffries attempted to interview R1, R2, R3, and R4 all stated they feel safe in facility, however none answered screening questions when LPA was checking cognitive understanding. On 11/21/2024 LPA Jeffries reviewed R1 and R2’s Physicians reports, Centrally Stored Medication Records (CDMR), and Medication Administration Records (MAR)and found no abnormalities. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegations of, “Staff do not respond to residents call for assistance.” and “Staff are not assisting residents with medications in a timely manner. “ and are both unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegation of, “Staff did not respond to resident's fall.” It was alleged that approximately between October 28 through November 3 of 2024 an unknown resident had fallen, and no staff assisted the resident. On 11/20/2024, 11/21/2024, and 11/23/2024 LPA Jeffries attempted to contact the reporting party (RP) by phone with no answered. As of 03/10/2025 there has been to return call from RP. On 11/21/2024 and 11/27/2024 LPA Jeffries reviewed facility serious incident reports (SIRs) which reviled the following: On 10/25/2024 a resident fell in their room, pressed pendant and staff address fall; accordingly, there was no other recorded resident fall in the time period of the alleged fall and there were no subsequent reports of resident injury within that time frame of the alleged fall. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff did not respond to resident's fall.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 11, 2025 · control 29-AS-20241120103550
Mar 11, 2025Facility evaluation reportCase Management - IncidentDeficiency page: Type A

Type of visit: Case Management - Incident

On 03/11/2025 at 1:20pm, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Haner-Tomasko and Jeffries conducted an unannounced Case Management visit. LPAs arrived at the facility, met with Administrator Adam Bramwell, and announced the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPAs reviewed relevant documents and interviewed staff and resident. On 03/03/2025, Community Care Licensing received a self-report from the facility regarding missing medication. On 03/03/2025, Resident #1(R1) reported medications missing from their self-managed medications to Administrator Adam Bramwell. On 03/03/2025, Adam reported the incident to Community Care Licensing, the Local Long-Term Ombudsman, local law enforcement, and opened an internal investigation. R1 is able to self-administer their medication, and keeps their medications locked in their apartment. It was alleged the narcotic Norco was missing, due to R1 keeping records of the number of pills in the bottle. The report states R1 believed 35 pills went missing in February 2025. On 2/27/2025, R1 left 3 Norco pills in a bottle at their bedside, went to dinner, and returned to find only 1 pill left. The facility was notified of the missing medications on 3/3/2025. On 3/8/2025, Administrator submitted a supplement incident report with additional details. After discussion with R1 and R1’s responsible parties, a Ring camera was placed in R1’s room to view only the drawer where the medications were kept and posted a camera in use sign outside resident room. On 3/5/2025 around 4:20pm, R1 left their room to go to dinner. At 5:25pm, the Ring camera detected movement in the room. The video footage revealed Staff 1 (S1) open the drawer, appear to take pills from the bottle, and exit the apartment within 20 seconds. The Administrator viewed the footage and contacted law enforcement. Once law enforcement was on-site, the pill bottles were collected and examined, and was found to be missing 2 Norco pills. Law enforcement questioned S1, who initially denied taking the pills. (Continue 809-C) S1 emptied their pockets and the 2 Norco pills were found on their person, along with 28 other pills of varying shapes, sizes, colors, and imprint codes. S1 refused to state where the other pills came from. S1 was arrested by law enforcement. S1 was terminated by the facility and administrator submitted documentation to remove S1's associated clearance from facility roster. Administrator stated they conducted an additional audit to ensure all residents who self-store medication had proper locking boxes. LPA recommended conducting an audit of all resident self-stored and administered medications with residents present. LPA conducted a medication audit of 9 centrally stored residents’ narcotic medications and found (no errors/errors). Administrator conducted full medication audit of all residents’ centrally stored medications on 3/6/2025. The following deficiencies were observed and cited from the California Code of Regulations, Title 22. Personal Rights of resident, property was not safeguarded by the facility. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report and appeal rights issued at the time of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 11, 2025

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.2(a)(25) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 12, 2025

Personal Rights 87468.2....residents in privately operated residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: To protection of their property from theft or loss... This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interview and record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited when S1 stole R1’s medications, which posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 11, 2025

Plan of correction: S1 was terminated 3/5/25. Administrator will create a policy addressing the residents self-custody of medication and training to review with every new and current resident who self-store medication, and as needed moving forward. The proposed policy will be emailed to LPA on 3/12/2025. A full medication audit of centrally stored medications was conducted on 3/6/2025. Administrator will email LPA documentation from the audit on 3/12/2025. Administrator will review facilities... (Continued LIC812).

Jan 23, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff inappropriately restrained resident. Staff are not safeguarding resident's personal belongings. Staff are not ensuring resident is showered. Staff left resident in soiled diapers for extended period of time.

At 9:00am on 01/23/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to issue final findings to the allegations above to this complaint as well as to conduct facility annual inspection on a separate report. LPA met with Administrator, Adam Bramwell, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of, “Staff inappropriately restrained resident.” It was alleged that an unknown date in September 2024, Staff 1 (S1), S2, and a third unidentified staff (S3) held down Resident 1 (R1). It was discovered through interviews and documentation that in interviews by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries, on 09/16/2025, with S1 and S2. It was discovered that R1 had had assistance with manicuring R1’s fingernails in September of 2024 by S1 and S2. Both S1 and S2 denied restraining R1 during the assistance with manicuring R1’s fingernails. S1 stated that, we both (S1 and S2) assisted R1 but no one had to restrained (R1) in doing so.” S1 did not recall who the third staff was nor a third staff assisting in the manicure of R1. S1 stated that R1’s right hand is always in a closed fist and S1 and S2 cut the nails of R1’s left hand, they attempted to cut the nails of R1’s right hand but R1 resisted. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated In an interview with R1 on 09/16/2024 by LPA Jeffries, R1 did not recall staff restraining R1 at any time. R1 stated that they have lived at the facility “for years”. R1 stated that they feel safe with staff and care at this facility. On 01/22/2025, LPA conducted a phone interview with R1’s Responsible party (F1). F1 stated that R1, had an undiagnosed stroke sometime in R1’s past (as told by R1’s Physician, Dr. Bettencourt) which resulted in R1’s right hand being closed. F1 stated that facility staff attempted to cut R1’s fingernails on the right hand but did not force R1. On 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries conducted interviews with S4, S5, and S6, and all staff stated that they have never participated or have witnessed a restraint of any resident at this facility. On 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries conducted interviews with R2, R3, R4, and R5, all stated that they have never been or seen any type of resident physical restraint at this facility. All four Residents stated that they feel safe in this facility and all staff treat them with dignity. LPA conducted a record review of incident reports for the month of September of 2024 and found no account of reported restraints or staff to resident interventions. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff inappropriately restrained resident.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff are not safeguarding resident’s personal belongings.” It was alleged that R1 had lost two sets of R1’s dentures. Additionally, a toothbrush that was dirty and black was found. It was discovered through interviews that on 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries conducted interview with Facility Administrator, Adam Bramwell, who stated that R1’s Responsible Person (F1) brought to the facilities attention that R1’s dentures were missing. Administrator stated that they instructed staff to conduct a through search in memory care unit for missing dentures, but they were not found. On 01/22/2025 LPA interviewed F1, who stated that they were aware of one set of dentures being missing, they reported to the facility and the facility conducted a search but did not find the dentures. F1 also stated that R1 has had a history of hiding their dentures and sometimes throwing them into the trash and did not dismiss this possibility in this instance. F1 stated that they facility followed through in their responsibility and due diligence to locate the missing dentures. On 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries interviewed S1, S2, S4, and S5, all had been instructed to search for missing dentures which were not found. Additionally, S1, S2, S4, and S5 were all shown a picture of the dirty black toothbrush, and all stated they had never seen that toothbrush before and would have collected it and notified supervisors if they had seen a toothbrush in that condition. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C On 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries noted on an inspection of R1’s room one clean toothbrush that appeared to show normal use which was the brand of Oral B, two unused new toothbrushes that were the brand of Colgate, all had R1’s name written on the handle of the toothbrushes, however the dirty black toothbrush, was not a brand name toothbrush nor did it have R1’s name on the handle. At this time there is not enough evidence to substantiate the allegation of, “Staff are not safeguarding resident’s personal belongings.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff are not ensuring resident is showered.” It was alleged that R1 was not getting showers. It was discovered through interviews and documentation that on 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries interviewed R1, who stated, “Staff take good care of me, I like the staff.” and that their (R1) needs were always met and have never had an issue with care, including bathing and incontinence. On 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries conducted interviews with S1 and S2 who stated that showers for R1 are offered 4 times per week, and often R1 would refuse showers. S1 and S2 stated that they would let supervisor know and note in the shower refusal log when R1 would refuse shower. S1 and S2 stated that R1 would normally be showered one to two time per week on average. LPA Jeffries reviewed facility documents labeled “Shower Refusal” for R1, which shows that R1 had refused showers on 10 occasions during the time period of August 15 through September 15th of 2024 which is a refusal of 10 of 20 shower days. On 01/22/2025 LPA conducted an interview with F1, who stated that the facility will call F1 who is R1’s responsible party and notify F1 when R1 has a shower refusal. F1 stated the facility will call but not always the same day. At this time there is not enough evidence to substantiate the allegation of, “Staff are not ensuring resident is showered.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff left resident in soiled diapers for extended period of time.” It was alleged that, facility are leaving R1 in soiled diapers for a long time. It was discovered through interviews on 09/16/2024, LPA Jeffries interviewed R1, who stated, “Staff take good care of me, I like the staff.” and that their (R1) needs were met and have never had an issue with care, including bathing and incontinence. On 09/16/2024 LPA Jeffries conducted an interview with S1, S2, S4, and S5, who all stated that residents are monitored throughout the day for incontinence and incontinence is always addressed when needed. On 01/22/2025, LPA Jeffries conducted an interview with F1 who stated, the facility dose a good job with R1’s incontinence and had never had an issue or problem with the facility addressing R1’s incontinence in a timely manner. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff left resident in soiled diapers for extended period of time.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2025 · control 29-AS-20240912163515
Jan 23, 2025Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

At 9:00am on 01/23/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to the facility to conduct the facilities annual inspection. LPA met with facility Administrator, Adam Bramwell, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. Additionally, LPA will issue final findings to a separate complaint on a separate report on this date. At 12:30pm, Administrator and LPA conducted a full facility walk through and tour. LPA noted that the facility has a 130 person capacity and has a current census of 96. The facility exterior has walking path around the entirety of the facility and a covered main entrance. There is a designated smoking area just out side the dining-room entrance that has a covered gazebo on the side of the facility. LPA noted that the memory care unit of 15 resident room with on suite bathrooms located in the back of the facility and has a fenced outdoor area that is also in the back of the facility, which has tables and umbrellas for shade. LPA noted that the facility has a outdoor courtyard in the middle of the facility which also has tables and umbrellas for shade. LPA did not observe any issues or violations on the outside areas of the facility. LAP noted that this facility is two stories and has 4 distinct wings. On the first floor there area 35 resident rooms with on suite bathrooms, On the second floor there are 50 resident rooms with on suite bathrooms. LPA inspected a sample of rooms rooms and noted that all rooms had working lights, ample storage, working appliances and non-skid surfaces in the showers. LPA observed that there is a medication room, physical therapy room, laundry room, snack bar area with seating, beauty shop, and an tv activity room on the second floor. LPA noted that all three stair wells had emergency fire chair at the top of the stairwells. LPA noted that the dining room, kitchen, laundry room, staff room, maintenance room and employee entrance on the first floor on the north side of the building. LPA noted that the front entrance has offices and reception desk, and a lounging room for residents. LPA note that there are assorted offices on both the first floor and second floor. LPA noted that there were fire extinguishers placed all throughout the facility, all fire extinguishers that were inspected were in the prime and charged in the green. LPA observed working carbon monoxide detectors through out the facility. CONTINUED on LIC809-C LPA noted that all walkways and entrances were free and clear of debit. At 9:40am Administrator and LPA conducted a full review of the facility annuals control tools module. LPA noted that no citations or violations as result of the annual care tool modules review. LPA noted that the annual facility inspection resulted in no violations or citations at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2025

The state marks this report as 3 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 2. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

20244 state visits · 6 documents

Dec 19, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility failed to notify responsible party/physician in residents change of condition. Facility did not provided change of contract notification. Facility did not observed residents change of condition. Facility did not follow terms of admission agreement. Facility staff are not properly trained.

