Illustration — no photo of this home on file yet

Heritage Gardens

Large community·Licensed for 64·Loma Linda, California

Licensed since 1994Licence #360900455Medi-Cal ALW
  • Care approvals on fileWheelchair · Hospice · BedriddenState licensing record · September 27, 2026
  • Estimated starting rate$2,900 a monthCovelight estimate · likely $2,250–$3,700
  • Home sizeLicensed for 64Large care community · a licensed care home (RCFE)
  • Room at the last state visit54 of 64 beds occupiedJuly 1, 2026 · not a current opening
  • Ways to payMedi-Cal ALW acceptedDHCS participant list · August 9, 2026
  • Last state visitJuly 1, 2026CDSS inspection record

Heritage Gardens is a large care community in Loma Linda — a licensed residential care facility for the elderly (RCFE), the licence category behind “assisted living” and “board and care.” It is licensed for 64 residents since 1994. Dementia 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 Heritage Gardens

Is Heritage Gardens licensed?

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

How many residents is Heritage Gardens licensed for?

64 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Has Heritage Gardens been cited?

2 Type A and 1 Type B citations since 1994, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. Those records count 30 state visits over the same years.

Is Heritage Gardens still open?

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

What does Heritage Gardens cost?

$2,900 a month to start is a Covelight estimate, likely $2,250–$3,700. 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 12 communities with 50 or more beds within 13 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 20 other homes of a similar licensed size across San Bernardino County that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $3,150 to $4,810 a month, and the middle figure is $3,823 (n = 20 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. What Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver covers in a care home.

Does Heritage Gardens take Medi-Cal?

On Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver: this home appears on the DHCS participation list, August 9, 2026. Confirm eligibility and current participation with the program. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.

Who holds the license?

The license is held by Heritage Health Care Inc., per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Is there a hospital nearby?

Loma Linda University Medical Center East Campus Hospital is 0.2 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.

Can Heritage Gardens keep a resident on hospice?

Hospice care is approved on this license, covering up to 10 residents, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Heritage Gardens license and inspection record

  • Name on the license: “HERITAGE GARDENS”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
  • License #360900455. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • Licensed for 64 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • Licensed to Heritage Health Care Inc., per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • First licensed in 1994, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 30 state inspection visits since 1994, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 2 Type A and 1 Type B citations on file since 1994, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. The same records count 30 state visits in that period.
  • 20 complaints and 3 substantiated allegations on file since 1994, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
  • The most recent state visit on file is July 1, 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 64 residents
  • Dementia / memory careNot on file · ask the home
  • Hospice careApproved · covers up to 10 residents
  • BedriddenApproved · covers up to 4 residents

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
64 NON-AMBULATORY, OF WHICH 4 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 10.

985 - RCFE / HOSPICE

CDSS record, verbatim · September 27, 2026

As needs change

  • Medicines

    Level of medication service: reminders only

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

    caring.com · 2026-09-09

  • Staying through hospice

    Hospice waiver on file · covers up to 10 — 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

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?”

  • If memory loss develops

    Dementia-care designation not on file

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

Care & day-to-day support

These are the home’s own statements about its day-to-day practice — they are not part of the state licensing record, and the state has not approved or reviewed them.

  • Works with hospice

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Level of medication serviceReminders only

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Nights & staffing

  • Nurse coverageNurse on Staff (Part time)

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

What it costs here

Covelight estimate

$2,900a month to start

Likely $2,250–$3,700

From 12 nearby homes that publish rates · this home’s rate is not on file

Likely monthly total

$2,900a month

Likely $2,250–$3,900

With a studio and basic help.

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

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

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

  • Starting monthly rate$2,900likely $2,250–$3,700

    Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 12 communities with 50 or more beds within 13 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 $2,250–$3,900
$2,900
First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $2,750–$7,150
$4,900
How people payOn the Medi-Cal waiver list · private pay, 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 appears on the DHCS participation list, August 9, 2026. Confirm eligibility and current participation with the program. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board. For a resident on SSI/SSP, California’s 2026 standard sends $1,444.07 a month to the home for 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 12 communities with 50 or more beds within 13 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.

12 homes like this within 13 miles publish starting rates mostly between $2,600–$4,600.

