Santa Barbara Memory Care is a residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara County, California — state license #425802116, licensed for 36 residents, listed as licensed in the CDSS record we retrieved August 2, 2026. It does not appear on the DHCS Assisted Living Waiver participant list checked August 9, 2026 — that list covers the state waiver only, not a home's own payment arrangements. California has 40 dated inspection and complaint documents on file for this home going back to 2021, the most recent dated April 7, 2026 — published below in full, verbatim and unscored.

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

9 homes in view

Santa Barbara Memory Care

No photo on file yet

No photo of this home is on file — we show real, attributed images only, never a stock photo of someone else’s building.

Residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) · Mid-size home, 36 residents · Santa Barbara, CA · Santa Barbara County
LicensedWheelchairMemory careHospiceBedridden
No openings reportedBeds change hands in days ·
License #425802116, held since 2019 · read from the California state record on August 2, 2026 ·See on State Site →
325 W Islay St · Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara County
Phone
(805) 880-4770
from the state licensing roster · August 2, 2026
No Google listing is on file for this home.
Website
None on file
Many small homes have no website — that says nothing about the care inside.
Contact facts come from the state roster, a county Area Agency on Aging roster, the home’s Google listing, or the operator — each labelled, never blended. Operators: add or correct yours, free →
Print tour sheet →

Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryApproved for 36 residents
Dementia / memory careVerified in record
Hospice careVerified in record
Bedridden careApproved for 36 residents

“Not on file” is not a no — approvals can be bed- or room-specific, so confirm current scope with the home on a tour. Where a number is shown it is the state’s own wording for how many residents the approval covers, not how many places are open today; where none is shown, the record simply does not state one.

Specific medical needs — insulin, oxygen, a catheter, an ostomy — aren’t in the state license record; ask the home directly. A feeding tube, tracheostomy, or advanced wound care usually needs skilled nursing →

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

What the state record says, word for word
AGE RANGE 18 AND OVER. FIRE CLEARANCE APPROVED FOR 36 NON-AMBULATORY RESIDENTS OF WHICH 36 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. HOSPICE WAIVER APPROVED FOR 10RESIDENTS. APPROVED SECURED PERIMETERS. NEW MGMT CO.: SANTA BARBARA MGR, EFFECTIVE 01/23/2025.State service designations980 - RCFE / LOCKED · 983 - RCFE / DEMENTIA · 985 - RCFE / HOSPICEthe CDSS license record, verbatim · checked August 2, 2026

“RCFE / Dementia” is the state’s designation for a home with an approved Dementia Care Plan of Operation — it’s recorded separately from the comments above, which is why the memory-care approval may not appear in that text.

Since 2021, the state has visited this home 42 times and filed 40 documents. The most recent is a complaint investigation report, dated April 7, 2026.

Most recent state visit
April 7, 2026
Occupancy at the August 27, 2025 visit
14 of 36 beds

The state's published file for this home includes 21 documents with transcribed findings, dated July 30, 2021 to August 27, 2025. 21 of the 21 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (15), “Unsubstantiated” (6). 21 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word.

Summary composed by computer from the 21 documents below — every count derives from them, and the documents themselves are the state's records, verbatim. We never grade, score, or color a record.

What the state’s words mean
Substantiatedthe state found the allegation more likely true than notUnsubstantiatedinvestigated, but couldn’t be confirmed either way — not a finding of wrongdoingUnfoundedthe state concluded it was false or couldn’t have happenedType A citationthe most serious: an immediate health-or-safety risk, usually fixed on the spot or on a short deadlineType B citationless serious, with a deadline to fix
The last 36 months — 27 of 40 documentsFull record on the state’s site →
20263 state visits · 4 documents
Apr 7, 2026Complaint investigation reportReport on file

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

Apr 7, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Feb 25, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Jan 15, 2026Complaint investigation reportReport on file

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

20257 state visits · 7 documents
Aug 27, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility did not issue a refund to resident.