At 8:45am on 12/19/2024, Licensing Program Anaylist (LPA) Jeffries arrived to the facility unannounced to issue final finding to the allegations to this complaint. LPA met with Administrator Adam Bramwell, annoucned who he is and the reason for the visit. As to the allegations of, “Facility failed to notify responsible party/physician in residents change of condition.”, “Facility did not observed residents change of condition.”, “Facility did not follow terms of admission agreement.”, and “Facility did not provided change of contract notification.” It was alleged that there was a lack of communication, and not replying to calls or emails to the family or physician’s a notification in R1’s change of condition. It was discovered through documentation and interviews of the following: On 05/15/2024, LPA Jeffries reviewed R1’s Admissions Agreement dated 02/15/2024, this Admissions Agreement was initialed and singed in all applicable notations with the following notable acknowledgements: CONTUNED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated R1 identified and initialed that this agreement was with the facility corporation, R1 and “self” indicating that R1 was independent of a designated representative by the contract. It is noted that there was a clause in the contract that in the event of Death, F1 was designated as the person to remove R1’s property. There were no other items in the contract as to a representative or designated person of R1 in this Admission Agreement. Additionally, on 05/15/2024, LPA reviewed R1’s Physicians Report (LIC602) dated 02/13/2024, two days prior to R1’s move in date to the facility, which did not notate any cognitive decline, and noted that R1 could leave the facility unassisted. On 05/15/2024, LPA reviewed, R1’s Central Coast Home Health Care, Admission Service Agreement, singed and dated on 02/18/2024 which indicated and marked as “I DO NOT have a durable Power of Attorney for Health Care.” Which was singed by R1 on 02/18/2024. On 05/06/2024 and 05/15/2024, LPA Jeffries reviewed 9 pages of transcripts submitted by F1 indicating outlining, weekly to daily communications with Administrator, Adam Bramwell, Facility Wellness Director (S1) pertaining to R1’s medical appointments, medication changes and concerns, billing explanations, insurance benefits, and general condition of R1. On 05/06/2024, LPA interviewed F1, who stated that they have been in communication with Administrator Adam Bramwell, and S1 through email, text, and phone calls multiple time a week during R1’s stay at the facility. On 05/10/2024 LPA Jeffries interviewed Administrator, Adam Bramwell who stated that they had continuous contact with F1 through phone (mostly in the evenings due to global location of F1), text, and emails. On 05/10/2024 LPA Jeffries interviewed S2 who stated that they have had continuous contact with F1 through emails during F1’s stay at the facility. LPA noted Based on documentation, and interviews, there in not enough evidence to support the allegations of, “Facility failed to notify responsible party/physician in residents change of condition.”, “Facility did not observed residents change of condition.”, “Facility did not follow terms of admission agreement.”, and “Facility did not provided change of contract notification.” and are all unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C At to the allegation of, “Staff are not properly trained.” It was alleged that on February 17th Staff 3 (S3) and Staff 4 (S4) did not know how to change the portable oxygen bottle for R1. It was discovered through interviews and documentation that on 05/06/2024, LPA conducted a phone interview with W1. W1 stated that R1’s portable oxygen tank was delivered “either the 16th or the 17th of February. 12/18/2024 LPA Jeffries conducted phone interviews with S4 who stated that Facility Health Care Director provided in “impromptu” training to all care staff that were working 02/19/2024 a training on the specific functions of R1’s portable oxygen tank. S1 stated that they have over a year experience as Medication Technician and Care Giver and has had experience and prior training with Oxygen for residents. LPA noted that the arrival of the new equipment (R1’s portable oxygen tank) on a weekend did not allow reasonable time for staff training. LPA noted that the “impromptu training took place on 12/18/2024 at the first available date for training by a qualified trainer. LPA reviewed all staff training records that were working at the facility on 12/17/2024 which included S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, and S7. S3-S7 all had met or exceeded the annual number of hours of training per regulations. LPA noted that the facility exercised due diligence in the training of the new equipment (R1’s portable oxygen) on the first available date. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff are not properly trained,” and is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided. On 02/19/2024 R1 had a follow up doctor’s appointment where new medication orders for R1 which changed the Furosemide 40mg to 1 tab PO qDay (Once per day) under the supervision of Phys2. On 03/05/2024, at the request of the W1, facility submitted a request to Phys3 for R1 to have Furosemide 40mg BID. On 03/07/2024 a return fax order which stated, “R1 can increase Furosemide 40mg BID for 5-7 days until swelling improves…” The final order that the facility received was for Furosemide 40mg BID was received on 03/28/2024 from Phys3. Upon admission to the facility on 02/16/2024, R1’s Medication Administration Record (MAR) from the facility shows R1 to have Furosemide 40mg administered twice per day (8am and 12pm) on date February 16, 17, 18, and 19, as prescribed by Phys1, which are the correct dosage time per Physicians orders as referenced above. Orders dated 02/19/2024 by Phys2, prescribing Furosemide 40mg qDay (once per day) as noted above where not followed according to Physician orders. As evidence by the facilities MAR, which shows that R1 continued to received Furosemide 40mg BID, from the dates of February 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28. On February 29th facility MAR shows Furosemide 40mg administered at 8am and Discontinued (DC) for the 12:00 pm time, however the facility did not present any physicians orders for this DC notation on February 29th. The facility March of 2024 MAR notes that the correct time and dosage of Furosemide 40mg as per Physicians orders were followed from March 7-12 was followed a per Physician Orders, as evidence of the facility MAR and the faxed order from Phys3 on 03/07/2024. Facility March MAR also noted that no Furosemide 40mg was administered between the dates of March 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 as per Physicians order. LPA Jeffries reviewed facility documents titled Incident Notification dated 04/17/2024, indicating that R1 was transported to the hospital for shortness of breath, however this was not reported and documents requested were not provided to determine how long R1 was in the hospital based on that facility incident report. Which puts the facility March 2024 MAR for the dates of March 15-21 in question as there is no note of Furosemide 40mg in question of multiple doctors’ orders which do not specify to DC or continue once per day. Facility MAR for March and April show that Furosemide 40mg was administered per Physicians order based on last prescription from Phys3 of Furosemide 40mg BID. Based on MAR, Physicians Orders, and CSMR, there is enough evidence to show that during the time period of February 19-28, R1 was not administered medication by the facility as prescribed by a physician. Therefore, the allegation of, ““Facility failed to provide resident with correct medication dosage.” Is substantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, citation issued, appeal rights and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 19, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240506140046

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87465(a)(5)(A) · Plan of correction due date: Dec 20, 2024

87465 Incidental Medical and Dental Care (a) A plan for incidental medical … provide for assistance in obtaining such care, by compliance with the following: (5) … Assistance with self-administered medications shall be limited to the following: (A) Medications usually prescribed for self-administration which have been authorized by the person's physician. This requirement was not met by evidence of MARs indicating medication not provided in accordance to Physicians order in February of 2024. Which poses an imminent risk to Residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 19, 2024

Plan of correction: Administrator agrees to conduct two hours of Medication training that includes medication initial intake, documentation, and medication distribution. Administrator will review and revise Medication Administration policy with all employees and proved LPA a copy of all staff 2 hour Medication training, as well as the facility’s current and updated medication distribution policy to LPA by 12/20/2024.

Aug 29, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sexually abused while in care. Resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care. Staff do not ensure that resident takes medication as prescribed. Staff do not ensure resident's incontinence needs are meet. Staff do not assist residents with showering. Staff do not provide resident with housekeeping service. Staff do not ensure that resident's dietary needs are met. Staff engaging in food preparation are not observing sanitation practices. Staff do not ensure that the facility is maintained sanitary.

At 9:30am on 08/29/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived to the facility unannounced to deliver the final findings to all the allegation to this complaint. LPA met with facility Administrator Adam Bramwell, announed who he is and the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of, “Resident sexually abused while in care.” It was alleged that Reporting Party (RP) was told by Staff that Resident 1 (R1), had stated “He raped me”. It was discovered through interviews, observation and documentation that on 11/02/2023, LPA Jeffries attempted to conduct an interview with Resident 1 (R1). R1 was cognitively unable to answer questions of LPA when asking basic screening questions (ie: what is your name? Do you know where you are right now?), R1 did not answer. LPA noted that approximately 15 minutes after the attempted interview, R1 was yelling several profanities at staff. On 11/02/2023, LPA interviewed Wellness Director (S1). S1 stated that the facility has been aware of R1’s statements of alleged sexual abuse and facility investigated pertaining to R1’s statements; CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated S1 stated that R1 denied any sexual acts that have happened while in the facility, additionally, there are no male staff currently or recently assigned to the memory care unit where R1 resides. S1 stated that staff that work with R1 were instructed to monitor who enters or exits R1’s room, staff have not observed any male enter R1’s room. S1 stated that R1 exhibits overt sexual language when R1 is upset which has been a consist behavior from the beginning of R1’s residing at this facility, according to S1 interview on 11/02/2024. On 11/02/2023, LPA interviewed Staff 3-10, (S3-S10), all stated that R1 typically exhibits explicit profanity as a normal behavior for R1 and has refused care giving assistance when upset.. On 11/02/2024, LPA, S1 and facility Administrator conducted an interview with S2. S2 stated that they had a conversation with a staff member about R1 but did not provide any other details about R1 other then what R1 stated, “He raped me”. Based on interviews, observations and documentation, at this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Resident sexually abused while in care.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care.” It was alleged that Resident had bruises all over their body and look like finger bruises. It was discovered through interviews, observations, and documentation that, on 11/02/2024, LPA Jeffries attempted to interview R1, and R1 was not responsive to basic screening questions. LPA did observe one red bruise on the left forearm of R1 that was approximately 2” with round shape and no indication in the shape that could determine how the bruise may have occurred. On 11/02/2023 LPA Jeffries reviewed R1’s LIC602 (Physicians Report) that indicated a primary diagnosis of Edema. On 11/02/2023, LPA interviewed Staff 3-10, (S3-S10), all stated that R1 typically exhibits explicit profanity as a normal behavior for R1 and has refused care giving assistance when upset. S3-10 stated they have not observed any other bruising on R1’s body other than the left forearm bruise. Based on interviews, observations, and documentation there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff do not ensure that residents take medication as prescribed.” and, “Staff do not ensure residents’ incontinence needs are met.” It was alleged that staff do not properly administer medication to R2 and R2 “stashed” medication in their drawer as well as R2 left in soiled briefs for extended periods. On 11/02/2023 LPA Jeffries conducted an interview with R2, R2 stated that they have always take medication when provided by staff. R2 denied hiding or stashing medications at any time. R2 stated that staff do a good job with incontinence needs and medications including prescribed ointments as need. LPA observation during interview, noted that no medications or ointments were in R2’s drawers. On 11/02/2024 LPA Jeffries reviewed R2’s LIC602 (Physicians Report) which indicated UTI as a secondary diagnosis. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C LPA also observed Centrally Stored Medication Record (CSMR) and Medication Administration Record (MAR)for R2 and did not find any missed medications. LPA reviewed Physician notes on facility visit of R2 on 08/22/2023 and 09/05/2023 both listing frequent UTI’s. On 11/03/2023, LPA reviewed facility serious incident reports (SIR) and did not find any SIR’s with R2 as the subject. LPA interviewed S3-10, who all stated that medications are always given as prescribed to their knowledge. S3-S10 all stated that all residents are always monitored for incontinence and cared for when incontinence care is needed. Based on interviews, observation, and documentation, there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff do not ensure that residents take medication as prescribed.” and “Staff do not ensure residents’ incontinence needs are met.” are both unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff do not assist residents with showering.” It was alleged that R2 and R3 were not regularly showered. It was discovered through documentation and interviews that on 11/02/2023 LPA Jeffries reviewed Admissions agreements, Level of Care Plans, Shower Schedules/Refusal documents for R2 and R3. Both R2 and R3 were assessed at the highest level of care (facility Level 6) provided by the facility. On 11/02/2023, LPA interviewed R2, who stated that the staff take care of bathing needs daily, most often while in bed. R2 stated that staff did a good job of keeping R2 clean. On 11/02/2023, LPA Jeffries conducted and interview with R3 who stated that the facility helps with shower daily. LPA observed and noted during the interview that R3’s room was clean and did not have any apparent emanating orders. LPA noted that R3’s facility care plan outlines daily shower as confirmed by R3. On 11/02/2023, LPA Jeffries conducted interviews of S3-S10 who all stated, stated that all residents are monitored at all times for incontinence and cared for when incontinence care is needed. Based on interviews, documentation, and observations, at this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff do not assist residents with showering”. and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff do not ensure that residents’ dietary needs are met.” It was alleged that staff “throw” food in front of R2, then leave. It was discovered through documentation and interviews that on 11/02/2023, LPA Jeffries interviewed R2. R2 stated that they have never had any issues with food service at this facility. R2 denied that staff threw or left food for R2 at any time. On 11/02/2023, LPA conducted interviews with S3-S10, all staff were aware that R2 required meals to be set up for R2. All denied throwing or leaving food for R2 that R2 was not able to consume. On 11/02/2023 LPA reviewed R2’s LIC602 (Physicians Report) which indicated that R2 is able to feed self, with “set up assistance.” At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff do not ensure that residents’ dietary needs are met.” And is unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegations of, “Staff do not provide residents with a housekeeping service.”, “Staff do not ensure that the facility is maintained sanitary.”; and “Staff engaging in food preparation are not observing sanitation practices.” It was alleged that; Kitchen staff do not wash hands when preparing meals for residents. And dining mats are not sanitary. And R3’s room smells of urine and is not cleaned. It was discovered through interviews, photographs, documentation, and observations that, on 11/02/2024 LPA Jeffries conducted an interview with R3. R3 stated that the facility helps with shower daily. LPA observed and noted during the interview that R3’s room was clean and did not have any apparent emanating orders. On 11/02/2023, LPA Jeffries interviewed S3-S10 who all confirmed R3 had incontinence behaviors that are continuously being addressed by staff and housekeeping staff. S3-S10 all confirmed that housekeeping staff will address any cleaning problems as needed on top of their normally schedule cleaning tasks. On 11/02/2023 LPA reviewed facility housekeeping schedule and noted no gaps or call offs in house keeping schedule. On 11/02/2023 LPA Jeffries observed kitchen staff preparing lunch, all were wearing black gloves. LPA interviewed Kitchen Staff S13 who stated that all food preparation is conducted with gloves for hygiene and sanitary reasons. LPA observed and photographed dining place mats and noted all were clean and free of stain and foods. On 04/09/2024, at approximately 10:50am, Administrator Adam Bramwell and LPA Jeffries conducted a visual inspection of all 14 bathrooms in the memory care unit. LPA photographed and noted that 13 of 14 bathrooms were clean and in good working order. LPA noted that the one bathroom in question was cleaned, however the floor was sticky. This was discovered to not be a sanitation issue but a floor material issue that is being addressed by the administrator. On 04/09/2024, LPA Jeffries interviewed Memory Care Staff 5, 11, and 12 (S5, S11, and S12), who all stated that their job duties included cleaning restrooms as needed. S5, S11 and S12 all stated that they knew they could call housekeeping on the radio if there was a need to have a residents restroom cleaned due to an immediate need. LPA noted that there was no evidence on this visit to indicated that staff do not ensure resident’s restrooms are cleaned and sanitized. LPA reviewed documentation (Job Description) of staff duties of Pegasus Senior Living for the position of Care Partner that included but not limited to, “Maintains clean, neat, comfortable, safe environment for Residents, Staff and visitors, including housekeeping services for Residents.” Which S5, S11, and S12 all acknowledged in interviews on 04/09/2024. At this time, there is not enough evidence to substantiate the allegations of, “Staff do not provide residents with a housekeeping service.” “Staff engaging in food preparation are not observing sanitation practices.” and “Staff do not ensure that the facility is maintained sanitary.” and all are unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 29, 2024 · control 29-AS-20231101084515
Apr 9, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not ensure resident's restrooms are clean and sanitized.