  • 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 12 nearby homes behind this estimate

Where it is

  • 25271 Barton Rd, Loma Linda, CA 92354Address 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 2021, the state has filed 27 documents for this home, and its records count 30 visits since 1994. The most recent — a complaint investigation report on July 1, 2026 — closed with the state’s outcome word: “Unfounded.”

On file since
2021
State visits
30
Most recent visit
July 1, 2026
Occupied at that visit
54 of 64 bedsa count on that day, not an opening

We hold 20 complaint reports the state published for this home, dated November 10, 2021 to July 1, 2026. 20 of the 20 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (2), “Unfounded” (6), “Unsubstantiated” (12). 20 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word. Summary composed by computer from the 20 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 citations2typical 0
  • Type B citations1typical 1
  • Substantiated allegations3typical 2
  • Total complaints20typical 6

“Typical” is the statewide median across the 1,354 licensed larger communities (16+ beds) in the state record — larger, longer-licensed homes accumulate more visits and reports, so compare like with like. One complaint can contain several allegations. Counts cover this licence since 1994.

Year by year
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated202645020254402024890202333020225522021110

The last 36 months — 19 of 27 documents

20264 state visits · 5 documents
Jul 1, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained fractures and other injuries due to staff neglect or physical abuse Licensee does not ensure there are adequate staff to meet resident's needs Staff did not address a resident's change in medical condition in a timely manner Staff did not ensure residents toileting needs were met

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegations. LPA met with Administrator Jessica Ramos, and discussed the purpose of the visit. Regarding allegations above, The Administrator informed LPA that resident #1 (R1) never resided in the assisted living facility but resided in the skilled nursing facility. LPA obtained a resident roster from the skilled nursing facility that verifies R1 lived at the skilled nursing facility. Based on LPA's interviews and record review, the above allegations are Unfounded. An Unfounded finding means, the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed and a copy of this report was provided to Administrator Jessica Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unfoundedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 1, 2026 · control 56-AS-20260623172640
Apr 17, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident sustained an unexplained head injury resulting in death. Staff did not inform resident's responsible party of incident in a timely manner. Staff did not seek timely medical care for resident.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on the allegations mentioned. LPA met with Administrator Jessica Ramos and explained the purpose of the visit. The Department's investigation involved interviews and records review. Allegation #1- Resident sustained an unexplained head injury resulting in death. Resident #1 (R1) resided at Heritage Gardens Facility. During R1’s residency, R1 sustained an unwitnessed fall. Based on information obtained during the investigation, the fall is believed to have occurred while R1 was attempting to use their wheelchair for mobility assistance. As a result of the incident, R1 sustained bruising to their head and multiple lacerations to their arms. Emergency medical services were contacted, and R1 was transported to Loma Linda University Medical Center for evaluation and treatment. R1 remained hospitalized for four (4) days. During the hospital stay, medical records were reviewed. Unsubstantiated Findings indicated that R1 experienced respiratory complications. A CT scan revealed no abnormalities to the carotid arteries; however, documentation noted a blockage of the internal carotid artery. This condition is associated with an increased risk of neurological impairment, including stroke. Medical review further indicated that R1 had pre-existing conditions. There was no documentation indicating trauma or suspicious activity related to the fall. The attending physician did not attribute R1’s death to the fall. During the investigation, records review and staff interviews were conducted. Documentation reviewed indicated the facility followed the resident’s care plan. The facility implemented measures to address fall risk, including coordination with R1’s private insurance to request additional interventions, such as a bed alarm. At the time of the incident, alarms were in place and operational. Staff conducted routine checks, assisted with medication management, and addressed R1’s mobility needs, including the use of a wheelchair for transfers. On the day of the incident, documentation revealed that R1 received their prescribed medications, and routine checks were completed by staff. Based on the information obtained, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation that the facility failed to provide adequate care and supervision. The allegation of neglect/lack of care and supervision is Unsubstantiated. Allegation #2 - Staff did not inform resident's responsible party of incident in a timely manner. Department staff conducted the investigation and revealed that at the time of the incident, the facility’s Medication Technician (Med-Tech) was notified by R1’s roommate that R1 had fallen. The Med-Tech responded immediately to the room and observed R1 on the floor. The MedTech initiated emergency response procedures. Vital signs were checked, and R1’s level of consciousness was evaluated. Emergency medical services were contacted without delay. Based on the information obtained, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation that the facility failed to inform responsible parties in a timely manner. The allegation is Unsubstantiated. Regarding allegation #3 - Staff did not seek timely medical care for resident. Records reviewed during the investigation documented a dispatch time of 2101 hours. This documentation is consistent with staff statements and supports that emergency medical services were contacted promptly following the incident. The facility staff made timely notifications to the resident’s responsible party, and to the resident’s private insurance provider to address any additional preventive measures related to the incident. Based on the information obtained, the facility responded promptly and appropriately to the incident, including immediate assessment, timely contacting of emergency medical services, and required notifications. The allegation of neglect/lack of care and supervision is Unsubstantiated.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 17, 2026 · control 56-AS-20240927152021
Apr 6, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff neglect resulted in a resident sustaining multiple burns. Staff did not timely address a resident's change in medical condition.

