Illustration — no photo of this home on file yet

Blue Skies of the Valley

Small home·Licensed for 6·Oceanside, California

Licensed since 2024Licence #374604738
  • Care approvals on fileWheelchair · HospiceState licensing record · September 27, 2026
  • Estimated starting rate$5,050 a monthCovelight estimate · likely $4,150–$6,250
  • Home sizeLicensed for 6Small care home · a licensed care home (RCFE)
  • Room at the last state visit6 of 6 beds occupiedDecember 30, 2025 · not a current opening
  • Ways to payAsk the homeMedi-Cal ALW participation not on file
  • Last state visitFebruary 4, 2026CDSS inspection record

Blue Skies of the Valley is a small care home in Oceanside — a licensed residential care facility for the elderly (RCFE), the licence category behind “assisted living” and “board and care.” It is licensed for 6 residents since 2024. Dementia care and bedridden care are not on file.

Built from CDSS public records · September 27, 2026. Every fact below names its source and date.

Quick answers and the state record

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

Quick answers about Blue Skies of the Valley

Is Blue Skies of the Valley licensed?

The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

How many residents is Blue Skies of the Valley licensed for?

6 residents — a small home, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Has Blue Skies of the Valley been cited?

0 Type A and 0 Type B citations since 2024, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. Those records count 10 state visits over the same years.

Is Blue Skies of the Valley still open?

This license was on the CDSS roster as of September 28, 2026.

What does Blue Skies of the Valley cost?

$5,050 a month to start is a Covelight estimate, likely $4,150–$6,250. This home’s own rate is not on file. Ask: “What is the all-in monthly rate, and what would push it higher?”

Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 14 small homes within 2 miles publish, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices. In testing, the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 homes. This home’s own rate is not on file.

Among 19 other homes of a similar licensed size in Oceanside that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $4,500 to $6,000 a month, and the middle figure is $5,000 (n = 19 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 Blue Skies of the Valley take Medi-Cal?

On Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver: this home is not on the DHCS participation list dated September 23, 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 Lvl Care Homes LLC, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Is there a hospital nearby?

Sharp Tri-City Medical Center is 4.9 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.

Can Blue Skies of the Valley keep a resident on hospice?

Hospice care is approved on this license, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Blue Skies of the Valley license and inspection record

  • Name on the license: “BLUE SKIES OF THE VALLEY”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
  • License #374604738. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • Licensed for 6 residents — a small home, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • Licensed to Lvl Care Homes LLC, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • First licensed in 2024, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 10 state inspection visits since 2024, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 0 Type A and 0 Type B citations on file since 2024, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. The same records count 10 state visits in that period.
  • 2 complaints and 0 substantiated allegations on file since 2024, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
  • The most recent state visit on file is February 4, 2026, per CDSS records as of September 27, 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

Can they support the care needed?

California licenses a home for specific kinds of care. The state’s record lists what this home is approved for; the home’s own answers fill in what changes as needs change.

  • Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryApproved · covers up to 2 residents
  • Dementia / memory careNot on file · ask the home
  • Hospice careApproved by the state
  • BedriddenNot on file · ask the home

State licensing record · September 27, 2026. An approval may cover specific rooms or residents; it does not establish an opening.

Read the state’s own wording
THE FACILITY SERVES ELDER RESIDENTS; AGES 60 AND ABOVE; OF WHICH TWO (2) MAY BE NON-AMBULATORY, TO BE HOUSED IN BEDROOM #5; HOSPICE WAIVER APPROVED FOR SIX (6) RESIDENTS.

935 - ELDERLY

CDSS record, verbatim · September 27, 2026

As needs change

  • Staying through hospice

    Hospice waiver on file — care may continue at the end of life

    Ask: “If hospice is needed, can care continue here until the end?”

    State licensing record · September 27, 2026

4 more questions to ask the home
  • Two-person transfers or a lift

    Not on file

    Ask: “If two people or a lift are needed to transfer, can the person stay?”

  • Someone awake overnight

    Not on file

    Ask: “Who is awake overnight, and how do residents ask for help?”

  • Medicines

    Not on file

    Ask: “Who manages the medicines, and what happens when a dose is missed?”

  • If memory loss develops

    Dementia-care designation not on file

    Ask: “If memory loss develops, what would change — and when would a move be needed?”

What it costs here

Covelight estimate

$5,050a month to start

Likely $4,150–$6,250

From 14 nearby homes that publish rates · this home’s rate is not on file

Likely monthly total

$5,050a month

Likely $4,150–$6,400

With a shared room and basic help.

An estimate for planning, not a quote. The price is made in the phone call.

