Illustration — no photo of this home on file yet

Golden Heritage Senior Care

Small home·Licensed for 6·Sacramento, California

Licensed since 2023Licence #342701261
  • Care approvals on fileWheelchair · Dementia · HospiceState licensing record · September 27, 2026
  • Estimated starting rate$4,550 a monthCovelight estimate · likely $3,700–$5,600
  • Home sizeLicensed for 6Small care home · a licensed care home (RCFE)
  • Room at the last state visit6 of 6 beds occupiedJuly 24, 2026 · not a current opening
  • Ways to payAsk the homeMedi-Cal ALW participation not on file
  • Last state visitJuly 24, 2026CDSS inspection record
  • Licence holderGolden Heritage Senior Care LLCSince 2023 · 3 licensed homes

Golden Heritage Senior Care is a small care home in Sacramento — 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 2023. Bedridden care is 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 Golden Heritage Senior Care

Is Golden Heritage Senior Care licensed?

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

How many residents is Golden Heritage Senior Care licensed for?

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

Has Golden Heritage Senior Care been cited?

0 Type A and 0 Type B citations since 2023, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. Those records count 13 state visits over the same years.

Is Golden Heritage Senior Care still open?

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

What does Golden Heritage Senior Care cost?

$4,550 a month to start is a Covelight estimate, likely $3,700–$5,600. 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 24 small homes and similar homes within 9 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 Sacramento that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $3,046 to $4,461 a month, and the middle figure is $3,500 (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 Golden Heritage Senior Care 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 Golden Heritage Senior Care LLC, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. See the homes licensed to Golden Heritage Senior Care LLC — at least 3 on the state roster.

Is there a hospital nearby?

Kaiser Foundation Hospital - Sacramento is 3 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.

Can Golden Heritage Senior Care keep a resident on hospice?

Hospice care is approved on this license, covering up to 1 resident, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Golden Heritage Senior Care license and inspection record

  • Name on the license: “GOLDEN HERITAGE SENIOR CARE”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
  • License #342701261. 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 Golden Heritage Senior Care LLC, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • First licensed in 2023, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 13 state inspection visits since 2023, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 0 Type A and 0 Type B citations on file since 2023, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. The same records count 13 state visits in that period.
  • 2 complaints and 0 substantiated allegations on file since 2023, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
  • The most recent state visit on file is July 24, 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 6 residents
  • Dementia / memory careApproved by the state
  • Hospice careApproved · covers up to 1 resident
  • 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
AGE RANGE 60 AND OVER. APPROVED FIRE CLEARANCE FOR SIX(6) NON-AMBULATORY. APPROVED HOSPICE WAIVER FOR ONE(1) HOSPICE RESIDENT.

983 - RCFE / DEMENTIA

CDSS record, verbatim · September 27, 2026

As needs change

  • Staying through hospice

    Hospice waiver on file · covers up to 1 — 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

  • If memory loss develops

    Dementia-care designation on file

    Ask: “Can we read the dementia care disclosure and discuss how daily support works?”

    State licensing record · September 27, 2026

3 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?”

What it costs here

Covelight estimate

$4,550a month to start

Likely $3,700–$5,600

From 24 nearby homes that publish rates · this home’s rate is not on file

Likely monthly total

$4,550a month

Likely $3,700–$5,800

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
  • Starting monthly rate$4,550likely $3,700–$5,600

    Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 24 small homes and similar homes within 9 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 $3,700–$5,800
$4,550
First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $4,350–$8,900
$6,550
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 24 small homes and similar homes within 9 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.

24 homes like this within 9 miles publish starting rates mostly between $3,200–$5,000.

  • 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 24 nearby homes behind this estimate

Where it is

  • 37 Mossglen Cir, Sacramento, CA 95826Address 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 2023, the state has filed 14 documents for this home, and its records count 13 visits since 2023. The most recent — a complaint investigation report on July 24, 2026 — closed with the state’s outcome word: “Unsubstantiated.”