On 04/6/2026,Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Beena Singh conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to deliver findings on a complaint alleging, Staff neglect resulted in a resident sustaining multiple burns and Staff did not timely address a resident's change in medical condition. LPA Singh met with front staff and was granted entry into the facility. LPA Singh was greeted by facility administrator Jessica Ramos and stated the purpose of this visit. The investigation conducted by LPA Singh consisted of observations,interviews and records review. First Alegation:- Staff neglect resulted in a resident sustaining multiple burns. LPA Singh met with the resident to discuss the accidental fire that led to their burn injuries and subsequent admission. The resident admitted that the incident occurred while they were receiving 2 liters of supplemental oxygen at the facility, explaining that they inadvertently attempted to light a cigarette after forgetting they were connected to the supply. R#1 self manage their oxygen and has quit smoking since the incident due to health reasons. This account was corroborated by the reporting party, who noted that the resident had previously been instructed not to smoke in the room while using oxygen. Unsubstantiated Despite the accident, the resident expressed satisfaction with the facility, describing the staff as attentive and stating there were no concerns regarding the quality of care or supervision provided. Second Allegation:- Staff did not timely address a resident's change in medical condition. LPA Singh conducted interviews with staff and residents concerning an un-witnessed fall involving Resident #1 (R1), which occurred while the resident was maneuvering a power chair outside the community while at the bank. Following the incident, the resident confirmed they were evaluated by facility personnel upon their return to the building. The resident further reported that staff provided the necessary medical attention to address the situation, ensuring their health and safety were prioritized after the fall. Statements from the resident, staff, and the reporting party consistently indicated that the facility provides adequate care and supervision, with no evidence of neglect or lack of oversight. Furthermore, Five (5)out of Five(5)residents and Three(3) out three(3) staff corroborated that the facility maintains a high standard of care, noting that personnel are attentive, assist in a timely manner, and respond appropriately to any changes in a resident's medical condition. Statements, records, and interviews obtained did not provide sufficient information to corroborate the allegation. Based on the evidence found during the investigation, the allegations listed above are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. A finding that the complaints are UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. During today’s visit, no deficiencies were cited per Title 22, Division 6, of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted, and this report LIC9099, LIC9099 C were discussed and provided to Facility Administrator Jessica Ramos.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 6, 2026 · control 56-AS-20251106142042
Jan 23, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not provide a safe environment for a resident in care.

