Early Horizons Home Care

Allegation investigated: Staff did not allow resident to go outside the facility Staff do not treat resident with dignity and respect Staff did not allow resident access to enter the facility

On September 3, 2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Murial Han conducted an unannounced visit to deliver the investigation findings. Upon entry, LPA was greeted by caregiver, Dennis Balingit who called the administrator to inform LPA's visit. The administrator arrived shortly thereafter and LPA explained the purpose of today's visit. Regarding the allegation of – Staff did not allow resident access to enter the facility, the reporting party stated that resident #1 (R1) was kicked out of the facility and that the police would be contacted if R1 returns to the facility. As part of the investigation, LPA interviewed R1, and the administrator. According to R1, on 6/1/2026, he/she had some physical contact with one of the caregivers because the caregiver was physically blocking the front door to stop him/her from going outside as they did not want to be responsible if he/she fell. R1 stated that after some struggles, R1 was able to go outside but R1 could not return to the facility. Subsequently, the administrator called the local law enforcement and informed them that R1 could not return to the facility until he/she followed the house rules. In addition, R1 stated that on 6/3/2026, he/she left the facility, went to stay with his/her family member for a few days and was told by the administrator that he/she was allowed to return to the facility unless the house rules were followed. Substantiated According to the administrator, on 6/1/2026, the police were called due to R1’s behavior as R1 was not following the house rules such as not allowing facility staff to assist with incontinent care, smoking and other behaviors. The administrator stated that on 6/3/2026, R1 was agitated, yelling and cursing at staff and decided to leave the facility. The administrator acknowledged that R1 was told that R1 could return to the facility on both occasions if R1 did not follow the house rules. Based on a written communication between the administrator and R1’s care management team members, LPA observed the administrator imposed some conditions if R1 wanted to return to the facility. After the investigation, this allegation is deemed to be substantiated, as R1 was not allowed to return to the facility unless R1 followed the rules that the administrator has imposed even though they were not part of the signed Admission Agreement/House Rules. Regarding the allegations of – staff do not treat resident with dignity, staff did not allow resident to go outside the facility, the reporting party stated that the operator demanded R1 to get permission prior to leaving the facility, the facility denied R1's right to go outside by using their body to block the front doorway, R1 was not allowed to have visits from one of R1’s case workers, and R1 was not allowed to smoke. As part of the investigation, LPA interviewed R1, the administrator, and Staff #1 (S1). According to R1, he/she had some physical contact with S1 as S1 was not allowing him/her to leave the facility and the facility place a child proof lock on the door which made it very difficult for R1 and other residents to leave the facility without asking the staff to unlock the child proof lock. R1 also stated that he/she was not allowed to smoke after the new administrator started, the facility staff confiscated the cigarettes, and lighter. LPA interviewed the administrator who stated that they discouraged R1 from leaving the facility because R1 was too weak and they did not want R1 to fall while outside. In addition, the administrator stated that facility staff took R1’s cigarettes and lighter because there was no designated smoking area inside the facility, and R1 would be unsafe to smoke outside. The administrator denied not allowing one of R1’s case workers to visit. LPA interviewed S1 who denied taking R1’s smoking paraphernalia, however, during LPA’s visit on 6/17/2026. LPA observed lighters and cigarettes were placed on the table in the staff room and S1 indicated that those items did not belong to them but did not elaborate who those items belonged to. S1 stated that R1 was the only resident who smoked. S1 stated that she did not stop R1 from leaving the facility, she wanted to clean R1 first as R1 was soiled. After the investigation, the above allegations are substantiated as indicated on the admission agreement/house rules that was dated and signed by the previous administration and R1 in which it indicated that smoking is allowed only at the designated areas (backyard) and this was not offered by the current administration. In addition, per Regulation under personal rights, resident has the right to depart or leave the facility at any time and to receive or reject medical care and other services. Furthermore, during LPA’s visit on 6/17/2026, LPA observed a child proof lock on the door and residents were not able to unlock it independently and S1 stated that it was preventing residents from leaving