At 3:30pm on 08/27/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived to the facility unannounced to deliver the final findings to this complaint. LPA met with, Wellness Director, Cielo Valladares, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. LPA received verbal authorization from Administrator via telephone call to have Wellness Director, Cielo Valladares review and sign complaint findings report. As to the allegation, “Facility did not issue a refund to resident.” It was alleged that, “the facility was taking about three weeks to cash the resident's checks and then were placing late fees…” the facility was processing checks late when recived on time, when they were mailed and followed up with phone call confirmation. It was discovered through interviews and documentation that on 05/15/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries conducted an interview with Family Member 1 (F1) who stated that they had sent a check for Resident 1 (R1) every month from out of state prior tothe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 27, 2025 · control 29-AS-20250219113025
Jun 25, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff are mismanaging residents medication.

At 11:30am on 06/25/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to the facility to conduct the initial investigation to the allegation to this complaint. LPA met with,Adminsitrator, Lisa Gerr, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. LPA conducted interviews, requested and reviewed documentation. Based on documentation and interviews, LPA was able to make a determination a final finding on the allegation to this complaint as follows: As to the allegation of, "Staff are mismanaging residents medications." It was alleged that, Resident 1 (R1) was hospitalized on 05/01/25 and subsequently did not return as a resident to this facility on that day. The evening of 05/01/25, R1's medications were provided to Witness 1 (W1), R1's responsible party, with the medication Olanzapine 2.5mg missing, according to W1. It was discovered through interview on 06/23/2025, LPA Jeffries interviewed W1 who stated, "the facility Administrator (Lisa Gerr) brought the medications tthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 25, 2025 · control 29-AS-20250618090543
May 21, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Apr 16, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Apr 4, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Mar 19, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Feb 24, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

20247 state visits · 15 documents
Jun 11, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not ensure that residents are provided activities while in care. Staff do not adhere to resident's special diet as prescribed. Staff do not ensure that resident is provided their medication(s) as prescribed.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. LPA Philips started the investigation on 3/6/2024 from 1:30pm to 3:30pm. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia, administrator, and Elizabeth Hernandez, Designee, explained the reason for the visit. LPA toured the facility, reviewed relevant documents, and interviewed administrator, staff, and residents. On the allegation: Staff do not ensure that residents are provided activities while in care. It was alleged that activities were not provided. However, reporting party also stated activities are provided, but they thought the activities could be improved. On 3/6/2024, LPA observed activities available for residents including board games, puzzles and reading materials in the common room. Continued on 9099-C Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240227112010
Jun 11, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Due to neglect, Resident became septic while in care

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. The initial visit was conducted on 06/17/2022 by LPA Kristin Kontilis. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia, Administrator, and explained the reason for the visit. On the allegation: Due to neglect, Resident became septic while in care. On 06/16/2022, the Department received a complaint alleging that former facility Resident #1 (R1) became septic while residing at the facility as a result of facility neglect. On 06/17/2022, between 1:10pm and 4:00pm, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial complaint visit. Continued on 9099-C Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20220616085421
Jun 11, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Due to neglect, Resident was dehydrated Due to neglect, Resident suffered a fall while in care Resident was vaccinated without consent Facility did not notice a change in resident’s condition Facility not allowing resident to communicate with family members