On file since
2023
State visits
13
Most recent visit
July 24, 2026
Occupied at that visit
6 of 6 bedsa count on that day, not an opening

We hold 2 complaint reports the state published for this home, dated April 24, 2024 to July 24, 2026. 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 2023.

Year by year
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated2026220202534020243402023440

The last 36 months — 12 of 14 documents

20262 state visits · 2 documents
Jul 24, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: The facility allowed excluded individuals to work in the facility. Staff are forging resident documents. The Administrator is not present at the facility for a sufficient amount of time.

icensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christina Valerio arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings. LPA Valerio met with direct care staff, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Valerio spoke to Administrator Yelena who gave permission for staff on shift to sign on her behalf. LPA Valerio read the report to Administrator via cell phone. The investigation consisted of interviews with residents, interview with staff, a review of facility records, and personal observation of the facility. Allegation: The facility allowed excluded individuals to work in the facility. On 02/19/2026, LPA Valerio conducted an unannounced visit. LPA Valerio did not see excluded individual 1 (EI-1) or excluded individual 2 (EI-2) present in the facility. Continues on LIC 9099 - C... Unsubstantiated LPA Valerio interviewed facility staff. Facility staff denied ever seeing EI-1 or EI-2 in the facility. LPA Valerio interviewed Resident 1 (R1), Resident 2 (R2), Resident 3 (R3), Resident 4 (R4), Resident 5 (R5), and Resident 6 (R6). Residents were shown pictures of EI-1 and EI-2 and asked if they have seen the individuals or know their names. R1 did not recognize the people in the pictures. R2's interview was unsuccessful and could not confirm or deny any information. R3 denied ever seeing the individuals and stated R3 did not know them. R4 stated R4 has seen EI-1 and EI - 2 at the grocery store before. LPA asked if R4 seen them at the facility, R4 stated no. LPA asked the names of the people in the picture. The names provided by R4 did not match the names of the individuals. R5 stated R5 does not know the individuals in the picture and R5 is glad to be aware that they are not allowed to be at the facility. R6 was unaware of the individuals in the photo and has not seen them before. Allegation: Staff are forging resident documents On 02/19/2026, LPA Valerio obtained LIC 602 Physician Reports for R1 - R6. LPA Valerio contacted the physician and/or health center documented on the LIC 602. LPA was unable to confirm validity for R1's LIC 602. LPA was able to confirm the validity of the doctors signature for R2's LIC 602. LPA was able to confirm the validity of the doctors signature for R3's LIC 602. LPA was unable to confirm validity for R4's LIC 602. LPA Valerio could not confirm or deny the signature for R5's LIC 602 due to the number being out of service. LPA was able to confirm the validity of the doctors signature for R6's LIC 602. Allegation: The Administrator is not present at the facility for a sufficient amount of time. Staff 1 stated Administrator Yelena comes every week and will come for one or few hours. If staff need additional assistance, Administrator Yelena will come to the facility. R1 stated the administrator comes every week. R2's interview was unsuccessful and could not confirm or deny any information. R3 stated R3 does not know who Yelena is. R4 stated R4 did not know who Yelena is. R5 knows Administrator Yelena comes to the facility every week, but cannot recall exact days and times. R6 knows Administrator Yelena comes to the facility every week and stated "She comes when she comes." Continues on LIC 9099 - C, page 3... Yelena stated she is at the facility at least twenty (20) hours per week. She stated that it varies, honestly. She stated it can be more or less depending on which facility needs me more. According to the LIC 500, Administrator Yelena is at the facility every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday from 8:00 AM to 12:00 PM. Based on all the information collected by the Department, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, here is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation occurred, therefore this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations (CCRs) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, no deficiencies cited. An exit interview was held with Administrator Yelena via cell, and a copy of report was left at the facility with facility staff.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 24, 2026 · control 27-AS-20260211122308
Jun 2, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christina Valerio arrived to the facility unannounced to conduct an annual required inspection. LPA Valerio met with Facility Staff Siteri and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Valerio and staff toured the facility to ensure compliance with Title 22 regulations. LPA Valerio observed three (3) resident bedrooms. Resident bedrooms were fully furnished and free from odors. Resident bathrooms were observed to be fully stocked with hygiene supplies, such as paper towels, toilet paper, and hand soap. LPA Valerio observed additional hygiene supplies locked in a cabinet available for use. LPA Valerio observed medications, sharps, and toxins locked an inaccessible to residents in care. LPA Valerio observed an outside contractor painting the kitchen area and replacing the lights. The facility was observed to have an adequate food supply. LPA Valerio observed snacks accessible to the residents located near the kitchen area and dinning room. The exterior area was observed to have a large area for outdoor visitation and/or activities. LPA Valerio observed residents watching television in their room/living room, smoking outside in the backyard, and walking in the back yard. Staff was observed assisting with resident ADLs, cleaning, and assisting the contractor. LPA Valerio observed the fire extinguisher was fully charged with last annual service date of 09 of 2025. LPA Valerio spoke to staff and residents during the visit. LPA Valerio observed alarms to be in working condition. LPA Valerio reviewed staff and resident files. All files were observed to up to date with required documentation. LPA Valerio requested the following be sent to cclascpsacramentosouthRO@dss.ca.gov: LIC 500, LIC 308, LIC 610D, and copy of liability insurance Per California Code of Regulations (CCR) - Title 22 - no deficiencies were observed during today's visit. An exit interview was held, and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 2, 2026