See the full cost breakdownRoom, care and fees · how people pay · how this estimate works
Room
Daily care
Sharing the room

Memory care is not priced here: a dementia-care designation is not on file for this home. Ask the home.

  • Starting monthly rate$5,050likely $4,150–$6,250

    Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 14 small homes within 2 miles publish, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices. In testing, the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 homes. 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 (45 California homes publish a care-level range, seen in September 2026).

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

    Homes that list a one-time entry or community fee charge a median of $2,000 (134 California listings; middle half $1,000–$4,000). Many homes list none — ask.

Likely monthly totalLikely $4,150–$6,400
$5,050
First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $4,850–$9,500
$7,050
How people payPrivate pay, Medi-Cal waiver, SSI/SSP, veterans, insurance
  • 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 September 23, 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.
  • MedicareDoes not pay for room and board in a care home. It can still cover hospice or home-health visits inside one.
If the money runs out, what Medi-Cal covers
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 community 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.

  • What is the full monthly cost for the room and care we need, and what does it include?
  • What would the next care level cost, and who decides when it changes?
  • What is billed separately, and is there a one-time fee or deposit at move-in?
  • Is any private-pay period required before another payment program can begin?
How this estimate worksWithin 25% for 7 in 10 homes in testing

Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 14 small homes within 2 miles publish, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices. In testing, the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 homes. This home’s own rate is not on file.

14 homes like this within 2 miles publish starting rates mostly between $3,500–$6,000.

  • 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.
Show the 14 nearby homes behind this estimate

Where it is

  • 4676 Marblehead Bay Dr., Oceanside, CA 92057Address from the public record · September 27, 2026. Confirm the entrance with the home before visiting.

Opening the neighborhood map…

The state record

California inspects every licensed home and publishes what it found. Here are the dated documents and the state’s own words, beside what is typical for homes this size.

Since 2024, the state has filed 9 documents for this home, and its records count 10 visits since 2024. The most recent is a facility evaluation report, dated December 30, 2025.

On file since
2024
State visits
10
Most recent visit
February 4, 2026
Occupied · December 30, 2025 visit
6 of 6 bedsa count on that day, not an opening

We hold 2 complaint reports the state published for this home, dated December 30, 2025. 2 of the 2 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Unsubstantiated” (2). 2 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word. Summary composed by computer from the 2 complaint reports below — every count derives from them, and the documents themselves are the state's records, verbatim. We never grade, score, or color a record.

Beside homes the same size

  • Type A citations0typical 0
  • Type B citations0typical 0
  • Substantiated allegations0typical 0
  • Total complaints2typical 0

“Typical” is the statewide median across the 6,808 licensed small board-and-care homes (6 or fewer beds) in the state record — larger, longer-licensed homes accumulate more visits and reports, so compare like with like. One complaint can contain several allegations. Counts cover this licence since 2024.

Year by year
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated20253502024340

The last 36 months — 9 of 9 documents

20253 state visits · 5 documents
Dec 30, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Licensee did not meet resident's hygiene needs Resident was confined to their room

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rebecca Borunda conducted an unannounced complaint visit to conduct follow up and deliver findings regarding the above mentioned allegations. LPA was greeted by, identified herself to, and explained the purpose of the visit to Caregiver William Punta. During today’s visit, LPA observed residents in care and interviewed staff. The Department’s investigation consisted of interviews with residents and staff, records review, and a tour of the facility. It was alleged that the Licensee did not meet resident’s hygiene needs and Resident 1 (R1) was confined to their room. Continued on LIC9099-C page... Unsubstantiated Review of assessment records for R1 revealed that R1 required assistance with bathing and hygiene care, and further assessment of the other resident’s assessment records revealed that a total of four of six residents requires assistance with hygiene and bathing care. Interviews with residents did not reveal any concerns that staff did not assist residents with showering and residents were pleased about the frequency of staff assistance with showers. Interviews with staff showed that coordination between facility staff and outside agencies allowed residents to receive showers as often as every other calendar day. Interviews with staff did reveal that at least one resident was resistant to receiving shower assistance by staff of the opposite gender, however, staffing schedules allowed for the resident to receive showers by their preferred staff. LPA observations during on-site visits did not reveal any noticeable odors or concerns that residents were not well groomed or appropriately dressed. Additionally, LPA observed that staff assisted residents with incontinence care and ensured that residents were well groomed and absent from noticeable odors following the incontinence care. Additionally, interviews with staff and residents did not reveal concerns that residents were not able to move about the facility as they wished, including entering the facility’s backyard. Interviews with R1 did not reveal any concerns that R1 was not able to leave their room if they wished. LPA observed during on-site visits that residents, including R1, were able to leave their rooms as desired. However, there was some evidence that residents were not allowed to enter the facility’s kitchen during certain times. Interviews with staff revealed that residents were not allowed to enter a portion of the kitchen where locked cabinets containing sharps and/or other hazardous items were stored. On-site visits confirmed that those items were kept in locked storage as required. The Department has investigated the above-mentioned allegations and based on observation, interviews, and records review, the preponderance of the evidence has not been met, therefore, these allegations are deemed unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Caregiver William Punta, whose signature below confirms receipt of a copy of this report and the Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22).the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 30, 2025 · control 08-AS-20251119162238
Dec 30, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Lack of Supervision, resulting in hospitalization