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. The initial visit was conducted on 06/17/2022 by LPA Kristin Kontilis. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Administrator Cynthia Garcia and explained the reason for the visit. On the allegation: Due to neglect, Resident was dehydrated. It was alleged R1 was diagnosed with dehydration. Staff interviewed stated one of the med tech’s job duties is to track resident’s bowel movements. Staff stated if a resident does not have a bowel movement for two days, then stool softeners may be provided with a doctor’s order. Continued on 9099-C Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20220616085421
Jun 11, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not notice a change in resident’s condition. Staff did not assist resident in care with their hygiene needs. Staff did not administer medication(s) to resident according to physician's instructions. Staff did not feed resident while in care. Facility did not have enough staff to meet the needs of resident(s) in care. Staff did not respond to resident's representatives requests for assistance. Staff did not notify resident's representative about resident's change in condition.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial visit on 11/14/22, obtained relevant documents, and interviewed staff. On the allegations: Staff did not notice a change in resident’s condition, Staff did not respond to resident's representatives requests for assistance, and Staff did not notify resident's representative about resident's change in condition. R1’s family member (F1) stated R1’s hospice social worker indicated they found a less expensive facility for R1, but did not state this was a facility for people who were at the end of life. Continued on 9099-C Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20221104125523
Jun 11, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not provide resident's responsible party with records after requested. Staff did not allow visitor(s) into the facility in a timely manner.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia, Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial visit on 11/14/22, obtained relevant documents, and interviewed staff; R1’s family member was also interviewed. On the allegation: Staff did not provide resident's responsible party with records after requested. R1’s family member (F1) stated they requested a copy of R1’s chart in October 2020, and August 3 (year not specified). Continued on 9099-C Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20221104125523
Jun 11, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure a safe environment for residents in care. Staff did not ensure a sanitary environment for residents in care. Staff did not ensure that residents were provided with clean linens while in care.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. The initial visit was conducted on 12/5/2022 by LPA Kristin Kontilis. During the investigation, LPA toured the facility and interviewed staff. LPA also collected and reviewed relevant documents. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia and explained the reason for the visit. On 11/26/2022, facility staff called first responders for assistance due to a resident falling. Multiple first responder agencies visited the facility as a result of this incident. Multiple patients were taken to hospital due to concerns for their health and safety. On the allegations: Staff did not ensure a safe environment for residents in care, and Staff did not ensure a sanitary environment for residents in care. Continued on 9099-C Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20221201151546
Jun 11, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff mismanaging residents medication. Facility toilet is in disrepair. Facility is dirty. Staff engaged in a verbal altercation in presence of residents.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted an initial complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia, administrator, and Elizabeth Hernandez, Designee, explained the reason for the visit. LPA toured the facility, reviewed relevant documents, and interviewed administrator, staff, and residents. On the allegation: Staff mismanaging residents medication. It was alleged that a med tech was signing off that they provided medications without having provided them. LPA interviewed administrator about the allegation. Administrator stated the Memory Care Director brought up the issue and they had a meeting with all med techs to discuss it. Continued on 9099-C Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240604085405
Jun 3, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility did not give a refund to a prospective residents after deciding not to move in.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Esmerlda Perez, Medical Technician and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Olson conducted the initial visit on 6/29/23, and interviewed staff and residents from 2:20pm to 4:45pm. LPA also obtained relevant documentation. On the allegation: Facility did not give a refund to a prospective residents after deciding not to move in. It was alleged that two residents had planned to move in and paid a pre- admission fee. Continued on 9099-C Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 3, 2024 · control 29-AS-20230628132443
May 6, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility doesn’t have an administrator. Staff are not providing adequate care and supervision.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial visit on 12/18/23, and obtained relevant documentation. LPA conducted interviews with responsible parties on 12/13/2023, 12/15/23, 1/29/24, and 2/27/24. On the allegation: Facility doesn’t have an administrator. It was alleged the facility does not have a certified administrator. LPA reviewed facility records. On 10/11/2023, CCL received documents to name Regional Director of Operations Tierre Thorton as Administrator of the facility. Continued on 9099-C Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20231212163454
May 6, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility staff did not follow infection control procedures. Facility did not provide residents basic supplies. Facility is not clean. Facility is in disrepair.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with ______ and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted an initial visit on 9/11/2023, toured the facility, interviewed staff from 10:40am to 4:00pm, and obtained documents. LPA conducted additional visits on 9/12/2023 from 12:30pm to 6:30pm and 9/18/2023 from 10:55am to 11:40am. Continued on 9099-C Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20230905123221
May 6, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained injuries while in care

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Olson conducted the initial visit on 6/29/23, and interviewed staff and residents from 2:20pm to 4:45pm. LPA also obtained relevant documentation. On the allegation: Resident sustained injury while in care. It was alleged that on 6/20/2023, Resident 1 (R1) was observed to have bruises on their hand/arm. It was alleged that staff indicated R1 sustained the injury while being “violent” towards staff. It was also alleged that the Administrator at the time indicated the injury was the result of a fall. Continued on 9099-C. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20230623160720
Mar 6, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not ensure residents receive mail correspondence in a timely manner