the facility without their knowledge, however, there was also an alarm installed when the door opened. This observation was cited during the visit. Based on interviews and record reviews during the investigation, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. Therefore, this allegations were determined to be substantiated. Deficiencies of the California Code of Regulations, Title, 22 cited on the LIC9099-D. Failure to correct the deficiencies may result in civil penalties. This report is reviewed and discussed with the administrator and the administrator. A copy of the report and appeal rights were provided. According to the administrator, on 6/3/2026, R1 left the facility without notification and staff tried to convince R1 to stay but R1 did not want to which resulting in R1 leaving the facility without medication. The administrator stated that she contacted R1’s family member about the medication and one of R1’s case workers came to the facility a couple of days later but did not want to wait for the medication and left. According to the written communication between the administrator and R1’s case workers, on 6/4/2026, the administrator contacted R1’s family member informing them that R1 has many medications that R1 took daily and must continue to take them. In addition, the written communication also indicated that one of R1’s case workers went to the facility a couple of days later to pick up the medication but did not want to wait for the medication to be accounted for so he/she left and did not return. Furthermore, the written communication indicated that the administrator contacted the case worker regarding the medication, but she was told that R1 was brought to the hospital for evaluation and medication refills. After the investigation, this allegation is deemed to be unsubstantiated as R1 left the facility on 6/3/2026 and the administrator contacted R1’s family member and make arrangement with the case worker for R1’s medication. Regarding the allegation of Unlawful eviction- the reporting party stated that R1 was kicked out of the facility without a 30-day eviction. As part of the investigation, LPA interviewed R1, and the administrator. R1 stated that he/she left the facility and went to his/her family member’s home because the administrator did not allow him/her to leave the facility and did not allow him/her to smoke outside the facility. R1 stated that after a few days, R1 returned to the facility. The administrator denied the allegation and stated that the facility did not evict R1 and on the day incident, R1 was agitated, yelling, and R1 was adamant about leaving the facility. The administrator stated that R1 returned to the facility after a few days. After the investigation, this allegation is unsubstantiated. Regarding the allegation of clients not have access to their personal belongings, the reporting party stated that R1 was kicked out of the facility on 6/3/2026, and R1 did not have his/her personal belongings. As part of the investigation, LPA interviewed administrator and S1. According to the administrator, they did not know that R1 wanted to leave the facility, therefore, they did not have time to pack his/her personal belongings. According to S1, no one knew that R1 was leaving so there was no time to pack anything for R1. However, R1 packed some of the personal belongings in a backpack and left the facility. After the investigation, this is deemed to be unsubstantiated as the facility did not have notices that R1 wanted to leave the facility, therefore, they were not able to assist with packing R1’s personal belongings. Regarding the allegation that does not allow residents to self-advocate for themselves, the reporting party stated that one of R1’s case worker observed coercive behavior from the administrator against R1. As part of the investigation, LPA interviewed the administrator, R1, and other residents. According to R1, the administrator spoke to him/her in a disrespect and condescending manner. R1 described their conversation as “it was the administrator’s way or the highway”. The administrator denied the allegation and stated that on many occasions, R1 got agitated and combative as R1 did not want to comply with the activities of daily living such as allowing staff to change his/her soiled briefs, assisting him/her with showers and encouraging him/her not to go outside as he was weak and high risk to fall. The administrator stated that she wanted to make sure R1 and all the residents were safe. LPA interviewed resident 2 (R2) and resident #3 (R3) and both reported that they did not experience any disrespectful behavior from the administrator and staff members. They reported that they are happy with the care that they received from the facility. After the investigation, this allegation is deemed to be unsubstantiated. Based on interviews, records review and observations, the department has determined that although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 3, 2026 · control 14-AS-20260608190543

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(6) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 4, 2026