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rebecca Borunda conducted an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings regarding the above-mentioned allegation. LPA identified herself to, was greeted by, and explained the purpose of the visit to Caregiver William Punta. The Department’s investigation consisted of interviews with residents, staff, and outside sources, records review, and a tour of the facility. It was alleged that lack of supervision resulted in the hospitalization of Resident 1 (R1). Interviews with staff and outside sources and review of medical paperwork revealed that R1 moved into the facility on 5/17/2025 following an admission to a skilled nursing facility. According to R1’s medical and pre-admission assessment documents, R1 was assessed to require the use of a wheelchair, staff assistance with all activities of daily living, and assistance with medication management. Continued on LIC9099-C page... Unsubstantiated Interviews revealed that on 5/20/2025, three days following R1’s admission to the facility, R1 was observed to have a change in condition, which resulted in emergency services being contacted and R1 was transported to the hospital. Medical records from R1’s hospitalization showed that toxicology results revealed that R1’s urine analysis was positive for fentanyl. Review of R1’s medical records revealed that R1 was not administered fentanyl during emergency services transport or while at the hospital prior to the toxicology test. Review of the medication lists for all residents at the facility, including for R1, did not reveal any medications that contained fentanyl. During interviews, staff denied any knowledge of the existence of any medications containing fentanyl in the facility, including medications prescribed to live-in staff. Staff also denied knowledge of how R1 could have been exposed to fentanyl while at the facility. Review of R1’s toxicology report confirmed that medications of a similar chemical structure to fentanyl could cause a false positive on testing. Interviews with medical professionals denied that any of R1’s prescribed medications could cause a false positive for fentanyl. Clinical consultants of the Department also reviewed R1’s medications and confirmed that none of R1’s prescribed medications could cause a false positive for fentanyl. Additionally, medical professionals stated that fentanyl is generally prescribed in patches applied to the skin and other forms of administration such as liquids or pills are rarely prescribed. R1’s toxicology report stated that the test was “unconfirmed screening results” used to assist in managing medical care and additional testing would need to be done to confirm the result. Review of R1’s medical records did not reveal any evidence that confirmatory testing was ordered to verify if the test was accurate. The Department has investigated the above-mentioned allegation and based on interviews and records review showing a lack of evidence of mismanagement of medications and a lack of explanation of how R1 tested positive for fentanyl, the preponderance of the evidence has not been met, therefore, this allegation is deemed unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Caregiver William Punta, whose signature below confirms receipt of a copy of this report and the Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22).the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 30, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250523102111
Dec 30, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rebecca Borunda conducted an unannounced Required 1-Year visit. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPA was greeted by, identified herself to, and explained the purpose of the visit with Caregiver William Punta. During today's visit, LPA observed residents in care and reviewed facility records. Due to time constraints, the annual inspection could not be completed and a return visit on a subsequent day is needed. No deficiencies were cited on today’s date. An exit interview was conducted with Caregiver William Punta, whose signature below confirms receipt of a copy of this report and the Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058 3/22).the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 30, 2025
Mar 12, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Annual Continuation