20253 state visits · 4 documents
Aug 28, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit. LPA Moleski spoke with facility administrator Lyenna Bigelow over the phone and explained the purpose of the visit. Bigelow said that caregiver Siteri Senitirau could sign this report in her absence. LPA Moleski explained to Bigelow that a staff person (S1) had been subject to immediate orders of exclusion, which bars them from working, residing in, or being present in any facility licensed by the California Department of Social Services. Bigelow said that S1 had not worked at this facility since last year. LPA Moleski asked Bigelow to remove S1 from this facility's Guardian roster. Bigelow agreed to do so. An exit interview was held with Senitirau. A copy of this report, and a copy of the immediate exclusion orders, were left with Senitirau.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 28, 2025
Apr 16, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit. LPA Moleski texted facility administrator Lyenna Bigelow and explained the purpose of the visit. Bigelow said staff member Siteri Senitirau could sign this report. During this visit, LPA Moleski took scans from a resident's file (R1) and interviewed a staff member (S1). No deficiencies were cited during this visit. An exit interview was held and a copy of this report was left with Senitirau.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 16, 2025
Apr 14, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct an annual inspection. LPA Moleski spoke with facility administrator Lyenna Bigelow over the phone and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Moleski reviewed six resident files (R1-R6) and three staff files (S1-S3). R2 was identified as bedridden on their latest LIC 602, dated 02/07/2025. Comments on the LIC 602 describe the resident as "bed bound," and suffering from motor impairment or paralysis. R2's latest appraisal, dated 02/18/2025, indicated that R2 was in bed all the time. In an interview during this visit, S1 referred to R2 as "bed bound." This facility has a fire clearance for six non-ambulatory residents, but is not cleared to accept or retain any bedridden residents. Medical records from an emergency room visit on 2/24/25 indicate that R3 received a CT scan of their head due to a "fall/ qeustionable [sic.] head injury." The CT scan revealed no internal bleeding or other signs of serious injury. LPA Moleski reviewed fax and email records and observed that no incident reports were received regarding this fall. LPA Moleski observed that three residents' admission agreements (R3, admitted 1/27/25, R4, admitted 2/10/25, and R6, admitted 3/14/25) did not include base rates for basic services. LPA Moleski toured the facility and inspected common areas, the kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, and backyard areas. Furniture and furnishings were sufficient to meet the needs of residents. The facility temperature was 69 degrees Fahrenheit, which is within the required range of 68 and 85 degrees. [continued on 809-C] The facility's water temperature was tested and measured 103 degrees Fahrenheit, which is not within the required range of 105 and 120 degrees. While touring the facility, LPA Moleski observed that the interior garage door was unlocked. LPA Moleski observed many cleaning solutions and chemicals out in the garage. A cabinet labeled "keep locked when not in use" and "must be locked at all times" was unlocked. Several different cleaning solutions were observed inside the unlocked cabinet. LPA Moleski observed one resident (R6) walk into the garage unaccompanied during this visit. LPA Moleski observed first aid supplies, a fully-charged and up-to-date fire extinguisher, and carbon monoxide/smoke detectors. LPA Moleski observed a minimum 2-day supply of perishable food and a minimum 7-day supply of nonperishable food. LPA Moleski observed a locked closet for the storage of medication. LPA Moleski observed locked cabinets for the storage of cleaning solutions and knives. LPA Moleski interviewed one staff member (S1). Residents were not able to be interviewed during this visit. This facility is cited per 22 CCR Sections 87202(a)(2), 87309(a), 87211(a)(1), 87303(e)(2) and 87507(g)(3)(A). Due to a violation of fire clearance requirements, an immediate civil penalty in the amount of $500 is hereby assessed. An exit interview was held with Bigelow. Appeal rights and a copy of this report were left with staff member Siteri Senitirau.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 14, 2025
Apr 14, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct an annual inspection. LPA Moleski spoke with facility administrator Lyenna Bigelow over the phone and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Moleski reviewed six resident files (R1-R6) and three staff files (S1-S3). R2 was identified as bedridden on their latest LIC 602, dated 02/07/2025. Comments on the LIC 602 describe the resident as "bed bound," and suffering from motor impairment or paralysis. R2's latest appraisal, dated 02/18/2025, indicated that R2 was in bed all the time. In an interview during this visit, S1 referred to R2 as "bed bound." This facility has a fire clearance for six non-ambulatory residents, but is not cleared to accept or retain any bedridden residents. Medical records from an emergency room visit on 2/24/25 indicate that R3 received a CT scan of their head due to a "fall/ qeustionable [sic.] head injury." The CT scan revealed no internal bleeding or other signs of serious injury. LPA Moleski reviewed fax and email records and observed that no incident reports were received regarding this fall. LPA Moleski observed that three residents' admission agreements (R3, admitted 1/27/25, R4, admitted 2/10/25, and R6, admitted 3/14/25) did not include base rates for basic services. LPA Moleski toured the facility and inspected common areas, the kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, and backyard areas. Furniture and furnishings were sufficient to meet the needs of residents. The facility temperature was 69 degrees Fahrenheit, which is within the required range of 68 and 85 degrees. [continued on 809-C] The facility's water temperature was tested and measured 103 degrees Fahrenheit, which is not within the required range of 105 and 120 degrees. While touring the facility, LPA Moleski observed that the interior garage door was unlocked. LPA Moleski observed many cleaning solutions and chemicals out in the garage. A cabinet labeled "keep locked when not in use" and "must be locked at all times" was unlocked. Several different cleaning solutions were observed inside the unlocked cabinet. LPA Moleski observed one resident (R6) walk into the garage unaccompanied during this visit. LPA Moleski observed first aid supplies, a fully-charged and up-to-date fire extinguisher, and carbon monoxide/smoke detectors. LPA Moleski observed a minimum 2-day supply of perishable food and a minimum 7-day supply of nonperishable food. LPA Moleski observed a locked closet for the storage of medication. LPA Moleski observed locked cabinets for the storage of cleaning solutions and knives. LPA Moleski interviewed one staff member (S1). Residents were not able to be interviewed during this visit. This facility is cited per 22 CCR Sections 87202(a)(2), 87309(a), 87211(a)(1), 87303(e)(2) and 87507(g)(3)(A). Due to a violation of fire clearance requirements, an immediate civil penalty in the amount of $500 is hereby assessed. An exit interview was held with Bigelow. Appeal rights and a copy of this report were left with staff member Siteri Senitirau.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 14, 2025