On 03/06/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Brian Phillips arrived at the facility above to conduct a Subsequent Complaint Investigation Visit and Deliver Final Findings. LPA met with Business Office Director Cynthia Garcia and Medication Technician Anais Ochoa and explained the purpose of the visit. On the allegation: Staff do not ensure residents receive mail correspondence in a timely manner. It is alleged that from 02/16/2024 through 02/20/2024, postal mail has been unable to be retrieved for Resident #1 (R1). The allegation states that the Responsible Party for R1 has attempted each day to get the mail with either no staff available or Staff not having a key to the mailbox/Staff Office where a mailbox key is kept. It is also alleged that none of the residents have been receiving the mail since 02/16/2024. On 02/26/2024, LPA requested documents pertaining to the investigation, conducted observations of the pertinent areas of the facility, and interviewed both Residents and Staffthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240220152049
Feb 13, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Jan 30, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Jan 24, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Due to a lack of staffing, staff are not answering the facility phone. Staff did not notify authorized representative of incident with resident.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kristin Kontilis conducted an unannounced subsequent visit to address the above-stated allegations. LPA met with Anais Ochoa, Medication Technician and explained the purpose of the visit. At the time of arrival, there were fourteen residents in care with two staff on duty. On the allegation, due to lack of staffing, staff are not answering the facility telephone: Reporting Party (RP) stated RP has placed numerous unanswered calls to the facility’s main line and has not been able to leave a message or speak with facility representatives. On 8/23/2023 one call was placed to the facility unanswered. On 8/24/2023, four calls were made to the facility. One call was answered and RP had a conversation with a facility representative. However, after the conversation, RP called back two more times, but the calls were not answered and no voicemail option was available. On 8/25/2023, RP stated two unanswered calls were placed to the facility. Also, on 8/25/2023, RPthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 24, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240117104513
20231 state visit · 1 document
Dec 18, 2023Facility evaluation reportReport on file

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

Beside homes the same size
Type A citations9typical 1
Type B citations13typical 1
Substantiated complaints26typical 2
Total complaints19typical 7
State visits on file42typical 19
“Typical” is the statewide median across the 1,244 licensed larger communities (16+ beds) in the state record — larger, longer-licensed homes accumulate more visits and reports, so compare like with like. One complaint can contain several allegations. Counts cover this license since 2019.
Year-by-year trend
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated20263402025772202471572023452202271032021111
An “unsubstantiated” complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing — it means the state investigated and could not confirm the allegation. Outcome words are the state’s own; we never grade, score, or color a record.Operate this home? Respond to or correct any document here, free. Respond or correct →

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

$6,000$9,000 /mo
our estimate — Santa Barbara County band, market research June 2026; not this home’s quoted price
$3,500 · statewide low$9,000 · statewide high
California’s public record holds no per-home price, so we never invent one. Ask the home for its rate sheet, or
Ways families pay here
Private pay — ask what the base rate includes and what’s billed separately.SSI/SSP — California’s board-and-care payment standard is $1,626.07/mo (2026): $1,444.07 to the home, $182 stays with the resident.Medi-Cal ALW — this home isn’t on the DHCS waiver list (checked August 9, 2026). Details →

Free for families · We never sell your information · Homes never pay to appear, and rankings are never affected by fees.

Cost range look wrong? Report it — free →

What dementia training does staff have, and is the area secured?
Non-ambulatory approval — whole home or specific rooms, and is a spot open?
How is medication handled and logged day to day?
What’s in the base monthly rate, and what’s billed separately?
Staff-to-resident ratio on day and night shifts?
How are medical emergencies handled after hours?

The first two come straight from this home’s record — a brochure won’t answer them.

Operate this home? This page is generated from CDSS public records — respond or correct it, free.
Claim your home → · See something wrong? → · How we source every fact →
Call (805) 880-4770

Is Santa Barbara Memory Care licensed?

Yes — Santa Barbara Memory Care is a licensed residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Santa Barbara (Santa Barbara County): California license #425802116, shown as licensed in the CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026, licensed for 36 residents. State records list 40 inspection and complaint documents since 2021; the most recent, a complaint investigation report dated April 7, 2026, appears in the inspection record on this page.