87468.1Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights:(6) To leave or depart the facility at any time and to not be locked into any room, building, or on facility premises by day or night... This requirement is not met as evidenced by during LPA's visit on 6/17/2026, LPA observed a child proof door lock on the front door knob and according to S1, it was to prevent residents from leaving and R1 stated that on 6/3/2026, staff member physically block the door to prevent R1 from leaving and it was a struggle for R1 to remove the child proof which poses an immediate health and safety risks to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 3, 2026

Plan of correction: The child proof lock was removed on the door knob during LPA's visit on 6/17/2026. The administrator will develop a plan of correction to ensure residents have the right to leave and depart the facility at any time. The administrator will provide a copy of the plan to CCL by 9/4/2026.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87507(f) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 11, 2026

87507 Admission Agreements (f) The licensee shall comply with all applicable terms and conditions set forth in the admission agreement, including all modifications and attachments. This requirement is not met as evidenced by based on the admission agreement/house rules, it stated that smoking is allowed only at the designated areas(backyard), however, R1 was not offered to smoke at the designated smoking area and the facility did not designate an alternative which poses a potential health and safety risks to residents in carethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 3, 2026

Plan of correction: The administrator develop a plan of correction to ensure compliance and will submit a copy of the plan to CCL 9/11/2026.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.2(a)(3) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 4, 2026

87468.2 Additional Personal Rights of Residents in Privately Operated Facilities(a) In addition to the rights..(3) To be encouraged and assisted in exercising their rights as citizens and as residents of the facility. This requirement is not met as evidenced by R1 left the facility twice and on both occasions, R1 was told by the administrator that he/she can not return to the facility unless R1 followed the rules that were not part of the admission agreement and the house rules which poses an immediate health and safety risks to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 3, 2026

Plan of correction: The administrator will develop a plan of correction to ensure Personal Rights are exercised at all times and will submit a copy of the plan to CCL by 9/4/2026.

Type of visit: Case Management - Deficiencies

On June 17, 2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Murial Han conducted an unannounced 10-day complaint visit and during the visit, LPA observed the following finding. LPA met with the administrator and explained the finding. During the visit, LPA observed a white plastic child proof door knob lock that was placed on the front door. According to the administrator and staff #1 (S1), this device is to prevent residents from leaving the facility unattended. LPA interviewed 3 residents (R1, R2 and R3) and all of the reported that they were not able to open the front door with the child proof door knob and they had to ask staff members to open the door. R1 stated that he/she open the door once and it was a hard struggle. Deficiency is cited under California Code of Regulations, Title, 22 cited on the LIC 809D. Failure to correct the deficiencies may result in civil penalties. This report is reviewed and discussed with administrator. A copy of this report and the appeal rights were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 17, 2026

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(6) · Plan of correction due date: Jun 18, 2026

87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (6)To leave or depart the facility at any time and to not be locked into any room, building, or on facility premises by day...This requirement is not as evidenced by LPA observed a child proof door knob door placed on the front door and 3 out of 3 residents reported that they were not able to open the door without staff's assistance which poses an immediate health and safety risks to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 17, 2026

Plan of correction: The administrator has removed the child proof door knob lock during the visit. The administrator will submit a plan of correction to CCL to ensure personal rights of residents are met and the plan of correction will indicate staff training. The administrator will provide a copy of the POC to CCL by 6/17/2026.

Allegation investigated: Staff threatened illegal eviction

On 12/5/2025, LPA Grace Donato conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit to deliver findings. LPA met with Administrator, Irene Mehta and explained the purpose of this visit. Regarding the allegation that Staff threatened illegal eviction, RP stated that ADM called a case worker (CW1) to start an eviction process for R1. This has now been put on hold and the resident is attending the Adult Day program and there is no eviction in process. According to ADM, R1 was having behavioral issues and an email was sent to CW1 regarding these changes. ADM also mentioned that the behaviors were just grounds for eviction but never said that the resident will be evicted. ADM even suggested additional counselling from the social worker (SW) that works with R1. Based on records review, the department has determined that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis, therefore the allegation is UNFOUNDED. Nothe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 5, 2025 · control 14-AS-20250605212144