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rebecca Borunda conducted an unannounced case management visit to finish the annual inspection from 2/26/2025. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPA was greeted by, identified herself to, and explained the purpose of the visit with Caregiver Caesar Tapit. The facility is licensed for a maximum capacity of 6 residents, 4 ambulatory and 2 non-ambulatory in bedroom # 5. The facility has a waiver for 6 hospice residents. During today’s visit, the facility had a census of 4 non-ambulatory residents, 1 of which was bedridden. During the Required 1-year visit on 2/26/2025, LPA Borunda cited the facility for the fire clearance violation and the facility has a pending capacity increase to address the fire clearance violation. The Administrator for the facility is Laurice Gamab and their certificate was valid and current. During visits on 2/26/2025 and 3/12/2025, LPA toured the facility and inspected each room of the facility, including resident and staff rooms, bathrooms for resident and staff use, kitchen, garage, common areas, and outside space. No bodies of water were observed on the premises. LPA did not observe any aspects of delayed egress or secured perimeter. The facility was found to be clean, safe, and in good repair with no pathway obstructions. The facility’s water temperature was measured at 111.0 and 112.6 degrees Fahrenheit in bathrooms for resident use. The facility’s internal temperature was measured at 78 degrees Fahrenheit. LPA observed locked storage for all hazardous and/or toxic chemicals and were stored separately from food supplies. According to Caesar Tapit, no firearms or weapons are stored on the premises. LPA also observed locked storage for resident medications and resident and staff files. Resident medications are stored in their original container and labelled. LPA observed a minimum of a 2-day supply of perishable food and a 7-day supply of non-perishable food present at the facility. The facility refrigerator was kept at 37 degrees Fahrenheit, and the facility freezer was kept at 0 degrees Fahrenheit. LPA observed linens and hygiene products provided to the residents that are in good repair and sufficient to meet their needs. Continued on LIC809-C page… Staff present at the facility during the time of the inspection had a criminal background clearance and at least one staff had a first aid certificate. LPA reviewed multiple resident and staff records. Each resident record was complete and contained a signed admission agreement, updated physician’s report and medical assessment, documents regarding safeguarding personal property, and personal rights. Each staff file was complete and contained a personnel record, first aid certificate, fingerprint clearance and association, and a health screening. LPA spoke with staff and residents present at the facility during the time of the inspection and those interviews did not reveal any licensing or regulatory concerns. The Administrator will submit copies of the LIC500 Personnel Report, LIC610E Disaster Plan, and current liability insurance to the Department within 15 business days. During the facility tour, LPA did not observe any grab bars in the shower in the common bathroom. Caregiver Tapit stated that staff currently shower residents in the facility's private bathroom due to the private bedroom being empty. LPA advised Caregiver that when the bedroom is occupied, staff could not shower any residents that did not reside in the attached bedroom in the private bathroom. Therefore, the following deficiency was cited for missing grab bars and noted on the attached LIC809-D page. An exit interview was conducted with Caregiver Caesar Tapit, whose signature below confirms receipt of a copy of this report and the Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058 3/22).the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 12, 2025
Feb 26, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rebecca Borunda conducted an unannounced Required 1-Year visit. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPA was greeted by, identified herself to, and explained the purpose of the visit with Caregiver Jemela Magulod. LPA spoke with House Manager Lauren DeLancey via telephone. During today's visit, LPA briefly toured the facility, reviewed facility records, and observed residents in care. The facility is licensed for a maximum capacity of 6 residents, 4 of which may be ambulatory and 2 of which may be non-ambulatory in bedroom #5. Review of all residents' medical assessment and appraisal records revealed that 5 of 6 residents (R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6) had a diagnosis of major neuro-cognitive disorder and 5 of 6 residents (R1, R2, R3, R5, and R6) required the use of mechanical aid devices to ambulate, such as walkers and wheelchairs. [Caregiver was provided with an LIC811 Confidential Names List to identify residents] Interviews with facility staff revealed that R4 and R5 are bedridden and unable to get out of bed. LPA confirmed residents' use of mechanical aids via interviews with staff. The diagnosis of major neuro-cognitive disorder and the use of mechanical aids to ambulate revealed that R1, R2, R3, and R6 are non-ambulatory and R4 and R5 are bedridden, which is violation of the facility's fire clearance approved on 3/11/2024. The following deficiency for fire clearance is noted on the attached LIC809-D page. Additionally, an immediate civil penalty in the amount of $500 is assessed and noted on the LIC421IM form. Due to time constraints, the annual inspection could not be completed and a return visit on a subsequent day is needed. An exit interview was conducted with Caregiver Jemela Magulod, whose signature below confirms receipt of a copy of this report, the LIC421IM, LIC811, and the Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058 3/22).the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 26, 2025
20243 state visits · 4 documents
Apr 10, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Collateral

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sabel Martinez conducted an unannounced collateral visit to conduct a resident interview. The LPA introduced himself to Caregiver Jemela Magulod, and disclosed to the purpose of the visit. Review of records and an interview with Magulod revealed Resident # 1 (R1) did not reside at the facility. An exit interview was conducted with Caregiver Magulod, to whom a copy of this report, and Licensee/Appeal Rights, were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 10, 2024
Apr 10, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Collateral