Can Santa Barbara Memory Care care for dementia, hospice, bedridden, or non-ambulatory residents?

From the CDSS license record, checked August 2, 2026.

The CDSS license record checked August 2, 2026 lists Santa Barbara Memory Care with clearances for wheelchair / non-ambulatory, dementia / memory care, hospice care, and bedridden. Clearances describe what the license permits, not day-to-day staffing — confirm current scope and availability with the home directly on a tour.

Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryDementia / memory careHospice careBedridden

From the California state record. Some approvals are bed- or room-specific — always confirm current scope with the facility.

What the state record says, word for word
Verbatim, from the CDSS license recordAGE RANGE 18 AND OVER. FIRE CLEARANCE APPROVED FOR 36 NON-AMBULATORY RESIDENTS OF WHICH 36 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. HOSPICE WAIVER APPROVED FOR 10RESIDENTS. APPROVED SECURED PERIMETERS. NEW MGMT CO.: SANTA BARBARA MGR, EFFECTIVE 01/23/2025.

How much does Santa Barbara Memory Care cost?

California's public licensing record does not include Santa Barbara Memory Care's monthly price, so we never show or estimate one for a specific home. As county-level context only, assisted living in Santa Barbara County typically runs $6,000–$9,000/mo and small board-and-care homes $5,000–$8,000/mo (market research compiled June 2026 — ranges, not quotes; California's 2026 SSI/SSP board-and-care payment standard is $1,626.07/month, of which $1,444.07 is the room-and-board portion paid to the home). Ask the home for its own rate sheet and what the base rate includes — or use the cost section at the top of this page.

Does Santa Barbara Memory Care accept Medi-Cal or the Assisted Living Waiver?

Santa Barbara Memory Care is not in the DHCS Assisted Living Waiver participant record we checked August 9, 2026 — that list covers only the state's ALW program, not a home's own payment policies, so ask the home directly about private Medi-Cal arrangements. The waiver pays for assisted-living care services (not room and board) at participating homes; every DHCS-listed home appears on our statewide Medi-Cal page.

Assisted living on Medi-Cal in California →See the DHCS list →

How full it was at the last state visit

14 of 36 beds occupied (39%) when the state visited on August 27, 2025. Availability changes constantly — confirm a current opening with the home.

What do state inspections show for Santa Barbara Memory Care?

Verbatim from CDSS complaint-investigation reports — the state's own words, never summarized by us. Record checked August 2, 2026.

The CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026 lists 42 state visits and 40 dated documents since 2021 for Santa Barbara Memory Care; 21 complaint-investigation narratives are transcribed verbatim below. The most recent, dated August 27, 2025, records an allegation the state marked “Substantiated. Open any entry to read the state's full finding, word for word.

Most licensed homes receive some findings over 36 months; what matters is what was found and whether it was corrected. Counts here are shown compared with homes of similar size, and the state's own words appear in full below.

21 transcribed reports on file

2025

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility did not issue a refund to resident.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
At 3:30pm on 08/27/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived to the facility unannounced to deliver the final findings to this complaint. LPA met with, Wellness Director, Cielo Valladares, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. LPA received verbal authorization from Administrator via telephone call to have Wellness Director, Cielo Valladares review and sign complaint findings report. As to the allegation, “Facility did not issue a refund to resident.” It was alleged that, “the facility was taking about three weeks to cash the resident's checks and then were placing late fees…” the facility was processing checks late when recived on time, when they were mailed and followed up with phone call confirmation. It was discovered through interviews and documentation that on 05/15/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries conducted an interview with Family Member 1 (F1) who stated that they had sent a check for Resident 1 (R1) every month from out of state prior toCDSS inspection report, August 27, 2025 · control 29-AS-20250219113025
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff are mismanaging residents medication.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
At 11:30am on 06/25/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeffries arrived unannounced to the facility to conduct the initial investigation to the allegation to this complaint. LPA met with,Adminsitrator, Lisa Gerr, announced who he is and the reason for the visit. LPA conducted interviews, requested and reviewed documentation. Based on documentation and interviews, LPA was able to make a determination a final finding on the allegation to this complaint as follows: As to the allegation of, "Staff are mismanaging residents medications." It was alleged that, Resident 1 (R1) was hospitalized on 05/01/25 and subsequently did not return as a resident to this facility on that day. The evening of 05/01/25, R1's medications were provided to Witness 1 (W1), R1's responsible party, with the medication Olanzapine 2.5mg missing, according to W1. It was discovered through interview on 06/23/2025, LPA Jeffries interviewed W1 who stated, "the facility Administrator (Lisa Gerr) brought the medications tCDSS inspection report, June 25, 2025 · control 29-AS-20250618090543