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

On 12/5/2025, LPA Grace Donato conducted a Case Management-Other visit to deliver amended findings to a complaint. LPA met with Administrator Irene Mehta and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA delivered amended findings for complaint number 14-AS-20250605212144. Report is reviewed and copy is provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 5, 2025

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

On 11/14/2025, LPA Yi Sam Jian made an unannounced annual visit to the facility. LPA met with staff, Nelsie Carlos, and staff, Josielyn Pataray. The licensee, Yolanda Rogayan, was contacted by phone to obtain permission for staff to sign the report. Administrator, Irene Mehta arrived later during the visit. LPA explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured the facility inside and outside including all of resident rooms, bathroom, common areas, kitchen area & garage. All outdoor and indoor passageway were free and clear of obstruction. No accessible bodies of water or fire safety hazards observed. Kitchen was inspected, sufficient supply of food observed. Medications, toxins and sharps stored appropriately and inaccessible to clients, a comfortable temperature was maintained, hot water temperature inspected to be compliant, furnishing and lighting was sufficient for comfort and safety. Carbon monoxide detector and smoke detector system inspected and met the requirements. fire extinguisher checked and fully charged. Facility has a written emergency disaster plan. Licensee has at least one completed first aid kit. Facility has an updated log for emergency drill. Technical violations were cited for the lack of updated client appraisals and for the facility’s ongoing efforts to obtain additional drinking water for residents in the event of an emergency. No deficiencies are cited at this time. Report is reviewed with administrator and a copy is provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 14, 2025

The state marks this report as 4 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 2. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

Allegation investigated: Staff restricted residents for visitation Residents are not accorded dignity and respect Residents are not allowed to use the telephone Residents are not allowed medical services from outside vendors Staff isolated resident

*** This is an amended report *** On 9/10/2025, LPA Grace Donato conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit to deliver findings. LPA met with Administrator, Irene Mehta and explained the purpose of this visit. Regarding the allegation of Staff restricted residents for visitation, reporting party (RP) stated that the new house rules seem to limit the time that residents can spend with their family members for special occasions like Easter, birthdays, and family reunions, requiring them to be back in the house by 8PM, limit visiting hours to 10 am to 7 pm. LPA interviewed staff members. S2 mentioned that residents can go with their families as long as they need. They just need to call the facility to let them know if they will come in late so they will be aware what time the residents will be back. ADM mentioned too that as long as they call beforehand that they’ll be coming in late then its ok. page 1 of 3 Unsubstantiated *** This is an amended report *** LPA also interviewed residents. R2 mentioned that he/she has visitors sometimes and they do go out. No one has stopped any visitors from visiting him/her. Regarding the allegation of Residents are not accorded dignity and respect, RP stated that one resident complained that there were scheduled diaper changes so if someone had a wet or soiled diaper, they might have to wait more than an hour and half to be changed. According to ADM, there is no schedule to follow for change in diapers. The residents are checked every 4 hours and as needed. There was an instance where R1 doesn't want to get changed and the staff kept asking. An ombudsman arrived and talked to the resident and staff was able to change the diaper. ADM added that there are 2 residents who wear pull ups but are still able to go to the bathroom on their own. S2 also mentioned that they monitor the residents with regards to their diapers but sometimes they are the ones who doesn't want to get changed when they are having behaviors. They just wear it just in case of accidents, but all residents are able to go to the bathroom by themselves. For the allegation of Residents are not allowed to use the telephone and Staff isolated resident, RP stated that a day program attempted to contact a resident with home activities. ADM refused to give them the phone number to the house and insisted that all communication happen through her on her cell phone. According to the Day program they called the ADM and left messages. LPA interviewed the ADM and it was stated that they can call anytime and that the phone number for the facility is posted in the transparency website. ADM did not isolate any resident. Residents are able to receive phone calls. S2 also added that no one has called the facility to talk to the residents during this time. And if so, they give the phone to the resident. Other case workers and social workers also call the facility phone number. page 2 of 3 *** This is an amended report *** Residents also mentioned that they are able to talk to their family members. LPA observed during one of the facility visits that the phone was handed to a resident when a family member called. Regarding the allegation of Residents are not allowed medical services from outside vendors, RP stated that ADM was banning a medical provider from seeing his/her client at Early Horizons. LPA interviewed a third party provider (W1) and was stated that About 6 months ago, ADM blocked medical provider from providing care to one of the clients; stating that they were rude and disrespectful and not allowed in her facility. During ADMs interview, she stated that there was no health care provider being banned from seeing their clients. One of the residents (R3) needs constant reminder with appointments as sometimes residents forget. The residents doctors, social workers and managers are still the same from when ADM took over. There was an incident that happened where one of the case workers that came was shouting at R3. ADM told the case worker to lower his/her voice since there are other residents in the facility. The case worker was told to not to be disrespectful otherwise leave the facility. S2 confirmed that the case worker was shouting at the resident. Another witness (W2) mentioned that the case worker was indeed shouting at the resident. Based on interviews, records review and observations, the department has determined that although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies cited today. Report is reviewed and copy is provided. page 3 of 3the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 10, 2025 · control 14-AS-20250605212144