20243 state visits · 4 documents
Nov 21, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit. LPA Moleski spoke with facility administrator Lyenna Bigelow over the phone and explained the purpose of the visit. Bigelow said caregiver Lesi Buinimasi could sign this report in her absence. This visit is to confirm immediate exclusion orders for a staff member (S1). Bigelow acknowledged that S1 is excluded effective immediately, which means that S1 cannot be allowed to work, live in, and/or have contact with clients in any residential facility licensed by the California Department of Social Services. Therefore, the Department orders this facility to remove S1 from any contact with clients and not allow this employee to be physically present in the facility. Bigelow said that S1 has not been working at this facility since at least 2023. Bigelow agreed to remove S1 from all facility Guardian rosters as soon as possible. No deficiencies were cited during this visit. An exit interview was held with Bigelow. A copy of this report and the immediate exclusion notice were left with Buinimasi. A signature on this report acknowledges receipt of these documents.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 21, 2024
May 6, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct an annual inspection. LPA Moleski met with facility administrator Yelena Bigelow and explained the purpose of the visit. Upon arrival, two staff members were present (S1-S2). LPA Moleski reviewed Guardian records and observed that S2 was not associated to this facility. S2 told LPA Moleski that S2 had started working at this facility today. Bigelow associated S2 during this visit. LPA Moleski reviewed six resident files (R1-R6) and five staff files (S1-S5). LPA Moleski toured the facility with staff and inspected common areas, the kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, and backyard areas. Furniture and furnishings were sufficient to meet the needs of residents. The facility temperature was 75 degrees Fahrenheit, which is within the required range of 68 and 85 degrees. The facility's water temperature measured 105 degrees Fahrenheit, which is within the required range of 105 and 120 degrees. LPA Moleski observed first aid supplies, a fully-charged and up-to-date fire extinguisher, and carbon monoxide/smoke detectors. LPA Moleski observed a minimum 2-day supply of perishable food and a minimum 7-day supply of nonperishable food. LPA Moleski observed a locked closet for the storage of medication. LPA Moleski observed locked cabinets for the storage of cleaning solutions and knives. [continued on 809-C] LPA Moleski interviewed two staff members (S1-S2) and one resident (R6). This facility hereby cited per 22 CCR Section 87355(e)(2). This facility was previously cited per 22 CCR Section 87355(e)(2) on 4/24/24. A $1,000 civil penalty is hereby assessed, as this is a repeat violation. A civil penalty in the amount of $100 per day for one day is hereby assessed for one day worked by a caregiver not associated to this facility (S2). An exit interview was held with Bigelow. Appeal rights and a copy of this report were left with Bigelow.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 6, 2024
Apr 24, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff pushed resident.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to follow up on this complaint investigation. LPA Moleski met with facility administrator Yelena Bigelow and explained the purpose of the visit. This investigation consisted of interviews, observation, and record review. LPA Moleski interviewed Bigelow, a staff member (S1) and four residents (R1, R2, R3, R6). During an interview, Bigelow said that a resident (R1) had been experiencing unusual behaviors during the time period of March 2, 2024 through March 4, 2024. Bigelow said during this time period, R1 had poured water all over the facility’s floors, was urinating in the facility, and on March 4, splashed water on S1. Afterward, R1 claimed that S1 had pinned R1 on the floor, according to Bigelow. Bigelow said R1 was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection after being sent out to the hospital. [continued on 9099-C] Unsubstantiated During an interview, LPA Moleski asked R1 about the events on March 4, 2024. R1 said there was “water everywhere.” R1 said that S1 had pushed R1, but also said that R1 had fallen. LPA Moleski did not observe any unusual injuries on R1 during this interview which would indicate physical abuse. LPA Moleski reviewed R1’s file. R1 is diagnosed with bipolar disorder, but does not have dementia, according to R1’s LIC 602 dated 1/18/24. During an interview, S1 said that R1 splashed water on S1 on March 2, 2024, then did so again on March 4, 2024. S1 said that after this second incident, R1 grabbed a plate and raised it to strike S1. S1 said S1 grabbed R1’s wrist and removed the plate from R1’s hand, but did not push R1. S1 said R1 had not fallen during the incident. S1 said the incident occurred in the facility’s living room, but said no others were present to witness the events as described. S1 said police were called and R1 was later sent out to the hospital. In interviews, R2, R3, and R6 did not report having been physically abused by staff while living at the facility. The department has determined the following as it relates to the allegation that staff pushed a resident: Based on interviews, observation, and record review, the above allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED, which means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. No deficiencies were cited regarding this allegation. An exit interview was held and a copy of this report was left with Bigelow.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 24, 2024 · control 27-AS-20240304171144
Apr 24, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Deficiencies

