Small home · Licensed for 6 · San Diego

Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility

6255 Mchaney Court, San Diego, CA 92114Licensed since 1984

Overview

Estimated starting rate

$3,450 a month

Covelight estimate · likely $2,800–$4,250 See costs

No openings reported

Approved by the state: WheelchairState licensing record · October 26, 2026
Licensed for 6: a small care homeThe state license record

Ask this home

Check availability

Request a tour

More days

AskThe cost, or your own question

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

Care and support

Wheelchairup to 6 residents

Not on file: dementia, hospice and bedridden approvals.

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

Read the state’s own wording

THE FACILITY SERVES SIX (6) NON-AMBULATORY RESIDENTS; AGES 60 AND ABOVE.

935 - ELDERLY

CDSS record, verbatim · October 26, 2026

As needs change

We’ll ask for you. Not on file for Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility: two-person transfers or a lift, who is awake overnight, help with medicines, staying through hospice and care if memory loss develops. When we check availability, we ask about these too.

Check availability

What it costs here

Covelight estimate

$3,450a month to start

Likely $2,800–$4,250

From 10 nearby homes that publish rates · this home’s rate is not on file

Monthly cost breakdownWith a shared room and basic help · room, care and fees$3,450likely a month

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$3,450likely $2,800–$4,250
Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 10 small homes within 3 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 (44 California homes publish a care-level range, seen in September 2026).
One-time move-in fee$2,500one time · likely $0–$4,000
Homes that list a one-time entry or community fee charge a median of $2,500 (133 California listings; middle half $1,000–$4,000). Many homes list none — ask.

Likely monthly totalLikely $2,800–$4,450: $3,450
First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $3,350–$7,800: $5,950

How people payPrivate pay, Medi-Cal waiver, SSI/SSP, veterans, insurance

MedicareDoes not pay for room and board in a care home. It can still cover hospice or home-health visits inside one.
Private payMost residents pay from savings, a home sale or family help. Ask for the rate and what it includes in writing.
Medi-Cal Assisted Living WaiverThis home is not on the DHCS participation list dated October 1, 2026. Ask the program about current options. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.
SSI/SSPCalifornia’s 2026 standard is $1,626.07 a month; $1,444.07 of it goes to the home and $182 stays with the resident. Whether this home accepts it is not on file — ask.
VeteransVA Aid & Attendance can add to a veteran’s or surviving spouse’s pension. Ask whether residents here have used it.
Long-term care insuranceMost policies pay for licensed care homes. Ask what paperwork the home provides for claims.

If the money runs out, what Medi-Cal covers

Rates at nearby homes10 nearby homes publish starting rates of $3,000 to $7,000

10 homes like this within 3 miles publish starting rates mostly between $3,150–$4,550.

Villa Victoria Care HomeSan Diego · 0.3 mi · Small home
$3,000Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
Daleina's Home CareNational City · 1.0 mi · Small home
$4,000Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
Archangel's Residential CareSan Diego · 1.3 mi · Small home
$4,000Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
Morningside ManorSan Diego · 1.6 mi · Small home
$4,500Listed on Seniorly · assisted living private room · seen September 9, 2026
Mayflower Home CareSan Diego · 1.7 mi · Small home
$4,500Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
Seniors Dignity Home and CareSan Diego · 1.8 mi · Small home
$3,500Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
Ideal Home CareNational City · 2.1 mi · Small home
$5,000Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
Sarasona Home CareBonita · 2.5 mi · Small home
$4,500Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
Ohana Care HomeSan Diego · 2.6 mi · Small home
$7,000Listed on its own website · monthly service fee · seen October 27, 2026
VMB Ultimate CareNational City · 2.9 mi · Small home
$3,500Listed on Seniorly · assisted living private room · seen September 9, 2026

How this estimate worksWithin 25% for 7 in 10 homes in testing

Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 10 small homes within 3 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.