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

On 12/02/2024 LPA Grace Donato made an unannounced annual visit to the facility. LPA met with Co-Administrator Irene Mehta. LPA explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured the facility inside and outside including all of resident rooms, common areas, kitchen area & garage. The indoor and outdoor passageways were free of obstruction. Facility has 2 storage sheds at the back which was checked by the LPA. LPA observed some residents resting in their bedrooms and living room. While touring the facility it was observed that the room temperature was at 70 deg F. Hot water was also tested in the bathrooms and the temperature was 110 deg F. The residents have adequate amount of linens and incontinence care items. All personal belongings are intact. Carbon monoxide monitors are working properly. Resident bedrooms are observed to be in good repair. Bathroom is equipped with grab bars non-skid floors. LPA checked the food supply and there is adequate amount of food, 2 days for perishables and & 7 days non-perishable. Emergency drills are logged and done every quarter. Three resident records and two staff records were reviewed. Resident records are updated, complete and signed. Staff records are complete, with training logs that have met the basic requirement. Facility has a certified administrator on site with complete certification and training requirements. Medication review was done, and all medications are accounted for, and centrally stored medication records are updated. No deficiencies are cited at this time. Report is reviewed with Administrator and a copy is provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 2, 2024

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

On 12/19/23 LPA Grace Donato made an unannounced annual visit to the facility. LPA met with Licensee Yolanda Rogayan. LPA explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured the facility inside and outside including all of resident rooms, common areas, kitchen area & garage. The indoor and outdoor passageways were free of obstruction. LPA observed some residents resting in their bedrooms. While touring the facility it was observed that the room temperature was at 74 deg F. Hot water was also tested in the bathrooms and the temperature was 108 deg F. The residents have adequate amount of linens and incontinence care items. All personal belongings are intact. Carbon monoxide monitors are working properly. All fire extinguishers have been checked and current. Resident bedrooms are observed to be in good repair. Bathroom is equipped with grab bars non-skid floors. LPA checked the food supply and there is adequate amount of food, 2 days for perishables and & 7 days non-perishable. Emergency drills are logged and done every quarter. Four resident records and two staff records were reviewed. Resident records are updated, complete and signed. Staff records are complete, with training logs that have met the basic requirement. Facility has a certified administrator on site with complete certification and training requirements. Medication review was done, and all medications are accounted for, and centrally stored medication records are updated. No deficiencies are cited at this time. Report is reviewed with Administrator and a copy is provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 19, 2023