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Sarina Ramirez and Eldin Serrano conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to initiate a complaint investigation. LPAs met with Administrator Jessica Ramos, and explained the purpose of the visit. It is alleged staff are not providing a safe environment for a resident in care. Based on interviews with staff and residents, it was determined that Resident 1 (R1) was pushed by Resident 2 and 3 (R2 & R3) on accident. R1, R2, and R3 all are in wheelchairs, R2 can only maneuver in reverse, R2 did not realize R1 was in the same path. R3 is non verbal, Based on interviews it is noted R1 is mostly upset because R2 and R3 did not apologize. Based on LPA's observations and interviews, the above allegation is unsubstantiated. This means that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed, and a copy was provided to Administrator Jessica Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2026 · control 56-AS-20260121131011
Jan 23, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Sarina Ramirez and Eldin Serrano made an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a required annual inspection. LPAs met Administrator Jessica Ramos, and discussed the purpose of the visit. The facility is a Residential Care Facility for Elderly (RCFE) with a license capacity of (64), and a current census of (55). LPAs conducted a general inspection of facility, which included, but was not limited to, the following: Physical Plant: Indoor and outdoor passageways were kept free of obstruction. The facility has no swimming pool or similar bodies of water. The facility has sufficient space for resident activities. Seven (7) resident bedrooms and Seven (7) resident’s bathrooms were inspected, hot water temperature measured at 95 to 106.1 degrees F, technical violation issued. The facility is equipped with operating smoke/carbon monoxide alarms, laundry equipment, and telephone service. The facility has posted in a common area, personal rights, facility sketch, the Community Care Licensing complaint poster, Ombudsman poster, menu, activities, and license. Cleaning supplies and sharps were kept inaccessible to residents in care. Last fire drill was conducted 12/18/25. Food Service: Kitchen and dining areas were maintained cleaned. Non-perishable and perishable food supply is sufficient for number of residents in care. Facility refrigerators and freezers were maintained in operating condition. Health Related services: LPA audited one (1) resident medication at random and found discrepancies, deficiency issued. Resident’s medications are labeled and centrally stored in a locked cart. Continuation on LIC809-C Record Review: Five (5) resident files reviewed were observed to be complete. Five (5) staff files reviewed were observed to be complete. Based on LPAs observations and records reviewed, deficiencies and a technical violation are being cited per Title 22, Division 6, of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted where this report (LIC809), (LIC809-C), LIC 809D, LIC 9102 were discussed to Administrator Jessica Ramos, copies of the reports were provided with appeal rights to the Administrator at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2026

The state marks this report as 5 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 4. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

20254 state visits · 4 documents
Sep 16, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff threatened resident with eviction.

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Sarina Ramirez and Eldin Serrano conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegation. LPAs met with Administrator Jessica Ramos, and discussed the purpose of the visit. Regarding Allegation Staff threatened resident with eviction. It is alleged Resident one (R1) had the option of moving into a single room from their double room or they would get evicted. LPAs interviewed four (4) staff, all 4 informed LPA R1 nor other residents have been threatened to be evicted. LPAs interviewed seven (7) residents, 6 out of 7 stated they have not been threatened with eviction without any notice. 1 out of the 7 residents stated they were threatened to be evicted; they were given the option of moving into a small room or to move out. Based on LPAs observations, record review, and interviews, the above allegations are Unsubstantiated. A finding that complaints are UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted, and this report was discussed, and a copy was provided to Administrator Jessica Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 16, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250911150242
Feb 25, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Sarina Ramirez and Eldin Serrano made an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a required annual inspection. LPAs met Director of Operations Samuel Goings, and discussed the purpose of the visit. The facility is a Residential Care Facility for Elderly (RCFE) with a license capacity of (62), and a current census of (51). LPAs conducted a general inspection of facility, which included, but was not limited to, the following: Physical Plant: Indoor and outdoor passageways were kept free of obstruction. The facility has no swimming pool or similar bodies of water. The facility has sufficient space for resident activities. Four (4) resident bedrooms and Four (4) resident’s bathrooms were inspected, hot water temperature measured at 105.9 degrees F. The facility is equipped with operating smoke/carbon monoxide alarms, laundry equipment, and telephone service. The facility has posted in a common area, personal rights, facility sketch, the Community Care Licensing complaint poster, Ombudsman poster, menu, activities, and license. Cleaning supplies and sharps were kept inaccessible to residents in care. Last fire drill was conducted 02/12/25. Food Service: Kitchen and dining areas were maintained cleaned. Non-perishable and perishable food supply is sufficient for number of residents in care. Facility refrigerators and freezers were maintained in operating condition. The facility has posted a weekly menu. Health Related services: LPAs reviewed four (4) resident medications. Resident’s medications are labeled and centrally stored in a locked room; however staff are not administering medications at prescribed times or signing after administering; deficiency will be issued. Continuation on LIC809-C Record Review: Seven (7) resident files reviewed were observed to be complete. Seven (7) staff files reviewed were observed to be incomplete, S1 had a missing health screening report signed by a physician, technical violation will be issued. Based on LPAs observations and records reviewed, deficiencies are being cited per Title 22, Division 6, of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted where this report (LIC809) and LIC 809D was discussed to Director of Operations Samuel Goings. Copies of the reports were provided with appeal rights to the Director of Operations at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 25, 2025
Feb 5, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Staff unlawfully evicted a resident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Bernadette Allen met with Jessica Ramos Administrator at Community Care Licensing Division (CCLD) Adult and Senior Care (ASC) Regional Office on 2/5/2025 at 1:45 PM to deliver the findings for the above allegation. LPA Allen explained the purpose of the requested office visit. The investigation consisted of interviews with outside parties and file review. During the interviews with outside parties and the administrator, Jessica Ramos, as well as a review of the files, it was confirmed that Resident 1 (R1) received an eviction notice on July 5, 2024. Both Jessica and R1's responsible party have indicated that they have been collaborating to find a new facility that meets R1's needs, but their efforts have been unsuccessful so far. They have both confirmed that R1 has been and will continue to reside at the current facility until suitable housing that meets R1's needs and services is found. Unfounded Based on interviews and evidence gathered during the investigation, the above allegation is found to be Unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted and where this report was discussed with Jessica Ramos Administrator and a copy of the report was provided at the conclusion of the visit with appeal rights.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 5, 2025 · control 56-AS-20240708112046
Jan 16, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Facility staff did not seek timely medical attention for resident in care