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

Avoid surprises on the billWhat changes the price, and what to ask

The care level
Some homes charge one all-inclusive rate. Others add levels or points as needs grow. Ask how the level is set, who decides, and what the next level costs.
What is billed separately
Medication management, incontinence supplies, transportation and a second person in the room are often extra. Ask for the list in writing.
Move-in costs
A one-time move-in fee or deposit is common. Ask what it covers and whether any of it comes back if the stay is short.
Increases
California requires at least 90 days’ written notice, with reasons, before a rate rises (Health & Safety Code §1569.655). A change in the resident’s care level is the section’s own exception and can be billed sooner.

Ask for the price

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

Daily life

Daily life here is not on file yet. Most small homes haven’t published it, and that says nothing about the home.

The best way to see it is a visit.

Request a tour

Where it is

6255 Mchaney Court, San Diego, CA 92114Address from the public record · October 26, 2026. Confirm the entrance with the home before visiting.

Opening the neighborhood map…

Paradise Valley HospitalHospital · General acute care, on the state’s list1.2 mi

Straight-line distances; check the drive or the walk. Hospital: the nearest general acute care hospital on the state’s list (CDPH, September 16, 2026).

Open directions

The state record

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

CDSS public record, read October 26, 2026 · License #370804165 · See the state’s own record

The last 36 months — 3 of 6 documents

20261 state visit · 1 document

Feb 11, 2026Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jose De La Cruz made an unannounced visit to conduct a Required Annual Inspection. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPA was welcomed by, identified himself to, and discussed the purpose of the visit with Licensee Angelita Sanchez. The facility's license shows a maximum capacity of six (6) non-ambulatory residents ages 60 and above. LPA arrived at 10:50 AM, and toured the facility’s interior and exterior, and inspected residents’ rooms, one staff room, as well as two bathrooms and garage. The facility was clean, sanitary, and in good repair. Pathways were free of obstruction and slip hazards. Client bedrooms contained the required furnishings and were personalized by the clients. Doors, windows, screens, toilet, and shower were in working order. Extra linen and hygiene supplies were present, as well as Personal Protective Equipment. The facility had sufficient space and equipment to facilitate dining, laundry, visitation, meetings, and client activities. The facility contained at least 2 days of perishable food, and at least 7 days of non-perishable food, all safely stored. Cooking, dining equipment, and utensils were present. Toxic chemicals, poisons were locked and inaccessible to clients. A drawer containing sharps was found open, as well as a pair of scissors accessible to residents. LPA measured the water temperature in two bathrooms and the kitchen sink in Fahrenheit degrees: B1 107, B2, 118 kitchen 108.9. [CONTINUED ON LIC809-C] [CONTINUED FROM LIC809] Medications were labeled, as required, and stored in locked areas. No bodies of water on the premises, one fireplace was on the premises with a door that made it inaccessible to clients. Per Administrator, no firearms or ammunition are kept at the facility. Carbon monoxide detectors, emergency lighting, and facility telephone were all in working order. Fire extinguishers were serviced within the last 12 months. First aid kits were complete and readily accessible. Required licensing postings were observed in visible areas of the facility. LPA interviewed clients, and reviewed facility records. The files reviewed by LPA were missing information related to communicable TB, pre appraisals and appraisals. Confidential records were stored in locked areas. Two deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations. No civil penalty was assessed. Plan of Correction was jointly developed with the staff responsible. An exit interview was conducted with Licensee Angelita Sanchez, to whom a copy of this report, the LIC 809-D pages, and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided during today’s visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 11, 2026

The state marks this report as 13 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 4. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