2024

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff do not ensure that residents are provided activities while in care. Staff do not adhere to resident's special diet as prescribed. Staff do not ensure that resident is provided their medication(s) as prescribed.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. LPA Philips started the investigation on 3/6/2024 from 1:30pm to 3:30pm. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia, administrator, and Elizabeth Hernandez, Designee, explained the reason for the visit. LPA toured the facility, reviewed relevant documents, and interviewed administrator, staff, and residents. On the allegation: Staff do not ensure that residents are provided activities while in care. It was alleged that activities were not provided. However, reporting party also stated activities are provided, but they thought the activities could be improved. On 3/6/2024, LPA observed activities available for residents including board games, puzzles and reading materials in the common room. Continued on 9099-C UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240227112010
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedDue to neglect, Resident became septic while in care
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. The initial visit was conducted on 06/17/2022 by LPA Kristin Kontilis. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia, Administrator, and explained the reason for the visit. On the allegation: Due to neglect, Resident became septic while in care. On 06/16/2022, the Department received a complaint alleging that former facility Resident #1 (R1) became septic while residing at the facility as a result of facility neglect. On 06/17/2022, between 1:10pm and 4:00pm, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial complaint visit. Continued on 9099-C SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20220616085421
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedDue to neglect, Resident was dehydrated Due to neglect, Resident suffered a fall while in care Resident was vaccinated without consent Facility did not notice a change in resident’s condition Facility not allowing resident to communicate with family members
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. The initial visit was conducted on 06/17/2022 by LPA Kristin Kontilis. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Administrator Cynthia Garcia and explained the reason for the visit. On the allegation: Due to neglect, Resident was dehydrated. It was alleged R1 was diagnosed with dehydration. Staff interviewed stated one of the med tech’s job duties is to track resident’s bowel movements. Staff stated if a resident does not have a bowel movement for two days, then stool softeners may be provided with a doctor’s order. Continued on 9099-C UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20220616085421
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not notice a change in resident’s condition. Staff did not assist resident in care with their hygiene needs. Staff did not administer medication(s) to resident according to physician's instructions. Staff did not feed resident while in care. Facility did not have enough staff to meet the needs of resident(s) in care. Staff did not respond to resident's representatives requests for assistance. Staff did not notify resident's representative about resident's change in condition.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial visit on 11/14/22, obtained relevant documents, and interviewed staff. On the allegations: Staff did not notice a change in resident’s condition, Staff did not respond to resident's representatives requests for assistance, and Staff did not notify resident's representative about resident's change in condition. R1’s family member (F1) stated R1’s hospice social worker indicated they found a less expensive facility for R1, but did not state this was a facility for people who were at the end of life. Continued on 9099-C UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20221104125523
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not provide resident's responsible party with records after requested. Staff did not allow visitor(s) into the facility in a timely manner.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia, Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial visit on 11/14/22, obtained relevant documents, and interviewed staff; R1’s family member was also interviewed. On the allegation: Staff did not provide resident's responsible party with records after requested. R1’s family member (F1) stated they requested a copy of R1’s chart in October 2020, and August 3 (year not specified). Continued on 9099-C SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20221104125523
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff did not ensure a safe environment for residents in care. Staff did not ensure a sanitary environment for residents in care. Staff did not ensure that residents were provided with clean linens while in care.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. The initial visit was conducted on 12/5/2022 by LPA Kristin Kontilis. During the investigation, LPA toured the facility and interviewed staff. LPA also collected and reviewed relevant documents. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia and explained the reason for the visit. On 11/26/2022, facility staff called first responders for assistance due to a resident falling. Multiple first responder agencies visited the facility as a result of this incident. Multiple patients were taken to hospital due to concerns for their health and safety. On the allegations: Staff did not ensure a safe environment for residents in care, and Staff did not ensure a sanitary environment for residents in care. Continued on 9099-C SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20221201151546
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff mismanaging residents medication. Facility toilet is in disrepair. Facility is dirty. Staff engaged in a verbal altercation in presence of residents.