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegation. LPA met with Administrator Jessica Ramos, and discussed the purpose of the visit. Regarding the allegation above, LPA’s record review and interviews reveals, R1 lives on the skilled nursing side of the facility. Based on LPA record review and interviews the above allegation is Unfounded. An Unfounded finding means, the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed, and a copy of this report was provided to Administrator Jessica Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unfoundedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 16, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250114091007
20248 state visits · 9 documents
Dec 26, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Staff did not respond to resident's call button in a timely manner. Staff did not follow resident's diet plan. Staff did not allow resident use restroom. Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests. Staff did not ensure resident's bathroom is clean and sanitized.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegations. LPA met with Administrator Jessica Ramos, and discussed the purpose of the visit. Regarding allegations above, The Administrator informed LPA that resident #1 (R1) never resided in the assisted living facility but resided in the skilled nursing facility. LPA obtained a resident roster from the skilled nursing facility that verifies R1 lived at the skilled nursing facility. Based on LPA's interviews and record review, the above allegation is Unfounded. An Unfounded finding means, the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed and a copy of this report was provided to Administrator Jessica Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unfoundedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 26, 2024 · control 56-AS-20241220125755
Dec 6, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff does not ensure facility serves food of good quality to residents in care

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarina Ramirez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegation. LPA met with Administrator Jessica Ramos and discussed the purpose of the visit. Regarding the allegation above, It is alleged that the facility does not stick to the provided daily menu that is displayed for residents. Investigation consisted of review of the food supply, food receipts, and menu. Based on review and interviews with facility staff and residents in the facility the allegation is unsubstantiated. LPA conducted three (3) staff interviews, 3 out of the 3 staff informed LPA the menu almost never gets changed unexpectedly and if it does staff notify residents same day. Interviews with 5 residents in the facility could not corroborate the allegation. Unsubstantiated An Unsubstantiated complaint means, that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Jessica Ramos and a copy was provided to Administrator at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 6, 2024 · control 56-AS-20241204143348
Oct 22, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not ensure resident's needs are met.

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Sarina Ramirez ad Mary Rico conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation on the above allegation. LPAs met with Administrator Jessica Ramos and explained the purpose of the visit. Regarding the allegation above, LPA Ramirez and LPA Rico conducted 5 staff interviews. 5 out of the 5 staff informed LPA residents needs are being met. 3 out of the 5 staff stated to LPAs they encourage residents to be independent, but never refuse assistance. LPA conducted 7 resident interviews. 2 out of the 7 residents stated staff are not ensuring residents needs are being met; 3 out of the 7 residents stated staff ensure their needs are being met, during the investigation 2 out of the 7 residents were unable to answer LPAs questions to corroborate the above allegation. Unsubstantiated Based on record review R1 care plan indicates R1 is independent and is encouraged for self- care tasks. Based on LPAs observations, record review, and interviews, the above allegations are Unsubstantiated. A finding that complaints are UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted, and this report was discussed and provided to Administrator Jessica Ramos along with a copy of the appeal rights.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 22, 2024 · control 56-AS-20241018122741
Oct 15, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure dinner was available to resident in care