At 9:45am on 04/09/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to the facility to conduct the initial investigation to the allegation to this complaint. LPA met with Administrator, Adam Bramwell, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. LPA conducted a facility tour, took photographs, made observations, collected and reviewed documents and conducted interviews. LPA issued final findings below: As to the allegation of, “Staff do not ensure resident's restrooms are clean and sanitized.” It was alleged that approximately 04/03/2024, Residents in Memory Care Units bathrooms were unsanitary and unclean. On 04/09/2024, at approximately 10:50am, Administrator Adam Bramwell and LPA Jeffries conducted a visual inspection of all 14 bathrooms in the memory care unit. LPA photographed and noted that 13 of 14 bathrooms were clean and in good working order. LPA noted that the one bathroom in question was cleaned, however the floor was sticky. This was discovered to not be a sanitation issue but a floor material issue that is being addressed by the administrator. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated On 04/09/2024, LPA Jeffries interviewed Memory Care Staff 1, 2, and 3 (S1, S2, and S3). S1-3 all stated that their job duties included cleaning restrooms as needed. S1-3 all stated that they knew they could call housekeeping on the radio if there was a need to have a residents restroom cleaned due to an immediate need. LPA noted that there was no evidence on this visit to indicated that staff do not ensure resident’s restrooms are cleaned and sanitized. LPA reviewed documentation (Job Description) of staff duties of Pegasus Senior Living for the position of Care Partner that included but not limited to, “Maintains clean, neat, comfortable, safe environment for Residents, Staff and visitors, including housekeeping services for Residents.” Which S1-3 all acknowledged in interviews on 04/09/2024. At this time, there is not enough evidence to substantiate the allegation of, “Staff do not ensure resident’s restrooms are clean and sanitized.” And is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 9, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240404095309
Apr 9, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility staff billed resident for services not rendered. Facility staff mismanaged resident medication.

At 9:45am on 04/09/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to the facility to issue final findings to the allegations to this complaint. LPA met with Administrator, Adam Bramwell, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. As to the allegations of, “Facility staff billed resident for services not rendered.” It was alleged that R1 was billed for services not rendered during the months of July through August 2023. It was discovered through interviews on 10/26/2023, LPA Jeffries conducted a phone interview of Family Member 1 (F1) that Resident 1 (R1) had been billed for the month of June for two different levels of care (Level 1 and level 2), also had not been provided access to at least 2 staff assisted showers per week after 06/01/2023, and a refund due of medication that was discontinued by R1’s Physician, that had been recorded after the Physicians discontinued order. On 10/26/2023, LPA Jeffries interviewed facility staff 2 (S2) who presented documentation of billing statement from 07/01/2023 through Octobers final billing statement. S2 explained that a higher level of care was assessed for R1 by S1 on 06/01/2023, CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated additionally there was a Care Conference Acknowledgement meeting on 06/01/2023 with S1, R1, and over the phone, F1, to address the change in level of care and charges associated with the higher level of care. Due to the billing cycle of the facility uses for charging residents, both levels 1 and 2 of care were billed in the month of June 2023 without being pro-rated. The refund for the prorated amount for the change in care in question was reimbursed to R1/F1 on the Octobers billing statement. Interviews with Staff 3-6 (S3, S4, S5 and S6), indicated that R1 had verbally denied shower assistance on more than one occasion. There is no written record of shower refusal, however, all three care staff who were tasked to shower R1 stated similar denial of showers by R1. With respect to the medication refund, there was a medication order from the R1’s physician to “put a hold” on the medication in question on 06/06/2023. That medication was then discontinued by the physician on 06/23/2023 by fax from R1’s physician. The medication discontinue order by R1’s Physician was sent to Omni Care (the company handling the pharmacy order) on the same day 06/23/2023. Omni care sent the medication despite the discontinued order. In an interview with S1, S1 stated that Omni Care refused to rerun the missed ordered medication. S1 stated that they informed F1 that they would pay for that month’s medication if Omni Care refused to reimburse R1/F1. On 02/12/2023 LPA interviewed F1 by phone a second time. F1 stated that they did receive a prorated bill amount in October 2023 for June 2023 double billing of levels of care. F1 stated that they were unaware of R1’s refusals of showers. F1 stated that they did not follow up on the medication refund because of the passing of R1 and the minimal amount of the medication charge. Based on interviews, documentation, and admissions, there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Facility staff billed resident for services not rendered.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegation of, “Facility staff mismanaged resident medication.” It was alleged that the facility ordered medication for R1 that had been discontinued. On 10/26/2023, LPA Jeffries reviewed documentation provided by the facility of R1’s physician order on a prescription dated 06/06/2023. The prescription order read “hold medication” meaning, do not administer the medication, starting 06/06/2023. LPA reviewed a fax from R1’s new physician on 06/23/2023 ordering the DC (discontinue) of the specific medication for R1. LPA interviewed S1 on 10/26/2023, where S1 stated that they faxed the DC order to Omni Care (the company handling the pharmacy order). Due to the timing of the order (3 working days) the medication was filled by Omni Care. S1’s stated that they attempted to return the DC ’ed medication to Omni Care, however Omni Care refused. S1 stated as a gesture of good faith, S1 offered to reimburse F1 (R1) the cost of the medication, if they also had attempted to get a refund due to Omni Cares oversight on the Physicians DC order of 06/23/2023. S1 stated that they never heard back from F1 about the medication refund from F1 contacting Omni Care. LPA observed the facilities medication destruction order for this medication in question for the remainder of the June prescription 06/07/2023- 06/30/2023, and the medication destruction order for the July order. LPA noted that the facility acted in due diligence with regards to handling of the medication in question. On 02/12/2023 LPA interviewed F1 by phone a second time. F1 stated that they did not follow up on the medication refund because of the passing of R1 and the minimal amount of the medication charge. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Facility staff mismanaged resident medication.” and in unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 9, 2024 · control 29-AS-20231023105727
Feb 15, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not respond to call bell in a timely manner. Facility does not provide adequate food service.

At 9:57am on 02/15/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to the facility to issue final finding to this complaint and in a separate report conduct the annual facility inspection. LPA met with Interim Administrator, Adam Bramwell announced who he is and the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of, “Staff do not respond to call bell in a timely manner.” It was discovered through documentation and interviews that R1’s call bell record from this facility indicated that between the days of April 8th, 2023, through June 8th, 2023, R1’s call pendent was pressed 87 times, during that time there were a total of 5963 total calls at the facility from an average of 60 residents who have call pendants. R1’s 87 calls represent less than .02% of total calls during that time period. Of those 87 calls, 42 calls (48% of R1’s calls) took longer than 10 minutes for facility staff to respond. This included the following call time responses: one call response time of over 50 minutes, one of over 40 minutes, four of over 30 minutes, eleven of over 20 minutes, twelve over 15 minutes, and thirteen calls of over 10 minutes that it took facility staff to respond to R1’s call pendant once it was pressed by R1. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Substantiated Interviews of Staff 1 – 4 (S1, S2, S3, and S4) on 06/08/2023, all stated that there is not enough staff to fully attend to all resident needs. Based on call times, interviews, and documentation there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the facility, during the time of this investigation, did not have staff sufficient in numbers to provide services necessary to meet resident’s needs and the allegation of, “Staff do not respond to call bell in a timely manner.” Is substantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Facility does not provide adequate food service.” It was discovered through interviews, documentation, and observations that food service at the facility on three specific weekends of May 20/21, May 27/28, and June 03/04, dining services were delivered cold and below basic standards meal offerings. In interviews on 06/08/2023, of staff 3-6 (S3, S4, S5, S6, and S7) all stated that lead staff (S2) working weekends was not properly trained and did not have enough head cook experience to manage basic food service during these dates. In interviews of Residents on 06/08/2023 R2, R4, R5, and R6 stated that the food service has been cold on the weekends during the May through June of 2023 time period. Based on interviews of Staff and Residents, at this time there is enough evidence to support the allegation of, ““Facility does not provide adequate food service.” and is substantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, deficiency cited, appeal rights and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 15, 2024 · control 29-AS-20230601115306

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87411(a) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 29, 2024

87411 Personnel Requirements - General (a) Facility personnel shall at all times be sufficient in numbers, and competent to provide the services necessary to meet residents’ needs. … This requirement was not met by the number of call response times with R1 that exceeded 10 minutes which poses a potential risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 15, 2024

Plan of correction: During time of complaint investigation facility employed contract staff due to low staffing. Current staffing meet or exceed standards to meet current resident census needs.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87555(b)(9) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 29, 2024

87555 General Food Service Requirements (b) The following food service requirements shall apply: (9) Procedures which protect the safety, acceptability and nutritive values of food shall be observed in food storage, preparation and service. This requirement was not met by evidence of Resident and Staff interviews verifying cold meals were served on serval occasions, which poses a potential risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 15, 2024

Plan of correction: During the time of this complaint facility employed staff that did not have adequate training. At the time this LIC9099-D was singed kitchen staff have proper training and POC is met.

Feb 15, 2024Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

At 9:57am on 02/15/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to the facility to conduct the annual facility inspection. LPA met with Interim Administrator, Adam Bramwell announced who he is and the reason for the visit. Administrator and LPA conducted a full facility walk through and tour. LPA noted that the facility has a 130 person capacity and has a current census of 74. The facility exterior has walking path around the entirety of the facility and a covered main entrance. There is a designated smoking area just out side the dining-room entrance that has a covered gazebo on the side of the facility. LPA noted that the memory care unit of 15 resident room with on suite bathrooms located in the back of the facility and has a fenced outdoor area that is also in the back of the facility, which has tables and umbrellas for shade. LPA noted that the facility has a outdoor courtyard in the middle of the facility which also has tables and umbrellas for shade. LPA did not observe any issues or violations on the outside areas of the facility. LAP noted that this facility is two stories, it has 4 wings. On the first floor there area 35 resident rooms with on suite bathrooms, On the second floor there are 50 resident rooms with on suite bathrooms. LPA entered a sample of rooms (10) rooms and noted that all rooms had working lights, ample storage, working appliances and non-skid mats in the showers. LPA observed that there is a medication room, physical therapy room, laundry room, snack bar area with seating, beauty shop, and an tv activity room on the second floor. LPA noted that all three stair wells had emergency fire chair at the top of the stairwells. LPA noted that the dining room, kitchen, laundry room, staff room, maintenance room and employee entrance on the first floor on the north side of the building. LPA noted that the front entrance has offices and reception desk, and a lounging room for residents. LPA note that there are assorted offices on both the first floor and second floor. LPA noted that there were fire extinguishers placed all throughout the facility, all prime and charged in the green. LPA observed working carbon monoxide detectors through out the facilty. LPA noted that all walkways and entrances were free and clear of debit. Administrator and LPA conducted a full tool module review and no violations of or citations were noted. One Technical Violation was issued on late Administrator Certificate which will be corrected on May 22, 2024. Exit interview, report read, no violations, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 15, 2024

The state marks this report as 2 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 1. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

Earlier years2021 to 2023 · 16 documents

20235 state visits · 6 documents

Jun 8, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff are overcharging a resident while in care.