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted an initial complaint visit to deliver final findings for the above allegation. During today’s visit, LPA Rankin met with Cynthia Garcia, administrator, and Elizabeth Hernandez, Designee, explained the reason for the visit. LPA toured the facility, reviewed relevant documents, and interviewed administrator, staff, and residents. On the allegation: Staff mismanaging residents medication. It was alleged that a med tech was signing off that they provided medications without having provided them. LPA interviewed administrator about the allegation. Administrator stated the Memory Care Director brought up the issue and they had a meeting with all med techs to discuss it. Continued on 9099-C UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 11, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240604085405
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility did not give a refund to a prospective residents after deciding not to move in.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Esmerlda Perez, Medical Technician and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Olson conducted the initial visit on 6/29/23, and interviewed staff and residents from 2:20pm to 4:45pm. LPA also obtained relevant documentation. On the allegation: Facility did not give a refund to a prospective residents after deciding not to move in. It was alleged that two residents had planned to move in and paid a pre- admission fee. Continued on 9099-C SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, June 3, 2024 · control 29-AS-20230628132443
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility doesn’t have an administrator. Staff are not providing adequate care and supervision.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted the initial visit on 12/18/23, and obtained relevant documentation. LPA conducted interviews with responsible parties on 12/13/2023, 12/15/23, 1/29/24, and 2/27/24. On the allegation: Facility doesn’t have an administrator. It was alleged the facility does not have a certified administrator. LPA reviewed facility records. On 10/11/2023, CCL received documents to name Regional Director of Operations Tierre Thorton as Administrator of the facility. Continued on 9099-C SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, May 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20231212163454
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff did not follow infection control procedures. Facility did not provide residents basic supplies. Facility is not clean. Facility is in disrepair.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with ______ and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Kontilis conducted an initial visit on 9/11/2023, toured the facility, interviewed staff from 10:40am to 4:00pm, and obtained documents. LPA conducted additional visits on 9/12/2023 from 12:30pm to 6:30pm and 9/18/2023 from 10:55am to 11:40am. Continued on 9099-C SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, May 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20230905123221
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedResident sustained injuries while in care
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rankin conducted a subsequent complaint visit to the facility above to issue final findings. LPA met with Cynthia Garcia and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation, LPA Olson conducted the initial visit on 6/29/23, and interviewed staff and residents from 2:20pm to 4:45pm. LPA also obtained relevant documentation. On the allegation: Resident sustained injury while in care. It was alleged that on 6/20/2023, Resident 1 (R1) was observed to have bruises on their hand/arm. It was alleged that staff indicated R1 sustained the injury while being “violent” towards staff. It was also alleged that the Administrator at the time indicated the injury was the result of a fall. Continued on 9099-C. UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, May 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20230623160720
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff do not ensure residents receive mail correspondence in a timely manner
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
On 03/06/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Brian Phillips arrived at the facility above to conduct a Subsequent Complaint Investigation Visit and Deliver Final Findings. LPA met with Business Office Director Cynthia Garcia and Medication Technician Anais Ochoa and explained the purpose of the visit. On the allegation: Staff do not ensure residents receive mail correspondence in a timely manner. It is alleged that from 02/16/2024 through 02/20/2024, postal mail has been unable to be retrieved for Resident #1 (R1). The allegation states that the Responsible Party for R1 has attempted each day to get the mail with either no staff available or Staff not having a key to the mailbox/Staff Office where a mailbox key is kept. It is also alleged that none of the residents have been receiving the mail since 02/16/2024. On 02/26/2024, LPA requested documents pertaining to the investigation, conducted observations of the pertinent areas of the facility, and interviewed both Residents and StaffCDSS inspection report, March 6, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240220152049
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedDue to a lack of staffing, staff are not answering the facility phone. Staff did not notify authorized representative of incident with resident.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kristin Kontilis conducted an unannounced subsequent visit to address the above-stated allegations. LPA met with Anais Ochoa, Medication Technician and explained the purpose of the visit. At the time of arrival, there were fourteen residents in care with two staff on duty. On the allegation, due to lack of staffing, staff are not answering the facility telephone: Reporting Party (RP) stated RP has placed numerous unanswered calls to the facility’s main line and has not been able to leave a message or speak with facility representatives. On 8/23/2023 one call was placed to the facility unanswered. On 8/24/2023, four calls were made to the facility. One call was answered and RP had a conversation with a facility representative. However, after the conversation, RP called back two more times, but the calls were not answered and no voicemail option was available. On 8/25/2023, RP stated two unanswered calls were placed to the facility. Also, on 8/25/2023, RPCDSS inspection report, January 24, 2024 · control 29-AS-20240117104513