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Magda Malcore and Becky Mann conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conclude the investigation on the above allegation. LPAs met with Sam Goings, Director of Operations, and explained the purpose of the visit. The investigation consisted of record review, interviews with staff and residents. Regarding the allegation staff did not ensure dinner was available to resident in care, interviews with outside parties, five (5) staff and six (6) residents reveals, for every meal service, a meal ticket is created and placed along side a meal tray for each resident. Staff deliver the meal trays to the residents in their rooms or in the dining area. All residents interviewed stated that staff have not missed provided them with meal service. Based on evidence obtained during the investigation, the above allegation is Unfounded. Unfounded means the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed and a copy provided to the Director of Operations at the conclusion of the visit. Unfounded Regarding the allegation, unauthorized individual residing in resident's room, there is not enough evidence to corroborate the allegation. Five (5) staff interviewed deny that unauthorized individual are sleeping and residing in residents’ rooms. Five (5) out of six (6) residents interviewed deny that unauthorized individuals are sleeping and residing in their rooms. Based on evidence obtained during the investigation, the above allegations are Unsubstantiated. Although, the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed and a copy of this report was provided with appeal rights to the Director of Operations at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 15, 2024 · control 56-AS-20240627142625
Sep 20, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility staff did not meet resident's incontinence care needs

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Magda Malcore conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conclude the complaint investigation and deliver findings on the above allegation. LPA met with Administrator Jessica Ramos who was informed of today’s visit. Regarding the allegation, staff did not meet the resident's incontinence care needs, interviews with five (5) staff and six (6) residents reveals not enough evidence to corroborate the allegation. Based on LPA record review, staff and resident interviews, the allegation above is Unsubstantiated; meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed and a copy of this report was provided to Administrator Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unsubstantiated An exit interview was conducted where reports (LIC9099/LIC9099C/LI9099-D) were discussed with Administrator Ramos. A copy of the reports were provided with appeal rights to the Administrator at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 20, 2024 · control 56-AS-20240315115831

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87217(b) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 21, 2024

87217 Safeguards for Resident Cash, Personal Property, and Valuables(b)Every facility shall take appropriate measures to safeguard residents' cash resources, personal property and valuables which have been entrusted to the licensee or facility staff. This requirement is not met at evidenced by: The licensee did not comply with the section cited above by not safeguarding R1's personal property as R1's dresser/mirror and night stand were documented at missing.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 20, 2024

Plan of correction: The facility reimbursed resident for missing furniture on 3/14/24. No futher action is required.

Mar 25, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Illegal eviction

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Magda Malcore conducted an announced visit to the facility to conclude a complaint investigation. LPA met with Jessica Ramos, LVN, and discussed the purpose of the visit. Regarding the allegation, illegal eviction, it is alleged that the facility is illegally evicting resident #1 (R1) from the facility. LPA Malcore interviews with staff, residents, outside parties and record review reveal, there is not enough evidence to corroborate the allegation; Therefore, the allegation above is Unsubstantiated. An Unsubstantiated complaint means, that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted with LVN Ramos and a copy of this report with Appeal Rights was provided to LVN Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 25, 2024 · control 56-AS-20240318132655
Feb 26, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff are not providing resident their medications as prescribed.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Magda Malcore conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a complaint investigation. LPA met with Jessica Ramos, LVN, and explained the purpose of the visit. Regarding the allegation, staff are not providing resident their medications as prescribed, it is alleged that staff are intentionally not providing resident with their medications. Six (6) staff interviewed deny not providing resident their medications as prescribed. Five (5) out of (6) residents interviewed stated that staff are providing their medications at prescribed. Based on evidence obtained during this investigation, the allegation above is Unsubstantiated; Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Jessica Ramos at the conclusion of the visit. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 26, 2024 · control 56-AS-20240221152527
Jan 8, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Magda Malcore made an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a required annual inspection. LPA met with Jaclyn Nava, Administrator, and discussed the purpose of the visit. The facility is a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) with a license capacity of (64) and a current census of (50) residents in care. The facility has a hospice waiver for (10) residents. LPA conducted an overall inspection of the facility, which included, but was not limited to, the following: Physical Plant: Indoor and outdoor passageways are free of obstruction. The facility has no bodies of water accessible to residents in care. The facility has sufficient indoor and outdoor shaded areas for resident activities. The facility has sufficient lighting and is maintained at a comfortable temperature. Resident’s bathrooms inspected at random, were operating in safe and sanitary conditions. The hot water temperature in residents' bathrooms measured between 105 and 108 degrees F. Resident’s bedrooms inspected at random, have sufficient lighting and furniture in good repair. Facility has operating carbon monoxide alarms and telephone service. The facility has sufficient linen and personal care items for residents. The facility has posted in a common area, Community Care Licensing complaint poster, Ombudsman poster, evacuation plan, resident monthly activities and resident's personal rights. Food Service: Facility has sufficient non-perishable and perishable food supply for residents in care. The refrigerators and freezers are operating in a healthful manner. Pesticides and other cleaning solutions were kept locked and stored away from food areas. Care & Supervision: Facility has 24-hour, 7 days a week care staff. Record Review: The facility conducted a disaster drill on 9/21/2023. Resident files reviewed were observed to be complete. Review of staff files reveals, the facility did not maintain a health screening with tuberculosis results for staff #1 (S1). Medical Related Services: All medication is centrally stored and kept secure in a locked room. Based on LPA observations and record review, a deficiency is being cited per Title 22, Division 6 of The California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted where reports LIC809/LIC809D/LIC9102 were discussed with the Administrator and copies of the reports with Appeal Rights were provided at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 8, 2024