20251 state visit · 1 document

Feb 13, 2025Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ramon Serrano conducted an unannounced Required Annual Inspection. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPA identified himself and discussed the purpose of the visit with Licensee Angelita Sanchez. According to the facility’s license, the facility is approved to serve six (6) non-ambulatory elderly residents, over the age of sixty (60). LPA, accompanied by Licensee toured the interior and exterior of the facility, and inspected each room. The facility was clean, sanitary, and in good repair. Pathways were free of obstruction and slip hazards. The facility’s ambient internal temperature was compliant, at 70 degrees F. Hot water temperature was compliant at 111 degrees F. Resident bedrooms contained the required furnishings. Doors, windows, toilets, and showers were in working order. Extra linens and hygiene supplies were present, as well as Personal Protective Equipment. The facility had sufficient space and equipment to facilitate dining, laundry, visitation, meetings, and resident activities. There was at least 2 days of perishable food, and at least 7 days non-perishable food present, all safely stored. Cooking/dining equipment and utensils were present. There were no toxic chemicals/poisons accessible to residents. Medications were labeled, as required, and stored in locked areas. No pools or bodies of water on the premises. Per Licensee, no firearms or ammunition are kept at the facility. Carbon monoxide detectors, emergency lighting, and facility telephone were all working. Fire extinguisher(s) were present. First aid kit(s) were complete and readily accessible. Required licensing postings were observed in visible areas of the facility. LPA reviewed multiple staff and resident records/files. LPA file review did not raise any licensing concerns. The files which LPA reviewed contained required documents. Confidential records were stored in locked areas. No deficiencies were observed or cited during today's annual inspection. An exit interview was conducted with Licensee Angelita Sanchez 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, Feb 13, 2025

20241 state visit · 1 document

Feb 15, 2024Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Daniel Pena conducted an unannounced Required Annual Inspection. LPA welcomed by, identified himself to, and discussed the purpose of the visit with Caregiver, Erminda Aquino. Administrator, Angelita Sanchez, later joined LPA for the remainder of the inspection. Per the license, the facility is approved to serve six (6) non-ambulatory elderly residents, over the age of sixty (60). On the day of the inspection six (6) of six (6) residents were present. During the inspection, LPA toured the interior and exterior of the facility and observed each resident’s room. The facility was organized, kempt and in good repair. Pathways inside the property were free of obstruction and slip hazards. Resident bedrooms contained the required furnishings. Doors, windows, toilets, and showers were in working order. Extra linens and hygiene supplies were present, as well as Personal Protective Equipment. The facility had sufficient space and equipment to facilitate dining, laundry, visitation, meetings, and resident activities. There was at least two days of perishable food, and at least seven days non-perishable food present, all safely stored. Cooking/dining equipment and utensils were present. There were no toxic chemicals/poisons accessible to residents. Medications were labeled, as required, and stored in locked areas. No pools or bodies of water were observed on the premises. Per Administrator, there are no firearms or ammunition kept at the facility. Carbon monoxide detectors, smoke alarms, emergency lighting, and telephone were all working. Fire extinguisher(s) were present. First aid kit(s) were complete and readily accessible. Required licensing postings were observed in visible areas of the facility. LPA interviewed residents and reviewed staff and resident records/files. LPA interviews did not raise any licensing concerns.Confidential records were stored in locked areas. Continued: LIC809 LPA provided the Administrator with consultation and LIC9282 template for Infection Control Plans. LPA provided consultation and technical advisories for the following: Physical Plant/Environmental Safety, First Aid/CPR certification renewal, Administrator Certification renewal, and Resident Needs and Services Plans. No deficiencies were observed or cited during today's annual inspection. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator, Sanchez 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, Feb 15, 2024

The state marks this report as 5 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 2. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

Earlier years2021 to 2022 · 3 documents

20222 state visits · 2 documents

Aug 26, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff are not meeting the needs of the resident. Staff do not assist the resident with dental care. Staff are misplacing the residents belongings. Staff are not following resident's special diet. Non ambulatory resident is listed as ambulatory on the facility emergency plan.