At 9:01am on 06/08/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived at the facility to deliver final findings to the allegations to this complaint. LPA, met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh, announced who he was and the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of, “Facility overcharging residents in care.” It was discovered through interviews, documentation, and observation that the facility has two independent financial oversight programs that need to communicate with each other to ultimately resolve resident monthly billing. In interviews with Administrator and S1 it was discovered that when a new resident service is added (for example, Level of Care increase) the facilities billing system will add that service to that month’s billing, and it will not prorate or remove the replaced service until the next billing cycle, thus charging a full month for both services. The following billing cycle will resolve the added service by crediting and/or prorating the added service and the service it replaced (if applicable). This billing resolution can take up to two billing cycles to resolve some billing issues. The facilities billing system ultimately will resolve billing issue in no more than two billing cycles. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Substantiated However, there is no indication on the residents billing statement that the newly added service will be prorated, which caused a temporary over billing when services are added during the billing cycle. Additionally, the residents bill has an overdue amount in three time frame sections at the bottom of the billing form that indicates the amount of time there is with a past due amount, which can be inaccurate based on the initial monthly overcharging amount before prorated and credited amount. The facility overcharges the new service without explanation of how it gets resolved, and because there is no explanation the resident receives a bill for the wrong amount for that month and the bill reflects a past due amount, placing an inaccurate past due amount on the residents bill at the bottom of the bill. Based on the initial monthly overcharge the allegation of, “Facility overcharging residents in care.” Is substantiated at this time. The same type of allegation was addressed and cited on Case# 29-AS-20221109110234 during the same time period investigated, subsequently there will be no LIC9099-D for this report, see referenced case report for deficiency and plan of correction.. Exit interview, report read, appeal rights and report provided. However, based on documentation of LIC602 (Physicians Report) showing that R1 had full capabilities of self-care and medication management, and the POA only covered health related oversight, the facility acted in due diligence according to releasing R1’s financial information to F1 at the time this complaint was filed. Based on documentation and interviews the allegation of, “Staff are not providing an authorized representative access to a resident’s personal records.” is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff are not following the admission agreement.” It was alleged that the facility was not notifying R1’s responsible party for billing and care assessment and changes in level of care billing and dietary assessments. On 03/10/2023 and 03/20/2023, LPA reviewed documentation including LIC602A (8/11) Physicians Report, singed and dated 09/15/2022, Facilities semi annual evaluations signed and dated 12/13/2022, 01/06/2023, and 03/15/2023, and Facilities dietary orientation form dated 10/03/2022. R1’s LIC602A (8/11) (Physicians Report) that indicated that R1 had full capabilities of self-care and medication management, signed on 09/15/2022. It was discovered through interviews of F1 on 02/27/2023, that R1 moved into the facility on R1’s own volition, and there was a Power of Attorney (POA) record for R1 identifying F1 and F2 as full health care POA’s for R1 dated 06/04/2019. The facilities first semi annual evaluation report was facilitated to F1 by phone conference and email follow up for Power of Attorney (F1). The facilities second semi annual evaluation report was signed by R1 and in accordance with R1’s LIC602A (Physicians Report) also signed by R1 on 01/06/2023, and R1’s third semi annual evaluation was emailed to F1 on 03/15/2023. LPA interviewed S1 on 03/02/2023 and indicated that the facility was working to provide F1 paperwork for financial records upon the authorization of R1. At the time of the interview on 03/02/2023 F1 had access from the facility to R1’s records. However, based on documentation of LIC602 (Physicians Report) showing that R1 had full capabilities of self-care and medication management. Based on documentation, interviews, and email confirmations there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of “Staff are not following the admissions agreement.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegation of, “Staff are not properly trained.” It was alleged that R1 was not properly assessed for dietary restrictions based on R1’s LIC602A (8/11) which indicated that R1 had a special diet of, “Low concentrated sweets, regular.” This information was also in resident file and additionally located in the kitchen available for review to all kitchen staff and Food Service Director (S7). On 11/17/2022, S7 provided LPA with a tour of the kitchen and resident dietary screening procedure. LPA observed R1’s admissions “Dietary Order/Information” dated 10/03/2022 indicating LCS (Low Concentrated Sweets) diet. LPA noted that the residents dietary oversight procedure was simple to follow and understandable. LPA reviewed the following documentation: “Crandell Corporate Dietitians Assisted Living Quarterly Audit” dated 09/15/2022, conducted by Registered Dietitian Jo Bergstrom with certification from Commission on Dietetic Registration (#708490) expiring 08/31/2026 for executive oversight and regulation requirements. The kitchen is operated on a daily basis by S7 who has 8 years of Executive Chief experience and Associates of Science Degree from California Culinary Academy - Food Services (June 1997). Additionally, all facility kitchen staff have training that meet regulation standards. LPA noted that interview with F1 on 02/27/2023 had a concern with R1 having a box of chocolate in their room. LPA noted LIC602A that indicated that R1 had full mental capacity, able to make own decisions for all health care needs and the box chocolate was a personal choice by R1 and not a reflection of the level of staff training. There is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Staff are not properly trained.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read and provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 8, 2023 · control 29-AS-20230221102902
May 24, 2023Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident physically assaulted another resident in care. Resident is not given showers. Facility did not provide resident with soap. Facility not properly caring for resident's wounds. Resident's responsible party did not receive a copy of the facility contract.

At 10:00am on 05/25/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived at the facility to deliver final findings to the allegations to this complaint. LPA, met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh, announced who he was and the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of, “Resident physically assaulted another resident in care.” It was discovered by documentation, and interviews that on 10/22/2022, R1 was sitting with peer at a dining table at approximately 1:00pm, when staff turned their back to table, R1 was sitting with R2, R2 struck R1 in the area of R1’s chest. S2 and S3 separated the residents, assessed for injuries, none were noted on R1 or R2. Out of precaution facility contacted 911. EMT arrived and accessed R1 and found no need for transport due to no injury. Facility contacted R1’s Physician, Responsible Party, Community Care Licensing, Ombudsman and submitted Unusual Incident Report (LIC 624 (4/99) on 10/28/2022. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated In interviews of R1 by EMT on 10/22/2022 and by LPA on 10/27/2022, R1 indicated no recollection of assault event. Facility had more then enough staff on shift during this time. Facility exercised due diligence, notifications and immediate action pertaining to the circumstances of this incident. There is no evidence to support that the facility was understaffed or negligent in, “Resident physically assaulting another resident in care,” and the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Resident is not given showers.” It was discovered through interviews, and documentation that R1 had showers scheduled by staff 7 days per week. From June 2022 through October 2022 there are 21 documented refusals for showers by R1. Interviews with Staff 1 – 5 all confirm that R1 would often refuse showers. Staff 1 – 5 stated they document and report when residents refuse showers. LPA attempted to interview Residents 1 – 6 In memory care as to shower frequency and schedule, however all answers were inconclusive. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Resident is not given showers.” And is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Facility did not provide resident with soap.” It was discovered through documentation, interviews and observation that it was observed by LPA that there was pearl-white soap in the soap dispenser on the bathroom sink in R1’s room that was free and clear of grime and/or other substance on 10/27/2022 and 11/17/2022 LPA did not observe any grim or forging substances on the soap dispenser on the wall of the bathroom. Staff duty logs indicate that staff address restocking bathrooms on a weekly basis and as needed. Interviews with S1, S2, S3, S4, S5 and S6 all indicated that soap and other bathroom amenities are stocked regularly and as needed. Based on interviews, documentation, and observations, there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Facility did not provide resident with soap.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Facility not properly caring for resident’s wounds.” It was discovered that R1 was in need of Podiatrist evaluation as early as November 2022. The facility has a Podiatrist that makes routine bi-monthly rounds, R1 was seen by this Podiatrist on 10/29/2022, 12/13/2022 and refused treatment, again on 12/27/2022 where toenails of R1 were clipped. Additionally, facility contacted R1’s primary physician in January 2023 to evaluate and address R1’s feet and skin care needs. Primary Physician and Nurse Practitioner addressed and treated both foot and skin conditions on January 11, 2023, according to documentation. Based on documentation there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Facility not properly caring for resident’s wounds.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegation of, “Resident’s responsible party did not receive a copy of the facility contract.” It was discovered that R1’s initial admission agreement (contract) was signed on September 30, 2017. When R1 added two children as Power of Attorney (POA) in October of 2021, both POA’s were provided copies of the original contract from September 30, 2017. In November of 2021, R1 moved to a higher level of care and into the facilities memory care unit. This was a change of level of care and not a change in the contract. At the time this complaint was issued, POA was assuming that a new contract was necessary for the change in higher level of care and moving to the memory care unit. During the LPAs investigation, the POA had received a copy of the original contract in 2017, in addition to receiving a copy of the original contract in October of 2021. Based on interviews with POA and Administrator, the original contract was provided to the responsible party when requested and the allegation of, “Resident’s responsible party did not receive a copy of the facility contract.” Is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, report singed, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 24, 2023 · control 29-AS-20221025100703
May 24, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility overcharging residents. Facility posted photos of residents on social media.

At 10:00am on 05/25/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived at the facility to deliver final findings to the allegations to this complaint. LPA, met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh, announced who he was and the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of, “Facility overcharging residents.” It was discovered through interviews, documentation, and observation that the facility has two independent financial oversight programs that need to communicate with each other to ultimately resolve resident monthly billing. In interviews with Administrator and S1 it was discovered that when a new resident service is added the facilities billing system will add that service to that month’s billing, and it will not prorate or remove the replaced service until the next billing cycle. The following billing cycle will resolve the added service by crediting and/or prorating the added service and the service it replaced (if applicable). This billing resolution can take up to two billing cycles to resolve some billing issues. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Substantiated The facility billing system ultimately will resolve billing issue in no more than two billing cycles. However, there is no indication on the residents billing statement that the newly added service will be prorated, which caused a temporary over billing when services are added during the billing cycle. The facility overcharges the new service without explanation of how it gets resolved and because there is no explanation the resident receives a bill for the wrong amount for that month. Based on the initial monthly overcharge the allegation of, “Facility overcharging residents.” Is substantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Facility posted photos of residents on social media.” It was discovered through photographs, and interviews that on 10/10/2022, photographs of R1 and R2 were posted to the facilities Facebook page. Both R1 and R1 had singed the facility's likeness of release form, stating that they did not wish to share their image to be published. LPA observed photographs of images. LPA interview Administrator on 10/27/2022 where it was stated that they acknowledged the photographs were posted on Facebook by mistake and were removed “a few days later.” Based on photographs and interviews the allegation of “Facility posted photos of residents on social media.” Is substantiated at this time. Exit interview, citation and technical violation issued, appeal rights and report provided. Based on documentation, and interviews, there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Facility did not notify authorized representative of resident being assessed by staff.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegations of, “Facility falsely advertised food items.” and “Food being served to residents is not of quality.” It was alleged through photographs that spinach and asparagus was not of quality at the facility. LPA conducted interviews with Residents 1 – 6 who all stated that the food at the facility has never been spoiled or rotten to their knowledge. R1 stated that they “didn’t like the choices but they are a picky eater.” R2 stated there are enough food choices that are of good quality but there is always someone who is not going to like the food.” LPA observed diet assessment for R1 conducted on 06/03/2022 that stated, “regular diet”. LPA interview S7 stated that the facility receives two shipments of food each week and fresh fruits and vegetables are always verified by S7 or staff to be fresh before serving to residents. LPA conducted visits on 10/27/2022, 11/17/2022, and 03/02/2023, food always appeared to be of good quality. LPA reviewed the facilities advertisement for dining and LPA found food to be of same quality as pictured as in web based advertisement. Based on interviews, observations, and documentation there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Facility falsely advertised food items.” and “Food being served to residents is not of quality.” and are unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Resident's chart notes are inaccurate.” It was alleged that R1’s chart notes had indicated that R1 observation by staff were inaccurate. On 11/17/2023, LPA interviewed Staff 1 -7. S1- S7 all indicated that R1 had some difficulty in dining and navigating throughout the facility when spouse was not present. S1 -S7 all so concurred that R1 had no challenges with dining and navigating throughout the facility when spouse was present. Interviews conducted on 11/17/2023 represent same findings as chart notes. Based on documentation of chart notes and staff 1-7 interviews there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Resident's chart notes are inaccurate.” and is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, report singed and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 24, 2023 · control 29-AS-20221109110234

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87507(g)(G)and(H) · Plan of correction due date: Jun 9, 2023

87507(g) Admission agreements shall specify ...:(G) A comprehensive description of billing and payment procedures.(H) A provision indicating that an itemized monthly statement that lists all separate charges incurred by the resident that are collected by the facility shall be provided to the resident or the resident’s representative, if any. This requirement was not met by evidence of monthly over billing of reporting parties and poses a potential danger to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 24, 2023

Plan of correction: Administrator shall provided an addendum to admission agreement outlining the billing procedures with an acknowledgment from resident or resident representative of billing process. And work with Licensee to rectify the technical monthly over billing charges. Administrator will provided addendum and update to LPA by 06/09/2023.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.2(a)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Jun 8, 2023

87468.2(a)In addition to the rights listed in Section 87468.1, Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities, residents ... shall have all of the following personal rights: (2) To have their records and personal information remain confidential and to approve their release, except as authorized by law. This requirement was not met by evidence of photographs posted on Social Media (Facebook) of R1 and R2, where R1 and R2 both signed facility's likeness of release, not to release form which poses a potential risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 24, 2023

Plan of correction: Administrator will provide 100% of staff a 1 hour training of resident personal rights that include instruction on regulation 87468.2. Administrator will submit list of staff that attended training and the course materials to LPA by 06/08/2023.