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct a complaint investigation. However, upon arrival, LPA Moleski observed multiple deficiencies. LPA Moleski met with facility administrator Yelena Bigelow and explained the purpose of the visit. Shortly after LPA Moleski had parked his car, around 9 a.m., LPA Moleski observed a resident (R1) walking toward the facility from the community. LPA Moleski observed R1 round a corner from elsewhere in the community and walk to the facility, and enter the backyard through a side gate. R1 was unassisted while out in the community. LPA Moleski entered the facility shortly after R1 and was met by a staff member (S1). S1 provided their name and birth date to LPA Moleski. LPA Moleski reviewed Guardian records and observed that S1 was not associated to this facility. S1 said this was their first day at this facility. LPA Moleski reviewed R1's file and observed that R1 is not able to leave the facility unassisted. LPA Moleski asked S1 if S1 was aware that R1 had taken a walk. S1 said they were not aware. LPA Moleski interviewed R1, who said that R1 had taken a walk to search for cigarette butts. LPA Moleski and Bigelow observed that the alarm on the sliding door into the backyard was not turned on. This facility is hereby cited per 22 CCR Section 87411(a) and 87355(e)(2). This facility was previously cited per 22 CCR Section 87411(a) on 11/9/23 due to a previous AWOL by R1. As this is a repeat citation, a civil penalty in the amount of $1,000 is hereby assessed. An additional civil penalty of $100 is hereby assessed for one day worked by S1 while not associated to this facility. An exit interview was held with Bigelow. Appeal rights and a copy of this report were left with Bigelow.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 24, 2024