2023

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility staff did not issue a timely refund in the event of a resident’s death.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kristin Kontilis conducted an unannounced initial complaint visit for the above stated allegation. LPA met with Administrator Miriam Santiago and explained the purpose of the visit. Entrance interview conducted: On the allegation, Facility staff did not issue a timely refund in the event of a resident’s death: Resident 1 (R1) passed away on 4/27/2023 while residing in the facility. R1’s belongings were removed by R1’s family members on the day of R1’s passing (4/27/2023). On or about 4/29/2023, R1’s Responsible Party (RP) received a telephone call from Administrator Miriam Santiago stating RP would be receiving a refund for pre-paid fees for R1. After 4/29/2023, RP did not hear from Administrator Santiago and no refund has been received by RP. On 6/12/2023, at approximately 9:30 am, RP sent an email to Administrator Santiago inquiring about the refund. To date, RP has not received a response to the email and there has been no contact or correspondence PlCDSS inspection report, June 13, 2023 · control 29-AS-20230613091004
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedFacility did not issue a prospective resident a refund of the deposit paid after deciding not to move in.
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kristin Kontilis conducted an unannounced initial complaint visit for the above stated allegation. LPA met with Administrator Miriam Santiago and explained the purpose of the visit. Entrance Interview Conducted: On the allegation, Facility did not give a prospective resident a refund of the deposit paid after deciding not to move in: On 3/4/2023, Prospective Resident 1’s (PR1’s) responsible party (RP) met with Administrator Miriam Santiago to discuss the possible placement of PR1 into the facility at which time, RP issued a personal check in the amount of $3,000 as a deposit to hold PR1's apartment. On 3/4/2023, RP was issued a Refundable Community Fee Agreement which states, “The Community Fee will reserve an apartment for a period not to exceed 30 days. After that time, the reservation will be cancelled and the apartment may be made available to another party.” On 3/8/2023, Administrator Miriam Santiago conducted a preassessment evaluation of PR1 at thCDSS inspection report, May 30, 2023 · control 29-AS-20230523091048

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

What the state has logged

California has logged 42 state visits for this home as of August 2, 2026. These are the home's own counts, straight from that record — shown beside the statewide median for larger communities (16+ beds), computed across all 1,244 licensed homes of that size, because larger and longer-licensed homes naturally accumulate more visits and reports. They are facts, not a grade — a citation may be minor and since corrected, and an “unsubstantiated” complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing.

Type A citations
9
typical for this size: 1
Type B citations
13
typical for this size: 1
Substantiated complaints
26
typical for this size: 2
Total complaints
19
typical for this size: 7
State visits on file
42
typical for this size: 19
See the full inspection record on the state's site →
Talk to this home directly

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

(805) 880-4770
What isn't in the state record

Resident reviews, the exact monthly price, and the languages staff speak aren't part of California's public licensing record, so we don't show them here. Ask the home directly — the tour questions above are a good start.

Operate this home? The record above comes from California's public licensing data. You can respond or correct it — free. Claim your home — free →

See something wrong? Report an error — free → · How we source every fact →

This page is generated from CDSS Community Care Licensing public records. How we build these pages →

Do you run Santa Barbara Memory Care? Claim this listing — free — add photos, activities, languages, and today’s availability.