Apr 21, 2023Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility did not meet resident’s needs due to insufficient staffing Facility did not meet resident’s dietary needs

At 10:30am on 04/21/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Mark Jeffries arrived at the facility to issue final findings to the allegation above to this complaint. LPA introduced himself and announced the reason for the visit. LPA met with Administrator, Cheryl Marsh and explained the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of "Facility did not meet resident’s needs due to insufficient staffing." It was alleged due to a lack of staffing, residents were not showered for multiple days, left a resident in bed for 24 hours, and was not assisted with toileting. LPA reviewed the staff schedule and Resident 1 (R1)’s needs. It was discovered through interviews, and documentation that R1 was non-ambulatory and required two person lift to ambulate. Shower schedule documentation showed showers for R1 competed on 04/02/22, 04/05/22, 04/08/22, 04/09/22, 04/10/22, 04/12/22, 04/16/22, 04/19/22, and 04/23/22. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated There were no shower refusal documents for R1 during this time period. R1 stated that they would refuse the shower if it was after breakfast time because they wanted it later in the morning, however there was no documentation of refusal during this time period. R1 stated their needs were met overall. Staff notes indicated that brief changes were completed for R1 and documented during this time period. S5 was the staff assigned to 5 of the 10 showers reviewed during this time period and stated that no showers were missed to their recollection. Residents R2 though R5 stated that they did not have an issue with showers facilitated by the facility during this time, however they did wait longer durations for care service to get showers and other needs met due to COVID staff call-offs during this time. During the months of March and April 2022, the facility was in a COVID positive status, which resulted IN staff call-offs, this resulted in longer call times for assistance and showers, however there was not enough evidence through documentation, and interviews to support showers were not given or offered or that meets were not met. Therefore, there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Facility did not meet resident’s needs due to insufficient staffing.” and is therefore unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of “Facility did not meet resident’s dietary needs.” It was alleged that resident was given meal tray service, but staff put it out of reach of the resident, so the resident could not eat. LPA reviewed the staff schedule and Resident 1 (R1) needs. It was discovered through documentation and interviews that R1 was non-ambulatory. Interview with R1 indicated that on the day of question specific to this allegation (04/17/2022), the dinner tray was placed to far from R1. R1 stated that they used the call button and staff was able to bring the tray, then stated that, “it didn’t bother me.” and was able to eat the meal. Pertaining to the food services, Residents 2-5 did not have any comment of the food service being not meeting their dietary needs. Based on interviews, there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Facility did not meet the resident’s dietary needs” and is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, report singed and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 21, 2023 · control 29-AS-20220421141830
Mar 25, 2023Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility requires staff to work during illnesses. Night staff are sleeping during shifts. Night staff leave facility prior to day shift coming to relieve them. Staff are not ensuring residents' incontinence needs are being met. Residents do not have a room that accommodates wheelchair access. Residents' beds have soiled linens. Residents' room does not have heat. Staff do not have training to appropriately care for residents. Facility is not clean, safe, sanitary nor in good repair.

At 10:00am on 03/25/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to deliver final findings to the allegations above to this complaint. LPA met with Maintenance Director/ Brain Lloyd announced who he was and the reason for the visit. As to the allegation of, “Facility requires staff to work during illness.” It was discovered through interviews and documentation that facility staff were required, upon initial entry to the facility for each shift, to screen for symptom of illness, known recent contacts of ill persons, alternate work environments, and temperature, and sign and notate any of the possible symptoms of illness. LPA reviewed each staff self-screening, with staff signatures for the months of October 2021 through January 2022 and there were no staff that entered the facility with symptoms or relative conditions related to possible symptoms as indicated from the self-screening sign-in documentation. Interviews of Staff S2 through S6 did not reveal any requirement, tactic, or coercion that required staff to work during an illness. LPA reviewed facilities attendance policy and did not find any regulation violations within the policy. CONTINUED ON LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated LPA reviewed seven staff write ups about excessive call offs during the months of October 2021 through January 2022. All write ups were adhered to attendance policy. LPA interviewed Administrator Cheryl Marsh on October 27, 2022, which did not reveal any requirement, tactic, or coercion for staff to attend work while sick, and outlined the use of two staffing agencies, Maxim and Brightstar, to utilized fill in for staffing needs. Based on interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Facility requires staff to work during illness.”, and is therefore, unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Night staff are sleeping during shifts.” LPA interviewed Administrator Cheryl Marsh who stated the facility had a complaint from a staff that another staff was sleeping during their NOC shift in memory care. Administrator directed Staff 1 (S1) to conduct unannounced visits to the facility overnight to check on staff performance and address the complaint. S1 conducted at least 4 unannounced visits and did not find any staff violating company policy or sleeping. LPA interviewed staff and there was no indication of staff sleeping on their shift during this time frame (November 2021-January 2022) . Based on interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Night staff are sleeping during shifts”, and is therefore, unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Night staff leave facility prior to day shift coming to relieve them.” Due to a complaint of staff sleeping on shift, Administrator directed Staff 1 (S1) to conduct unannounced visits to the facility overnight to check on staff performance and address the complaint. S1 conducted at least 4 unannounced visits and did not find any staff violating company policy or leaving early. LPA interviewed staff and there was no indication of staff leaving early on their shift during this time frame. LPA reviewed staff timecards from January 2022 and observed that shift starting times in the morning shift were staggered for coverage. LPA did not find any days where there were unusual gaps in shift changes in the overnight to AM shifts during the months of October 2021 through January 2022. Interviews of S1 through S6 did not reveal any knowledge or evidence of staff leaving before end of shift. Based on interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Night staff are sleeping during shifts”, and is therefore, unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegation of, “Staff are not ensuring residents' incontinence needs are being met.” It was discovered through interviews and documentation that October 2021 through January 2022 there were 14 residents that resided in the Memory Care Unit. 4 of 14 residents were identified through interviews of S2 and S4 to have chronic incontinence issues. Interviews of S2 through S6 did not reveal any unmet needs with incontinence during the time period of October 2021 through January 2022. Interviews of S1 through S6 discovered that shift specified duties were followed and no staff were aware of unmet needs pertaining to incontinence. LPA reviewed staff actual work schedules from October 2021 through January 2022 and found no staffing vacancies in the memory care unit during this time. LPA interviewed a witness (W1) who visited the facility during this time frame, through interview W1 indicated they were not aware of incontinence care issues. Based on Interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Staff are not ensuring residents' incontinence needs are being met.”, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Residents do not have a room that accommodates wheelchair access.” It was discovered through documentation, interviews, photographs, and multiple observations that the residents in room 237 did not have issues with accessing the bathroom amenities, doorways, or walkways of their room with their wheelchair. LPA Interviewed resident (R1) who resided in room 237 during the time of this complaint, interview revealed that both residents choose this specific room upon admission to the facility and the ambulatory status of both R1 and R2 was the same at the time of admissions as it was at the time of this complaint. In an interview with R1 who was the resident in room 237 during the time of this complaint, R1 stated that R1 and R2 made a request to change the sink to a different height to better accommodate R2’s wheelchair height, R1 stated that the facility replaced the sink in the bathroom of room 237 to accommodate the resident’s wheelchair height per request. R1 stated that the first sink was accessible, as well as functional, and the request was made for better convenience. LPA’s observations and photographs indicated that room 237’s door width and bathroom door width allow for access of wheelchairs. Interview with Administrator indicated that R1 and R2 had choice of room upon admission and facility made accommodations for this room as requested. Based on Interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Residents do not have a room that accommodates wheelchair access”, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegation of, “Residents' beds have soiled linens. “It was discovered through interviews and documentation that October 2021 through January 2022 there were 14 residents that resided in the Memory Care Unit. 4 of 14 residents were identified through interviews of S2 and S4 to have chronic incontinence issues. Interviews of S1 through S6 did not reveal any unmet needs with incontinence during the time period of October 2021 through January 2022. Interviews of S1 through S6 discovered that shift specified duties were followed and no staff were aware of unmet needs pertaining to incontinence. LPA reviewed staff actual work schedules from October 2021 through January 2022 and found no staffing vacancies in the memory care unit during this time. LPA interviewed a witness (W1) who visited the facility during this time frame, through interview W1 indicated they were not aware of incontinence care issues. Based on Interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Residents' beds have soiled linens” therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Resident’s room does not have heat.” It was discovered through documentation and interviews that the heater in Room 237 broke and had to be fixed. LPA reviewed a repair invoice indicating the heater was functional, however it was noisy on 12/10/21, addressing the noise, parts for heater were ordered on or before 12/17/21 as indicated by purchase invoice from Direct Supply Equipment Furnishings (30222352) and arrived to the facility on 12/31/21. The heater was repaired on 01/03/22. LPA interviewed Administrator, who indicated they assured that room 237 had a working heater and ordered parts to address the noise the heater created. LPA interviewed residents about the heater and did not indicate that there was no heating in room 237 during the months of November and December of 2021. Based on Interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Resident’s room does not have heat” therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Staff do not have training to appropriately care for residents.” It was alleged that memory care staff did not have adequate training per regulations. It was discovered through documentation and interviews that, facility employees working in the memory care unit had the initial 6 hours of dementia specific training in their initial training records. Four of the Six facility employees working in the memory care unit who were employed at least 12 months had the additional 2 hours and/or 8 hours annually of dementia specific training required by regulations to care for residents with dementia. The facility did utilize two staffing agencies, Maxim and Brightstar, to fill in for staffing needs that were supervised by appropriately dementia trained facility employees during their shifts. At this time there is not enough evidence to support the allegation of, “Staff do not have training to appropriately care for residents.” therefore is unsubstantiated at this time. CONTINUED on LIC9099-C As to the allegation of, “Facility is not clean, safe, sanitary, nor in good repair.” It was alleged that the residents’ rooms were not clean. It was discovered through documentation and interviews that, during a COVID-19 outbreak in September of 2021 and January in 2022, the facility had fewer staff available due to the COVID-19 outbreak. As a result, available staff pitched in to cover housekeeping duties. Administrator told LPA that, herself and the health director helped empty trash cans and clean frequently touched surfaces due to the outbreak to mitigate the COVID-19 positive staff call offs. Administrator stated that all of the facility staff that could work, performed extra duties to maintain the facilities conditions during the COVID-19 outbreaks. LPA has conducted 4 facility visits from October 2022 to March 2023 and has made no observations indicating that the facility is not clean, safe, sanitary, nor in good repair.” Additionally, repairs are documented and conducted in a timely manner based on facility work history report for the months of October 2021 through January 2022 were done in a timely manner. Based on Interviews, and documentation there is not enough evidence at this time to support the allegation of, “Facility is not clean, safe, sanitary, nor in good repair” therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report read, and report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 25, 2023 · control 29-AS-20220112095629
Jan 13, 2023Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

At 9:15am on 01/13/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct the annual, infection control inspection. LPA was properly screened at the front entrance for COVID-19 protocols by front desk staff. LPA met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and announced the reason for the visit. Administrator and LPA conducted a cursory walk through tour of the facility. LPA observed a more than 30 day supply of PPE and more than 30 day supply of incontinence products for a facility of maximum capacity of 130 residents. LPA observed several bathrooms throughout the facility and bathrooms had liquid soap and paper towels available in the all observed bathrooms LPA observed at least two days of perishable and at least seven days of non-perishable foods on hand in the kitchen: food orders are normally delivered twice per week and local fresh products are purchased when needed. LPA confirmed that the last emergency fire inspection pressure test was conducted by Silicon Valley Incorporated on August of 2022. LPA observed fire extinguishers throughout the facility all in good working order with current inspection tags and pressure sensor in the green rating. LPA observed fire escape chairs at the top of each stairwell. LPA noted that no exits were blocked and all free and clear of obstructions and the facility appeared to be clean and in good repair. LPA noted that no violations or citations were issued as a result of the cursory walk through tour. Administrator and LPA conducted the annual, infection control module of the annual inspection. LPA noted that no violations, technical, or citations were issued during the infection control module of this annual inspection. LPA noted that there were no observed violations or citations issued during this annual inspection, at this time. Exit interview, report singed, and report emailed.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 13, 2023