The state marks this report as 5 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 3. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

Jan 8, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Incident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Magda Malcore conducted an unannounced case management visit to follow-up on an incident reported to Community Care Licensing Division Regional office on 1/05/2024 by the facility. LPA met with Jaclyn Nava, Administrator and discussed the purpose of the visit. During today's, LPA obtained pertinent documentation and conducted interviews with resident #1(R1) and resident #2 (R2). The facility also conducted interviews with staff, residents involved and reported the incident that occurred on 1/03/2024 to the local Ombudsman and Sheriff department. No deficiencies were cited during this visit. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed and a copy of this report was provided to the Administrator at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 8, 2024
20231 state visit · 1 document
Nov 17, 2023Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Magda Malcore made an unannounced visit to conduct a Health and Safety check to the facility. LPA met with Administrator Jaclyn Nava, and discussed the purpose of the visit. LPA Malcore observed no immediate health and safety concerns; However, Administrator Nava did not have an Administrator Certification. Administrator Nava provided LPA verification of Administrator course completion. Administrator Nava stated she will submit a Administrator Certification Application (LIC9214) today, 11/17/23. Based on the observations made during today’s visit, a deficiency was cited per Title 22, Division 6, of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed, and a copies of reports (LIC809/LIC809-D) with Appeal Rights were provided to the Administrator at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 17, 2023

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87406(a) · Plan of correction due date: Nov 22, 2023

(a) All individuals shall be residential care facility for the elderly certificate holders prior to being employed as an administrator. This requirement is not met by: Licensee did not comply with the regulation cite by Administrator Nava did not have an Administrator Certification, which poses an potential health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in carethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 17, 2023

Plan of correction: Licensee/Administrator shall provide verification of a certified and associated Administrator by POC due date.

What the state’s words mean
Substantiatedthe state found the allegation more likely true than notUnsubstantiatedthere was not enough evidence to prove a violation occurred — not a finding of wrongdoingUnfoundedthe evidence showed the allegation was false, could not have happened, or had no reasonable basisType A citationa violation that poses an immediate risk to health, safety or personal rights if it is not correctedType B citationa violation that could become a risk if not corrected, or one involving records, resources or required services

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

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

Life here

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

Find a detail about life at this home.

Rooms & the spaces they will use

  • Shared / companion roomsReported no

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Outdoor spaceGarden

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Room typesStudio

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Common areasCommunal dining room

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • LaundryDone by staff

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Housekeeping

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Salon or barber

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Meals, preferences & familiar food

  • Meals are cooked in the home's own kitchen

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

  • Vegetarian or vegan optionsVegetarian

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Activities & the rhythm of a day

  • Religious services at the home

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Faith, culture & language

  • Languages spoken by caregiversEnglish

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Pets, routines & independence

  • Overnight guests

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Visiting & staying involved

  • Transport for group outings

    Reported on caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.

Before you call

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

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

Other homes nearby

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

Explore San Bernardino County