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87411(a) · Plan of correction due date: Apr 25, 2024

"(a) Facility personnel shall at all times be sufficient in numbers, and competent to provide the services necessary to meet resident needs. ...The licensing agency may require any facility to provide additional staff whenever it determines through documentation that the needs of the particular residents, the extent of services provided, or the physical arrangements of the facility require such additional staff for the provision of adequate services." This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on observation and record review, R1 was in the community unattended, despite being unable to do so per doctor's orders, which poses an immediate health and safety risk.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 24, 2024

Plan of correction: Licensee agrees to provide R1 with cigarettes to prevent his elopements, and to install an alarm on the backyard side gate. Additionally, licensee agrees to ensure that all other alarms are regularly checked for functionality. Licensee shall provide LPA Moleski a written plan describing how the above will be accomplished by POC due date. vincent.moleski@dss.ca.gov

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR87355(e)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Apr 25, 2024

"(e) All individuals subject to a criminal record review pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 1569.17(b) shall prior to working, residing or volunteering in a licensed facility: ... (2) Request a transfer of a criminal record clearance as specified in Section 87355(c) ..." This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on observation and record review, S1 worked in this facility without criminal record association, which poses an immediate health and safety risk.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 24, 2024

Plan of correction: Licensee agrees to submit transfer requests for all unassociated staff by POC due date. Licensee shall cc LPA Moleski on all electronic communication with transfer request staff. sacasctransferrequest@dss.ca.gov