20224 state visits · 8 documents

Mar 11, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff member does not treat residents with dignity and respect Staff member made inappropriate comments to residents

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) De Leon conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above. LPA met with Wellsness Director Sherry Mccormick and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Jeffries conducted the initial investigation on 01/19/2021 from 10:48 AM to 2:00 PM with interviews and documentation collection. LPA De Leon conducted staff interviews on 03/10/2021 at 1:00 PM, 1:16 PM, 1:30 PM, 3:45 PM, 4:00 PM, 4:20 PM, 4:48 PM, 5:20 PM and resident interviews at 2:00 PM, 2:22 PM, 2:31 PM, 2:39 PM, 2:52 PM, 3:18 PM, 3:33 PM. LPA requested additional documentation on 03/11/2022 at 12:00 PM. LPA reviewed documentation at 12:45 PM on 03/11/2022. Continued 9099-C Substantiated On the allegation: Staff Member does not treat residents with dignity and respect. LPA interviews with staff revealed that there were some staff back in 2020-2021 that spoke in a demeaning way to residents in care, some staff were terminated or left for those reasons, and all current staff is interacting well with the residents and no one in 2022 has heard any other complaints from residents about interaction with staff. The facility did an internal investigation due to this complaint and found that R1 and S1 had had a conversation were the resident felt dis-respected and staff’s interaction with R1 was unprofessional. The investigation also revealed S1 had several other inappropriate interactions with staff, residents and 3rd party agencies. S1 resigned from employment with the facility on 02/04/2021 during the completion of the investigation. The facility terminated employment with two other staff members on 12/04/2020 and 04/21/2021 for general disrespect of residents in care. Based on the evidence this allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. On the allegation: Staff member made inappropriate comments to residents. LPA’s conducted interviews with staff, residents, and reviewed documentation that revealed a few staff had made inappropriate comments to residents in care. The facility S1 resigned on 02/04/2021 during an investigation regarding inappropriate language and general disrespect of residents. The facility terminated S2 on 12/04/2020 and S3 on 04/12/2021 due to general disrespect of residents. Based on the evidence this allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted, Deficiency cited, Civil Penalty assessed, copy of report and appeal right emailed to Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 11, 2022 · control 29-AS-20210115105930

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 18, 2022

(a)...following personal rights:(1)To be accorded dignity in their personal relationships with staff, residents, and other persons. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews and documentation the licensee did not comply with the regulation above, residents were not being accorded dignity from a few staff at the facility which poses a potential Personal rights risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 11, 2022

Plan of correction: Administrator agreed to hold personal rights training with staff and about inappropriate language or interactions with residents and provide staff with samples of being inappropriate on the job and Mandated reporting requirements. Send staff training documentation along with staff signatures to CCL by 3/18/2022. Civil Penalty assesed for repeat violation

Mar 10, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff threatened resident in care.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) De Leon conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to deliver final findings. LPA met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA spoke with Administrator at 11:15am and toured the facility at 1:40 PM. LPA conducted resident and staff interviews from 1:00pm-5:45pm. LPA Jeffries conducted the initial complaint visit, conducted interviews and toured the facility virtually on 05/21/2020 from 1:41pm-2:30pm. Continued 9099-C Substantiated On the allegation: Staff threatened resident in care. LPA interviewed staff and residents which revealed back in 2020 they did have some staff that were not very professional in dealing with residents, some staff would be dismissive to some of the residents that would push their pendants regularly for help. Interviews also revealed that some staff were let go. Based on the evidence this allegation is Substantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted, deficiency cited, copy of report and appeal rights given.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 10, 2022 · control 29-AS-20200518105812

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 17, 2022

(a)... (1) To be accorded dignity in their personal relationships with staff, residents, and other persons. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews the licensee did not comply with regulation above, residents that were pressing pendants for help often were being told not to do that which poses a potential personal rights risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 10, 2022

Plan of correction: Administrator agreed to hold personal rights training with all staff and send copy of training and staff signatures to CCL by 03/17/2022.

Mar 10, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Food is served cold.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) De Leon conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to deliver final findings of the complaint investigation. LPA met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Jeffries conducted the initial investigation on 09/02/2020 from 7:59 am- 2:00 pm. LPA Jeffries made a subsequent visit on 04/15/2021 from 7:06 am-12:11pm. LPA interviewed Residents (R1-R15) from 7:05am through 10:00am, Head Chef at 7:20am, Administrator at 8:29am and Staff (S1-S3) from 9:45am-10:45am. LPA toured the kitchen with Chef, collected photographs of kitchen from 7:10am through 9:20am. LPA observed morning food service meals for entire census on this day. Continued 9099-C Substantiated During the investigation process on this day, LPA reviewed resident files for meal plans and doctors orders pertaining to meal plans and functional capabilities as it relates to food services. LPA De Leon conducted interviews with staff and residents from 1:00 PM- 5:00pm. LPA toured the facility Kitchen, dining room and food supply at 1:35pm. On the allegation: Facility's food is not of good quality. LPA Interviewed staff and residents which revealed the food is of good quality but not always cooked well, over cooked at times and sometimes tasted bland. Facility invoices show adequate and quality food being purchased regularly. LPA Jeffries took photographs of quality foods. LPA De Leon observed quality food in refrigerator, freezer and walk in pantries. Based on the lack of evidence this allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. On the allegation: Licensee is not providing nutritious food. LPA interviewed staff and residents which revealed the food is nutritious. The facility invoices, tour of kitchen, photographs of the meals all show food with nutritional value. The facility meets regulation requirements for food service. Based on the evidence this allegation is Unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted and copy of report emailed the Administrator. During the investigation process on this day, LPA reviewed resident files for meal plans and doctors orders pertaining to meal plans and functional capabilities as it relates to food services. LPA De Leon conducted interviews with staff and residents from 1:00 PM- 5:00pm. LPA toured the facility Kitchen, dining room and food supply at 1:35pm. On the allegation: Food is served cold. LPA's interviewed staff and residents which revealed during 2020, quarantined and isolation periods the food served to the residents rooms was cold. Staff interviews reveal numerous complaints from residents at the time the food was arriving cold. The facility made adjustments and purchased additional warming equipment to help with the complaints that were coming in. Based on the evidence this allegation is Substantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted, deficiency cited, copy of report and appeal rights emailed to administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 10, 2022 · control 29-AS-20200901154537

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87555(b)(32) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 17, 2022

(32) Equipment or appropriate size and type shall be provided for the storage, preparation and service of food and for sanitizing utensils and tableware, and shall be well maintained. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews the licensee did not comply with the above regulation as food was not being served hot which poses a potential health and personal rights risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 10, 2022

Plan of correction: Facility updated equipment's and purchased a new warmer to keep food hot. POC cleared on visit.

Mar 10, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident wandered away from the facility

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) De Leon conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to deliver final findings of the investigation. LPA met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh at 11:15 AM and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Jefrries conducted the initial investigation on 10/14/2020 from 8:16 aM- 10:45 Am and gather documentation. LPA reviewed documentation from 11:30 am-1:00 PM. LPA conducted interviews with staff and residents from 1:00 PM-5:30 PM. LPA toured the kitchen, dining room, refrigerator, freezers, and pantry food supply. On the allegation: Resident wandered away from the facility. LPA reviewed incident report from facility. On 07/20/2020 R1 was able to elope from the memory care unit. R1 was given a ride to family home. Continued 9099-C Substantiated On the allegation: Facility staff failed to report incident. LPA reviewed documentation of an incident report regarding R1 wandering away from the facility. The incident happened on 07/20/2020 and an incident report was sent to CCL on 07/24/2020. Based on the evidence this allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. On the allegation: Food is poor in quality. LPA De Leon toured the kitchen and food supply which meets the food service requirements. Residents interviews revealed the food is of good quality but is not prepared and over cooked at times. The food was being served to residents rooms and was served cold which was cited on 29-AS-20200901154537. Based on the evidence this allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted, copy of report emailed to Administrator. R1's family called facility and reported R1 being brought home by an unknown person that found R1 walking. Based on the evidence this allegation is Substantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted, deficiency cited, copy of report and appeal rights emailed to the administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 10, 2022 · control 29-AS-20201009102940

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87464(f)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 16, 2022

(f) Basic services shall at a minimum include:(1) Care and supervision as defined in Section 87101(c)(3) and Health and Safety Code section 1569.2(c). This requirement was not met as evidneced by: Based on documentation the licensee did not comply R1 was able to elope undected and wander away from facility which poses an immediate safety risk to reisdents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 10, 2022

Plan of correction: Administrator agreed to have safety trianing with staff in memery care regarding wandering. Send training records and staff signatures to CCL by 03/11/2022.

Feb 24, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained multiple pressure injuries while in care Resident’s diapering needs were not being met Staff not responding to residents call button in a timely manner Staff not providing appropriate bed accommodations for resident Facility is not kept free of pests