On 08/26/2022, at about 3:10 PM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Daniel Pena conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit to the facility to deliver findings on the above-mentioned allegations. LPA identified himself and was granted entry into the facility by Administrator, Angelita Sanchez. LPA met with Administrator Sanchez to discuss the purpose of today’s visit. The Department’s investigation into this complaint consisted of interviews with residents, staff, outside sources and review of facility records. It was alleged staff did not meet Resident 1’s needs, did not provide assistance with dental care, misplaced Resident 1’s belongings, did not follow Resident 1’s special diet and listed Resident 1 on facility documents as ambulatory when they were non-ambulatory. Documents show that Resident 1 resided at the Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility from June 2, 2020 until they passed on January 28, 2021. Resident 1 was diagnosed with Metabolic Encelopathy; unspecified Dementia without behavioral disturbance; Type 1 Diabetes; chronic diastolic (congestive) and chronic Stage 3 kidney disease. Unsubstantiated Records reflect Resident 1 required assistance with all Activities of Daily Living. A review of Resident 1’s medication administration records illustrated that staff consistently gave Resident 1’s medications without any lapses. Interviews with residents reported no complaints in the level of care or responsiveness by staff. Staff interviews revealed that Resident 1 had severe Dementia and required a high level of attention. Staff said they followed the prescribed care plan, which included Resident 1’s special diet plan. Facility staff did not recall Resident 1 reporting to them that they lost personal property. Facility staff denied ever taking or losing any of Resident 1’s personal belongings. Staff also said they brushed Resident 1’s teeth in the morning and before they went to bed. An interview with Resident 1’s responsible party reported stated that Resident 1 had Dementia, Type 1 Diabetes and suffered from short term memory loss. This interview revealed that Resident 1 was not always truthful and complained to staff a lot. The responsible party said facility staff always met Resident 1’s needs, kept the facility clean and fed Resident 1 well. Responsible party advised that staff placed a bell in Resident 1’s room to call for assistance. However, the responsible party said staff had to take it every once in a while, because Resident 1 was disruptive and constantly ring the bell. Resident 1’s responsible party was never concerned that staff were not responsive to Resident 1’s needs. The responsible party also stated that Resident 1 brushed their own teeth regularly. The responsible party advised staff that Resident 1 could do it themselves and encouraged staff to let Resident 1 do things for themselves. Responsible party said facility staff followed their guidance. Responsible party said Resident 1 never complained of personal property being stolen or lost. Responsible party stated that staff strictly followed Resident 1’s diet plan. Interviews yielded that Resident 1 was a vegetarian by choice but did eat chicken and fish. No red meat. When asked, this source said Resident 1 preferred fish but could eat chicken and it was part of their diet plan. The responsible party also said staff took great care in caring for chronic sores on Resident 1’s hip and foot. The responsible party said Resident 1 was non-ambulatory and they never saw any facility record documenting that Resident 1 was ambulatory. After reviews of facility documentation and interviews of staff, residents and outside sources there is insufficient information to support the allegations. Based on the evidence obtained during this investigation, the aforementioned allegations are found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED, meaning that although the allegations may have happened or may be valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Sanchez; a copy of this report and Licensee's Rights (LIC9058) were provided to Administrator Sanchez.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 26, 2022 · control 08-AS-20201014130330

Feb 24, 2022Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Dawn Segura visited the facility to conduct an annual required licensing inspection. LPA disclosed the purpose of the visit, was granted entry into the facility, and met with Angelita Sanchez, Licensee. During today's visit, LPA toured the facility and verified compliance with infection control practices. LPA observed one central entry point for universal entry screening; routine symptom screening initiated at entry for staff, residents, and visitors; a sign-in policy enacted for visitors; signs in the facility to promote hand hygiene, cough/sneeze etiquette, symptom and transmission awareness; face coverings worn by staff; hand sanitizer/hand washing stations readily available; available visitation area; emergency agencies’ contact information visible to staff; and an ample supply of cleaning products. No deficiencies were cited during today’s visit. An exit interview was conducted with Angelita Sanchez, and a copy of this report and Licensee Rights (LIC 9058 FAS 01/16) will be provided, via email, following the visit. An electronic receipt of confirmation was requested to be sent to LPA upon receipt of the documents.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 24, 2022