20232 state visits · 2 documents
Nov 9, 2023Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit. LPA Moleski spoke with facility administrator Yelena Bigelow over the phone and explained the purpose of the visit. Bigelow said staff member Sandra Robinson could sign this report in her absence. LPA Moleski reviewed facility records comprised of daily notes taken by a staff member (S1). Daily notes for 10/28/23 indicate that a resident (R1) left the facility, "lost his way" and was returned to the facility by "someone." S1 confirmed that R1 was out in the community alone. S1 said R1 was returned by a community member. Bigelow said R1 left the facility because R1 did not have cigarettes. R1's LIC 602 indicates that R1 cannot leave the facility without assistance. LPA Moleski photographed the daily notes and the LIC 602. LPA Moleski did not receive an incident report regarding this incident. Bigelow said she did not send an incident report. This facility is being cited per 22 CCR Sections 87411(a) and 87211(a)(1)(D). Appeal rights and a copy of this report were left with Robinson.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 9, 2023

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87411(a) · Plan of correction due date: Nov 10, 2023

Personnel requirements: "Facility personnel shall at all times be sufficient in numbers, and competent to provide the services necessary to meet resident needs. In facilities licensed for sixteen or more, sufficient support staff shall be employed to ensure provision of personal assistance and care as required in Section 87608, Postural Supports. Additional staff shall be employed as necessary to perform office work, cooking, house cleaning, laundering, and maintenance of buildings, equipment and grounds. The licensing agency may require any facility to provide additional staff whenever it determines through documentation that the needs of the particular residents, the extent of services provided, or the physical arrangements of the facility require such additional staff for the provision of adequate services." This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, R1 left the facility unassisted on 11/9/23, which poses an immediate health and safety risk.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 9, 2023

Plan of correction: Licensee agrees to provide a written plan addressing staffing needs at the facility by the POC due date. Licensee agrees to email LPA Moleski this written plan. Failure to correct the deficiency by the POC due date may result in civil penalties. vincent.moleski@dss.ca.gov

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR87211(a)(1)(D) · Plan of correction due date: Nov 10, 2023

Reporting requirements: "(a) Each licensee shall furnish to the licensing agency such reports as the Department may require, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) A written report shall be submitted to the licensing agency and to the person responsible for the resident within seven days of the occurrence of any of the events specified in (A) through (D) below. This report shall include the resident's name, age, sex and date of admission; date and nature of event; attending physician's name, findings, and treatment, if any; and disposition of the case. (D) Any incident which threatens the welfare, safety or health of any resident, such as psychological abuse of a resident by staff or other residents, or unexplained absence of any resident." This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interviews, a resident AWOL was not reported, which poses a potential health and safety risk.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 9, 2023

Plan of correction: Licensee agrees to review reporting requirements and provide a written statement of acknowledgement by the POC due date. Licensee agrees to email LPA Moleski this written statement. Failure to correct the deficiency by the POC due date may result in civil penalties. vincent.moleski@dss.ca.gov

Oct 23, 2023Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Post Licensing

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Vincent Moleski arrived unannounced to conduct a postlicensing inspection. LPA Moleski met with facility administrator Yelena Bigelow and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA Moleski reviewed four resident files (R1-R4) and three staff files (S1-S3). LPA Moleski toured the facility with Bigelow and inspected common areas, the kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, and backyard areas. Furniture and furnishings were sufficient to meet the needs of residents. The facility temperature was 73 degrees Fahrenheit, which is within the required range of 68 and 85 degrees. LPA Moleski observed first aid supplies, a fully-charged and up-to-date fire extinguisher, and working carbon monoxide/smoke detectors. LPA Moleski observed a minimum 2-day supply of perishable food and a minimum 7-day supply of nonperishable food. LPA Moleski observed a locked closet for the storage of medication. LPA Moleski observed locked cabinets for the storage of cleaning solutions and knives. LPA Moleski interviewed one staff member (S2) and two residents (R3, R5). No deficiencies were cited during this visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was left with Bigelow.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 23, 2023
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.

Who holds the licence

Golden Heritage Senior Care LLC, licensed since 2023, operates 3 licensed homes in California. Running more than one home is common and is neither good nor bad on its own.

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 Sacramento County, closest first. Every listed home appears on the same terms.

Explore Sacramento County