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA’s) Rachael De Leon and Jeannette Olson conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver findings of the allegations. The initial visit was conducted on 09/22/2020 by LPA Mark Jeffries. During today’s visit, LPA’s De Leon and Olson met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and explained the purpose of the visit. On 09/21/2020, the Department received a complaint regarding an allegation of Neglect/Lack of Care and Supervision - Resident #1 (R1) fell and sustained multiple injuries. The complaint was referred to Community Care Licensing Investigations Branch (IB) and assigned to Investigator Elisia Rippe. The remaining allegations above were investigated by LPA’s Jeffries and De Leon. Continued 9099-C Substantiated On 09/22/2020, from 11:35 a.m. to 1:35 p.m., LPA Jeffries conducted the initial complaint visit telephonically with Executive Director/Administrator, Michael Mayfield. Due to the situation surrounding the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to implement mitigation measures, the complaint visit was conducted telephonically and through FaceTime. LPA Jeffries conducted a physical plant tour from 11:35 am to 1:35 pm and requested copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation and took photographs of Resident 1’s (R1) room. During Investigator Rippe’s investigation, interviews were conducted, medical reports were obtained and reviewed. Investigator Rippe conducted interviews with R1’s responsible party on 10/06/2020 at 7:25 a.m. and 12:20 p.m.; and with R1 at 12:02 p.m.; with staff on 10/15/2020 at 1:00 p.m.; with Regional Director of Operations on 10/20/2020 at 3:16 p.m. and on 10/22/2020 at 10:07 a.m.; with staff on 10/22/2020 from 11:26 a.m. to 12:47 p.m.; with the Executive Director/Administrator on 10/29/2020 at 8:56 a.m.; with staff on 11/04/2020 at 12:57 p.m.; and with staff on 11/13/2020 from 8:37 a.m. to 3:21 p.m. On the allegation: Resident sustained multiple pressure injuries while in care - The Wilshire Home Health (HH) reports for September 2020 stated that R1 had a stage two pressure injury on right buttocks, a stage one pressure injury on sacrum, and a stage one pressure injury on coccyx area. According to the last report from HH on 09/29/2020 the pressure injuries has been staged as a 3 by a Medical Doctor. Based on this information, the Department has sufficient evidence to support the above allegation. Therefore, the allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. On the allegation: Resident’s diapering needs were not being met- HH records revealed on 08/25/2020 R1 was assisted in brief change during transfer to toilet resident was soiled with stool and HH staff held a conference with the facility staff Medication Technicians (MT) and Resident Assistants (RA) about R1 not being aware of loss of control and asked staff to visually inspect briefs for adequate hygiene and infection process. Continued 9099-C Witness 1's (W1) interview revealed R1 was soaked with BM's on every visiit. HH reports for the beginning of September 2020 stated R1 had a stage two pressure injury on right buttocks, stage one pressure injuries on sacrum and coccyx area as of 09/29/2020 the pressure injuries were not healing and had been staged as a 3 by MD. Staff interviews revealed 3/7 staff stated R1 was found soiled on several different occasions. Based on the information, the Department has sufficient evidence to support the above allegation. Therefore, the allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. On the allegation: Staff not responding to residents call button in a timely manner – The facility provided copies of the call log for R1. From the time period of 09/04/2020 to 09/06/2020, the staff response time to R1’s call button ranged from 9 to 25 minutes, which indicates an untimely staff response. Based on this information, the Department has sufficient evidence to support the above allegation. Therefore, the allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. On the allegation: Staff not providing appropriate bed accommodations for resident – Staff admitted moving R1’s mattress to the floor to prevent injury to R1 falling out of bed. There was no Dr. order or letter of support from the responsible party to move the mattress to the floor. Based on this information, the Department has sufficient evidence to support the above allegation. Therefore, the allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. On the allegation: Facility is not kept free of pests- Based on LPA Jeffries observation, tour of the facility with the Administrator and 12 photographs LPA took of room 111 showed bugs, dead bugs, and spider webs present. Administrator confirmed this to LPA Jeffries that there were cobwebs on the curtains and window seals. Based on the evidence the allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted, deficiencies cited, copy of report and appeal rights emailed to Administrator. On 09/22/2020, from 11:35 a.m. to 1:35 p.m., LPA Jeffries conducted the initial complaint visit telephonically with Executive Director/Administrator, Michael Mayfield. Due to the situation surrounding the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to implement mitigation measures, the complaint visit was conducted telephonically and through FaceTime. LPA Jeffries conducted a physical plant tour from 11:35 am to 1:35 pm and requested copies of pertinent documents relevant to the investigation. The physician’s report dated 08/23/2018. Investigator Rippe conducted interviews with R1’s responsible party on 10/06/2020 at 7:25 a.m. and 12:20 p.m.; and with R1 at 12:02 p.m.; with staff on 10/15/2020 at 1:00 p.m.; with Regional Director of Operations on 10/20/2020 at 3:16 p.m. and on 10/22/202 at 10:07 a.m.; with staff on 10/22/2020 from 11:26 a.m. to 12:47 p.m.; with the Executive Director/Administrator on 10/29/2020 at 8:56 a.m.; with staff on 11/04/2020 at 12:57 p.m.; and with staff on 11/13/2020 from 8:37 a.m. to 3:21 p.m. On 07/02/2020 at 8:30 p.m., R1 was getting coffee in R1’s assisted living apartment and slipped on some coffee that had spilled on the floor. R1 was ambulatory and able to walk using a walker on own prior to July 2020. R1 was taken to Twin Cities Hospital, where an x-ray was taken and noted that R1’s right femur was fractured. R1 had open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) surgery to place a rod in the femur and was then transferred to Mission View Rehabilitation from 07/08/2020 to 07/29/2020. R1 returned to Creston Village Assisted Living on 07/29/2020. R1 was not able to walk and was in a wheelchair. R1 returned to the same assisted living apartment. R1 required more care upon return to the facility. The administrator denied telling R1’s responsible party there would be two staff with R1 at all times. Staff stated they checked on R1 every 30 to 60 minutes. Staff stated when R1 returned from the rehab facility, R1 would throw self out of bed and onto the floor and hid pendant from staff. Due to these behaviors, staff moved R1’s mattress to the floor. Per Home Health notes, R1 had 3 falls since returning from the rehab facility. R1 stated to the Home Health nurse that R1 was intentionally throwing self out of bed in order to cause self-harm. Continued 9099-C On 09/05/2020, R1 was found on the floor of R1’s assisted living apartment, was taken to Twin Cities Community Hospital and diagnosed with a left proximal humerus fracture. Hospital notes state “patient fell out of bed onto floor, has a history of falling out of bed, patient mental status has been declining since recent rehab admission after leg fracture 2 months ago”. During the visit, R1 was also diagnosed with a urinary tract infection (UTI). Investigator Rippe requested and reviewed medical records pertinent to the investigation and conducted interviews. R1 admitted to rolling out of bed and going to the hospital while living at the facility. R1 was unable to provide any further details. The former Executive Director/Administrator, Michael Mayfield, gave the approval for R1 to return to the facility from the skilled nursing facility. He did not promise R1’s responsible party that there would be two staff members with R1 at all times. Information provided through interviews found that R1 would throw self out of bed and onto the floor, which led staff to place mattress on floor to prevent injury. Investigator Rippe found no evidence of neglect or lack of supervision regarding R1’s care. Based on the information and documentation obtained and reviewed, the Department does not have sufficient evidence to support the above allegation. Therefore, the above allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, copy of report given.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022 · control 29-AS-20200921120015

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87466 · Plan of correction due date: Feb 25, 2022

...residents are regularly observed for changes in physical, mental, emotional and social functioning and that appropriate assistance is provided...This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on medical reports and interviews, R1 had multiple pressure injuries observed but not reported by the Licensee, which posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

Plan of correction: Licensee will submit memo of understanding on how facility will ensure residents will be observed for change of conditions and a plan on pressure injuries prevention and care. Submit to CCL by 02/25/2022.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87625(b)(3) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 25, 2022

(b)...(3)Ensuring that incontinent residents are kept clean and dry and that the facility remains free of odors from incontinence. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on medical reports and interviews the Licensee did not ensure the R1’s diapering needs we are being met which poses an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

Plan of correction: Administrator Review resident records for incontinence, train all staff on caring for Incontinence residents and provide proof of training, staff signatures on trianing records to CCL by 02/25/2022.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87303(i)(1)(B) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 25, 2022

(i)…(1) shall have a signal system which shall…(B)…produce an auditory signal at the living unit loud enough to summon staff. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on review of call log 09/04/2020 to 09/06/2020, staff response time to R1’s call button was from 9 minutes to 25 minutes, which posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

Plan of correction: Licensee will submit plan how you will ensure a timely staff response time to residents’ call buttons. Submit to CCL by 02/25/2022.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87307(a)(3)(A) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 25, 2022

(a)...(3)...(A)A bed for each resident… Each bed shall be equipped with good springs, a clean and comfortable mattress…This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews, staff admitted moving R1’s mattress to the floor to prevent injury to R1 falling out of bed, which posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

Plan of correction: Licensee will submit memo of understanding regarding providing an appropriate bed for residents unless modification is prescribed by a physician. Submit to CCL by 02/25/2022.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87303(a) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 3, 2022

(a)The facility shall be clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair at all times. ...safety and well-being of residents, employees and visitors. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on Observation and photographs the licensee did not comply with the regulation above R1’s room was found with bugs and dead bugs all over the floors, cobwebs in the windows and curtains and dirt in window seals which poses a potential Health, Safety and Personal rights risk to residents in carethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

Plan of correction: Licensee agreed to have housekeeping clean all rooms making sure to check for bugs, cobwebs, curtains, windows, and dirt from window seals. Send a complete roster with rooms cleaned.

Feb 24, 2022Facility evaluation reportCase Management - DeficienciesDeficiency pages: Type A, Type B

Type of visit: Case Management - Deficiencies

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rachael De Leon conducted a Case Management - Deficiencies visit in conjunction with a complaint visit (Complaint Control #29-AS-20200921120015). LPA De Leon met with Cheryl Marsh. The purpose todays visit is to issue citations for deficiencies observed during the complaint investigation. During the complaint investigation of complaint #29-AS-20200921120015, the following deficiencies were observed: R1’s Physician Report was dated 08/23/18. R1 was noted to have “Baseline Dementia” during a 09/05/20 ER visit. There was no updated Physician Report provided due to R1’s change of condition. R1’s Resident Evaluation was updated 08/03/2020 – there are no signatures/dates from appropriate parties on the updated evaluation. R1’s evaluation was not updated when R1 began having behaviors of throwing self out of bed to cause self-harm and was diagnosed with “Baseline Dementia” during a 09/05/2020 ER visit. Resident #1 (R1) had a fall on 7/31/20 and 09/05/20. The Wilshire Home Health reports for September 2020 indicate R1 had a stage two pressure injury on right buttocks, a stage one pressure injury on sacrum, and a stage one pressure injury on coccyx area. R1 was diagnosed with a Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) on 09/05/21. No Special Incident Reports (SIRs) were submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL). Exit interview conducted, deficiencies cited, copy of report and appeal rights issued.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87705(5) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 25, 2022

MedicalAssessment,...reappraisal done at least annually, both of which shall include a reassessment of the resident’s dementia care needs. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on Record Review the licensee did not comply R1 had a change of condition, No annual medical assessment and was diagnosed with “Baseline Dementia” during a 09/05/2020 ER visit, which posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

Plan of correction: Adminitrator agreed to review regualtion 87705 andl submit a memo of understanding of the requirements for providing updated medical assessments for residents when there is a change of condition. to CCL by 02/25/2022.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR87463(a) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 3, 2022

The pre-admission appraisal shall be updated, in writing as frequently as necessary to note significant changes and to keep the appraisal accurate. The reappraisals shall document changes in the resident's physical, medical, mental, and social condition….This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews and documentation review, R1’s Resident Evaluation was not updated to reflect R1’s change of condition, which posed a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

Plan of correction: Licensee will submit memo of understanding regarding updating resident appraisals for change of condition. Submit to CCL by 03/03/2022.

Feb 24, 2022Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst's (LPA's) Olson and De Leon conducted an on-site 1 year infection control annual visit to the facility above on 02/24/2022 at 9:50 AM. LPA's met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA took a physical plant tour of the facility with staff. The facility has submitted a mitigation plan to the department, and it has been approved. The facility has an entry point at the front door where everyone entering completes sign-in, symptom questionnaire and temperature screening on all staff and visitors wanting to come into the facility. All documentation is kept in a file. The entry station has hand sanitizer along with a thermometer. The facility has multiple areas spaced to accommodate as much space as possible for social distancing. The facility has a large courtyard for resident use with a couple umbrellas. All equipm ent and PPE supplies are kept in the storage closet. Medications are kept in a locked medication room. The staff screen residents for symptoms and temperature at least once a day and documentation is kept on file. Increased monitoring is conducted if any change of condition are noted or any residents are showing any signs, symptoms or a temperature. Signs are posted on the front door, entry area regarding Covid-19. Staff makes sure residents have a mask when leaving the facility on outings into the community. All staff wear face coverings in the facility and when on outings with residents. Facility have areas for visiting inside and outside. The facility also offers virtual and telephone communications to all residents in care. Staff, Residents and visitors are informed of the facilities infection control policies. New residents and staff will be tested and negative results received before working or residing in the facility. The facility has procedures and plans for screening, isolation, testing, when to call 911 and notifying all responsible parties and agencies when needed. Continued 809-C Emergency Disaster plan is posted and all agencies with telephone numbers are listed. Health and Wellness Director is in charge of infection control and provides training and education to staff, residents and visitors. Administrator is in charge of staffing and works on any issues or additional coverage. If any suspected or confirmed cases of Covid-19 are found in the facility a staff will be assigned to only work with those quarantined/isolated individuals and will not work with other negative individuals until cleared by Health Department to do so. Staff will use full PPE with N95 masks and face shields when dealing with any pending or confirmed cases of Covid-19. Facility is able to dedicate a single room for resident so isolation can be arranged when and if needed. The facility has single rooms with restrooms and they are disinfected bi-weekly or daily in Memory Care. Precautionary Droplet signs will be posted on any room with quarantine or isolated individuals. PPE supplies will be located right outside those rooms when required. Facility has a 30 day supply of PPE on hand. Facility has plans for delivering medications and meals to any quarantined/isolation resident room. The facility has proper cleaning and disinfectant sprays. Facility Administrator has a plan in place for when and whom to notify in an outbreak or other emergencies. Administrator will keep a line list of all vaccinated and tested staff/residents in care with dates/results. Facility has conducted training on infection prevention, symptoms, transmission and PPE use. Facility has non-punitive sick leave polices for staff. Sick staff are requested to stay home and not report to work if ill. Activities have been modified to individuals or small groups with social distancing. Residents medication is delivered in 30 day supplies to the facility. The facility ensures proper cleaning is done on frequently touched surfaces and between any individuals sharing of space or items. Sinks were well stocked with soap, paper towels and hand washing signs. Staff and resident records are kept in locked office. Facility does realize guidance changes and the most up to date guidance from CCL-PINS, CDC, CDPH, and local health departments should be followed to remain in compliance. The most stringent orders should be followed by any of these agencies. Administrator Certificates are valid. Fire extinguishers were charged and inspected annually. The facility has hardwired smoke and carbon monoxide detectors thorough the facility. Continued on 809-C At around 10:35 AM LPAs noticed the Memory Care common area had an accordion door that was open. There is a sign that says “Staff Only” but the area was not locked and LPA Olson noticed cleaning products, lotion, staff food, coffee, and a Monster drink. These items were unlocked and easily accessible to any Memory Care resident. At 10:40 LPA Olson saw an unlocked door to a staff restroom. Staff on tour immediately closed door which then locked. LPA Olson asked to see the inside of the restroom. LPA Olson observed full bottles of Acrylic Paint in the unlocked cabinet. At 10:50 AM LPA Olson observed pallets, holes, and materials out in the Courtyard that should not be there and needs to be repaired. At 11:00 AM LPAs observed stairwell by door 7 did not have an emergency evacuation chair. Administrator stated paining was done and it was lost in the process. A new one will be ordered today 2/24/22. Exit interview completed, deficiencies cited, civil penalty issued, copy of report and appeal rights emailed to Administrator/Licensee.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022
Jan 20, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility staff are not wearing face masks.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Chavez conducted an unannounced 10-day complaint investigation visit to the facility above. LPA met with Cheryl Marsh, Administrator, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured the facility and at 11:26 am observed Staff #1 (S1) not wearing a mask in the kitchen while preparing food. At 11:37 am, LPA observed Staff #2 (S2) wearing a mask below the nose in the Activity Room. The facility failed to protect the personal rights of residents in care to be able to receive safe and healthful accommodations, in that the facility S1 and S2 failed to wear face coverings properly while providing care and supervision to residents in care. This is a violation of official government orders requiring the wearing of face coverings while working under specified conditions. Pursuant to Title 22, California Code of Regulations, the deficiency will be cited on 9099-D. Exit interview conducted, deficiency cited, a copy of this report and appeal rights emailed to Administrator. Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 20, 2022 · control 29-AS-20220120125841

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.1 · Plan of correction due date: Jan 27, 2022

87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities ...To be accorded safe, healthful and comfortable accommodations, furnishings and equipment. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on observations, the facility failed to ensure S1 and S2 were wearing face coverings which poses an immediate health, safety and personal rights risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 20, 2022

Plan of correction: Administrator has agreed to immediately implement mask wearing in the facility, hold Mask/Infectious Prevention training with all staff, and provide training records with all staff signatures to CCL by 1/27/22.