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sabel Martinez conducted an unannounced collateral visit to conduct a resident interview. The LPA introduced himself, and disclosed to the purpose of the visit to Manager Lauren Delancey. During the visit, the LPA reviewed records and interviewed Resident # 1 (R1). An exit interview was conducted with Manager Delancey, to whom a copy of this report, and Licensee/Appeal Rights, were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 10, 2024
Mar 27, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rebecca Ruiz conducted an unannounced case management visit due to a request to change the facility capacity. LPA was greeted by, identified herself to, and discussed the purpose of the visit with House Manager Lauren DeLancey. A Change of Capacity application was received by the Department on February 2, 2024, in which the licensee requested an increase in non-ambulatory capacity from 0 to 2 residents. The Fire Safety Inspection Request was approved by the local fire authority on March 11, 2024 with the requirement that the 2 non-ambulatory residents will reside in the room noted Bedroom #5 on the facility sketch. During today’s visit, LPA toured the facility and inspected each room. No residents were admitted to the facility at the time of LPA's inspection. The facility sketch was consistent with the current layout of the facility. No immediate health and/or safety concerns were observed during today's visit. The completed change of capacity request will be forwarded to management for final review and approval. An exit interview was conducted with House Manager Lauren DeLancey, whose signature below confirms receipt of a copy of this report and the Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058 3/22).the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 27, 2024
Jan 23, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Prelicensing

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Dang Nguyen conducted an announced Pre-Licensing visit to observe the facility’s physical plant for compliance with Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations and California Health & Safety Code. LPA was greeted by, identified himself to, and explained the purpose of the visit to the applicant’s representatives, Hanh Le Dao and Lauren Delancey. The facility fire clearance was granted on 12/27/2023 and reflected that the facility was approved for six (6) residents in total, of which all must be ambulatory. The facility's fire clearance did not include delayed-egress door or secured perimeter endorsements, and neither were present during today's visit. The submitted facility sketch was consistent with the current layout of the facility. During today’s visit, LPA, accompanied by the applicant’s representatives, toured the interior and exterior of the facility and inspected each room. The facility was clean, sanitary, and in good repair. Pathways were well lit and free of obstruction and slip hazards. Resident bedrooms allowed for easy passage and contained the required furnishings. Toilets, sinks, and showers were in working order. The facility’s ambient internal temperature was compliant at 72 degrees F. Hot water temperature at taps accessible to residents were also compliant: Kitchen sink was 117 F, Bathroom #1 sink was 114.6 F, Bathroom #2 sink was 118.4 F, and Laundry Room sink was 119 F. The facility has enough linens, hygiene supplies, cooking and dining supplies, and perishable and non-perishable food for future resident use. All kitchen appliances were in working order. Refrigerator temperature was 37 F, and freezer temperature was 0 F. [CONTINUED ON LIC 809-C] [CONTINUED FROM LIC 809] The facility has sufficient space and equipment to facilitate laundry, visitation, meetings, and resident activities. The facility has locked areas for storage of sharp objects, medication, and confidential resident and staff records. No pools or bodies of water were observed on the premises. There were no toxic chemicals/poisons, fireplaces, or open-faced heaters accessible to residents. Per the applicant’s representatives, no firearms or ammunition are or will be stored at the facility. Smoke alarms, carbon monoxide detector, emergency lighting, and facility telephone were all operational. The facility's fire extinguisher was serviced within the last twelve months. A complete first aid kit was present. Required licensing postings were observed in visible areas of the facility. The items reviewed were complaint with Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations and California Health & Safety Code. The applicant passed the pre-licensing inspection. LPA also provided the Component III Training during today’s visit. Le Dao was advised that the facility’s application is pending management final review and approval. An exit interview was conducted with the applicant’s representative, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided during the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2024
What the state’s words mean
Substantiatedthe 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 and the questions below stand in their place.

Life here

Rooms, meals, the rhythm of a day, faith and language, pets and house rules — as the home describes them. Tap any detail for its source and date; nothing here is graded.

The home has not described daily life anywhere we have reviewed yet — that is the case for most small homes, and it says nothing about the home. These questions fill in the picture; keep the ones that matter to you.

Before you call

Ask every home the same questions — the state’s record does not answer these. Keep the ones that matter and they travel with your saved homes.

  1. What is included in the monthly rate, and what costs extra?
  2. Who is awake overnight, and how do residents ask for help?
  3. Which rooms does the non-ambulatory approval cover, and what transfer support is provided?
  4. What could change whether someone can stay here?
  5. Can we see a bedroom and share a meal during a visit?

Other homes nearby

The nearest licensed homes in San Diego County, closest first. Every listed home appears on the same terms.

Explore San Diego County