20211 state visit · 1 document

Aug 24, 2021Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility did not have a working shower

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Lizzette Tellez conducted an unannounced complaint visit to investigate the above-mentioned allegation. LPA was met by Caregiver, Gloria Ganduela, and was granted entry into the facility. LPA met with Administrator, Faye Mayo, and discussed the purpose of the visit. Investigation consisted of interviews with staff, residents, outside sources, and a tour of the facility. It was alleged that the facility does not have a working shower, specifically, that there was not a working shower in the facility in 2015. During a tour of the facility, LPA observed two full bathrooms with two working showers in good repair. Interviews with staff, residents, and outside sources, did not support the allegation. Individuals interviewed did not report concerns regarding the facility showers. The Department has investigated the above-mentioned allegation and based upon interviews and LPA observations, has found that there is insufficient evidence to support or corroborate the alleagtion. Therefore, this allegation is deemed unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Ms. Mayo and a copy of this report, along with Licensee Rights (LIC 9058 01/16), were provided to the Administrator via electronic mail. An electronic receipt of confirmation was requested to be sent by the Administrator upon receipt of the documents. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 24, 2021 · control 08-AS-20210819144211

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

6 of 6 beds were occupied at the August 26, 2022 state visit — a count on that day, not an opening.

License holder

Sanchez, Godofredo and Angelita L., licensed since 1984.

The state’s totals for this licenseSince 1984, as the state’s facility page counts them

State visits on file: 4
Total complaints: 0
Substantiated allegations: 0
Type A citations: 0
Type B citations: 0

These are the state’s own totals for this license since 1984, per CDSS records. The state counts them apart from the documents above, and they can differ from what those documents show; the documents say what each visit found. One complaint can contain several allegations.

Compare with homes the same size

	This home	Typical
Type A citations	0	0
Type B citations	0	0
Substantiated allegations	0	0
Total complaints	0	0

“Typical” is the statewide median for licensed homes this size. It does not adjust for years licensed, and older licenses have had more visits and reports. The median is across the 6,916 licensed small board-and-care homes (6 or fewer beds) in the state record. The figures compared are the state’s totals, not the documents.

What the state’s words mean

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

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

An “unsubstantiated” complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing — it means the state investigated and could not confirm the allegation. Outcome words are the state’s own; we never grade, score, or color a record, and we publish no reviews — the state’s dated documents stand in their place.

Open CDSS facility search ↗Report a record error Operate this home? Respond or correct, free →

Frequently asked questions

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

Quick answers about Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility

Is Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility licensed?

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

How many residents is Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility licensed for?

6 residents — a small home, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.

Has Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility been cited?

0 Type A and 0 Type B citations since 1984, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. Those records count 4 state visits over the same years.

Is Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility still open?

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

What does Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility cost?

$3,450 a month to start is a Covelight estimate, likely $2,800–$4,250. This home’s own rate is not on file. Ask: “What is the all-in monthly rate, and what would push it higher?”

Among 51 other homes of a similar licensed size in San Diego that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $4,000 to $6,000 a month, and the middle figure is $5,000 (n = 51 other homes publishing a starting rate).

Each of those is a home’s own published figure, gathered on its own date between September and October 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 Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility take Medi-Cal?

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

Who holds the license?

The license is held by Sanchez, Godofredo and Angelita L., per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.

Is there a hospital nearby?

Paradise Valley Hospital is 1.2 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.

Can Good Samaritan Board and Care Facility keep a resident on hospice?

Not on file — the state’s record does not list hospice care on this license. Ask: “Can a resident stay here on hospice, and under what conditions?”