20212 state visits · 2 documents

Aug 19, 2021Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility failed to promptly respond to resident call buttons. Facility did not provide safe accommodations to resident.

At 10:00am on 08/19/2021, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Mark Jeffries, contacted the facility by phone, the Administrator was not available. LPA obtained the COVID-19 screening by Staff 9 (S9). No positive cases and no residents displaying symptoms of COVID-19 per S9. At 10:15am LPA arrived at the facility and met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and announced the reason for the visit. LPA collected documentation and conducted interviews. As to the allegation of, “Facility failed to promptly respond to resident call buttons.” It was discovered through interviews and documentation that at 9:15am on 05/28/2021 R1 was interviewed and disclosed that R1 has never had an emergency while pressing R1’s call button. R1 has pressed the call button 191 times during the time frame of 04/28/2021 through 05/29/2021. R1 did not recall having to wait a long period of time after pressing R1’s call button. Interviews with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and Health Welfare Director (HWD) indicated that the staff would occasionally forget to clear call button calls. CONTINUED on LIC9099C Unsubstantiated At 10:50am on 08/19/2021, LPA interviewed R2 and R3, both R2 and R3 deny having to wait on call button responses. Both R2 and R3 state they have only used their call buttons in emergencies and the times they had to use them there was no abnormal waiting for staff response. Administrator conducted staff training on clearing call buttons prior to LPA’s initial visit on 05/28/2021. Based on the interviews and documentation the allegation of “Faculty failed to promptly respond to resident call buttons.” Is unsubstantiated at this time. As to the allegation of, “Facility did not provide safe accommodations to resident.” It was discovered through direct observations and interviews that R1’s room and bathroom had no items in disrepair or broken. At 9:10am on 05/28/2021, LPA and Business Office Manager (BOM) conducted a physical inspection of R1’s room; LPA tested the shower pressure, it was good; the water temperature was with in regulations. LPA checked to ensure all safety handles were securely attached to the walls. LPA did not observe any broken shower or bathroom parts. LPA observed that the commode was firmly anchored to the floor. LPA and BOM did not observe any safety hazards or disrepair items in R1’s room at the time of inspection. Interviews of R1 and staff did not reveal any hazards or disrepair items, therefore the allegation of, “Facility did not provide safe accommodations to resident.” Is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report singed, report emailed.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 19, 2021 · control 29-AS-20210527092347
Jul 16, 2021Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff does not meet resident's toileting needs.

At 8:35am, on 07/16/2021, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Mark Jeffries arrived at the facility to issue final findings for the allegation listed above. LPA met with Administrator Cheryl Marsh and announced the reason for this visit. As to the allegation of, “Staff does not meet resident's toileting needs”; LPA conducted complaint investigation at 9:30am on 07/08/2021, LPA observed and photographed ample incontinence products to meet the needs of the residents of a 130-bed facility. At 10:02am – 10:35am LPA physically observed residents’ rooms 126, 131, 132, and 138. Room 110 was occupied and declined entrance by resident due to visitation in progress in room 110, LPA noted no olfactory abnormalities in and outside of listed rooms. LPA conducted interviews with Residents, Staff and Administrator. LPA view staff schedules, incontinence product distribution logs, resident physician reports, Appraisal Needs and Services plans and staff training records. LPA noted that the schedule reflected enough staff to meet the toileting needs of residents in care and were properly trained to care for residents with incontinence needs as reflected by initial training records (Shadowing training and videos). CONTINUED on LIC9099C Unsubstantiated LPA's Interviews of staff revealed one incident of soiled briefs of R1 which was soiled on the NOC to AM shift transfer the morning of 07/03/2021, however, R1 could not recall a time when their incontinence needs were not met. Through observation, records, training logs, interviews and photographic evidence it is determined at this time there is not enough evidence to support that allegation of, “Staff does not meet resident's toileting needs” therefore this allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview, report emailed.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 16, 2021 · control 29-AS-20210701150257

100 of 130 beds were occupied at the July 7, 2026 state visit — a count on that day, not an opening.

License holder

Welltower Pegasus Tenant LLC; Psl Associates LLC, licensed since 2019.

Operates 4 licensed homes in California. Running more than one home is common and is neither good nor bad on its own.

  • The Havens at Antelope Valley Assisted Living · Lancaster
  • Whispering Winds of Apple Valley Assisted Living · Apple Valley
  • The Village at Rancho Solano Assisted Living · Fairfield
The state’s totals for this licenseSince 2019, as the state’s facility page counts them
State visits on file
34
Total complaints
18
Substantiated allegations
14
Type A citations
2
Type B citations
9

These are the state’s own totals for this license since 2019, per CDSS records. The state counts them apart from the documents above, and they can differ from what those documents show; the documents say what each visit found. One complaint can contain several allegations.

Compare with homes the same size
This homeTypical
Type A citations20
Type B citations91
Substantiated allegations142
Total complaints186

“Typical” is the statewide median for licensed homes this size. It does not adjust for years licensed, and older licenses have had more visits and reports. The median is across the 1,354 licensed larger communities (16+ beds) in the state record. The figures compared are the state’s totals, not the documents.

What the state’s words mean
Routine visita visit the state records as “Required” — a scheduled visit, not one made in answer to a complaintSubstantiatedthe state found the allegation more likely true than notUnsubstantiatedthere was not enough evidence to prove a violation occurred — not a finding of wrongdoingUnfoundedthe evidence showed the allegation was false, could not have happened, or had no reasonable basisType A citationa violation that poses an immediate risk to health, safety or personal rights if it is not correctedType B citationa violation that could become a risk if not corrected, or one involving records, resources or required services

CDSS citation definitions (PDF) ↗ · CDSS complaint outcomes ↗

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, and we publish no reviews — the state’s dated documents stand in their place.

Open CDSS facility search ↗Report a record errorOperate this home? Respond or correct, free →
Frequently asked questions

A citation does not make a home unsafe, and an empty file does not make a home good.

Quick answers about Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care

Is Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care licensed?

The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.

How many residents is Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care licensed for?

130 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.

Has Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care been cited?

2 Type A and 9 Type B citations since 2019, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. Those records count 34 state visits over the same years.

Is Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care still open?

This license was on the CDSS roster as of November 11, 2026.

What does Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care cost?

$4,700 a month to start is typical in San Luis Obispo County, likely $3,150–$7,000. This home’s own rate is not on file. Ask: “What is the all-in monthly rate, and what would push it higher?”

Too few nearby homes publish a rate, so this is the typical starting rate 5 communities with 50 or more beds publish in San Luis Obispo County, with a wider likely range. This home’s own rate is not on file.

Among 5 other homes of a similar licensed size across San Luis Obispo County that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $3,635 to $7,114 a month, and the middle figure is $4,695 (n = 5 other homes publishing a starting rate).

Each of those is a home’s own published figure, gathered on its own date in September 2026 — not an average of ours, and not a survey. Similar size means small and mid-size homes counted together, and large communities counted on their own, because they are different markets.

A home outside the band is not overcharging or underpricing: a starting rate covers different things in different homes, which is the first thing to ask about.

The price is made in the phone call. Nothing here is a quote, an offer or a discount.

A starting rate is the room and the base care. California homes commonly bill care levels, medication management, supplies, transport and a second person in the room as extras. Many also charge a one-time fee at move-in. Ask for that list in writing before anything is signed.

Only prices a home put out itself count here: its own website, a listing it supplied, or a price a listing site says the home confirmed. Prices a site shows without saying where they came from are left out.

Does Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care take Medi-Cal?

On Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver: this home is not on the DHCS participation list dated October 1, 2026. Ask the program about current options. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.

Who holds the license?

The license is held by Welltower Pegasus Tenant LLC; Psl Associates LLC, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. See the homes licensed to Welltower Pegasus Tenant LLC — at least 6 on the state roster.

Can Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care keep a resident on hospice?

Hospice care is approved on this license, covering up to 18 residents, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.

Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care license and inspection record

  • Name on the license: “CRESTON VILLAGE ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
  • License #405850010. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
  • Licensed for 130 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
  • Licensed to Welltower Pegasus Tenant LLC; Psl Associates LLC, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
  • First licensed in 2019, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
  • 34 state inspection visits since 2019, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
  • 2 Type A and 9 Type B citations on file since 2019, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. The same records count 34 state visits in that period.
  • 18 complaints and 14 substantiated allegations on file since 2019, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
  • The most recent state visit on file is August 25, 2026, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Type A citationa violation that poses an immediate risk to health, safety or personal rights if it is not correctedType B citationa violation that could become a risk if not corrected, or one involving records, resources or required services

California writes these definitions for every licensed home, not for this one. CDSS citation definitions (PDF) ↗

See the state’s own record

Nearby

Other homes nearby

Licensed homes near this one in San Luis Obispo County, most information on file first. Every listed home appears on the same terms.

  • Map

    Paso Robles · 1.2 mi

    The Oaks at Paso Robles

    Large community · licensed for 120

    Starting rate

    $4,695 a month to start

    Listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026

    On the state record

    • Wheelchair: on the state record
    • Dementia: on the state record
    • Hospice: on the state record
    • Bedridden: on the state record
  • Map

    Paso Robles · 0.4 mi

    Paso Robles Senior Living

    Small home · licensed for 6

    Starting rate

    $5,000 a month to start

    Listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026

    On the state record

    • Wheelchair: on the state record
    • Hospice: on the state record
  • Map

    Paso Robles · 0.6 mi

    Oak Hills Residential Care Home

    Small home · licensed for 6

    Estimated starting rate

    $5,250 a month to start

    Covelight estimate · likely $4,300–$6,450

    On the state record

    • Wheelchair: on the state record
    • Hospice: on the state record
  • Map

    Paso Robles · 0.6 mi

    Paso Senior Care

    Small home · licensed for 6

    Estimated starting rate

    $5,000 a month to start

    Covelight estimate · likely $4,100–$6,150

    On the state record

    • Wheelchair: on the state record
    • Hospice: on the state record
  • Map

    Paso Robles · 0.7 mi

    Caring Hands Home Care

    Small home · licensed for 6

    Estimated starting rate

    $5,250 a month to start

    Covelight estimate · likely $4,300–$6,500

    On the state record

    • Wheelchair: on the state record
    • Dementia: on the state record
    • Hospice: on the state record
  • Map

    Paso Robles · 1.1 mi

    All Seasons Care II

    Small home · licensed for 6

    Estimated starting rate

    $5,300 a month to start

    Covelight estimate · likely $4,350–$6,500

    On the state record

    • Wheelchair: on the state record
    • Dementia: on the state record
    • Hospice: on the state record

Street maps © Protomaps · © OpenStreetMap

Explore San Luis Obispo County ↗

Do you run this home?

Add your photos, care details, and contact information. Your public profile is free.

Claim this home
Visiting in person? Print a visit sheetHow we source information
CallAsk this home
CV

Call Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care

Paso Robles · Licensed for 130

(805) 239-1313

From the state licensing record · October 26, 2026

From the home’s website, pegasusseniorliving.com:

(214) 306-7674 · main line · seen October 27, 2026

or

Let us do the legwork

  • We ask about availability, price and the care you describe.
  • If it’s a fit, you choose whether they call you. Either way, you get every answer.
Check availabilityFree

Ask Creston Village Assisted Living and Memory Care

Check availability

Request a tour

More days
  • AskThe cost, or your own question

Free for families. A home gets your number only if you say yes.

Covelight Care

A free directory of every licensed care home in California, built from CDSS public records.

Find your next step

Find a homeSaved homesHelp me chooseCheck a home

Make sense of care

Care guidesMedi-Cal & careYour rightsHow we workAbout this site

Work with Covelight

For professionalsFor home operatorsSuggest a correctionDevelopersContact us

© 2026 Covelight Care LLC. Homes never pay to appear or rank higher.

Covelight Care is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the sources named on this page.

3104 O St Unit #1023, Sacramento, CA 95816

PrivacyTermsText messages