Large community · Licensed for 76 · Anaheim
Karlton Residential Care Center
3615 West Ball Rd., Anaheim, CA 92804Licensed since 1996
Overview
No openings reported
- Approved by the state: Wheelchair · Dementia · Hospice · BedriddenState licensing record · October 26, 2026
- Licensed for 76: a large care communityThe state license record
Ask this home
Free for families. A home gets your number only if you say yes.
Care and support
- Wheelchairup to 76 residents
- Dementia
- Hospiceup to 15 residents
- Bedriddenup to 76 residents
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
76 NON-AMBULATORY, OF WHICH 76 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN, HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 15, APPROVED FOR SECURED PERIMETER
980 - RCFE / LOCKED
CDSS record, verbatim · October 26, 2026
Care services
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.
Assisted living
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Help with bathing or showering
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Medication storageCentrally stored
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Podiatrist visits
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Incontinence care
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Respite / short-term stays
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Help with dressing and grooming
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Dental care available at the home
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Works with hospice
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Activities of daily living the home lists help withBathing · Dressing · Grooming · Oral care
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Clinicians who come to the homePhysicians · Dentists · Podiatrists · Physician assistants · PA (physicians assist.)
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Continuing education cadenceMonthly
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
24-hour supervision claimed
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
As needs change
Staying through hospice
Hospice waiver on file · covers up to 15 — care may continue at the end of life
State licensing record · October 26, 2026
If memory loss develops
Dementia-care designation on file
State licensing record · October 26, 2026
We’ll ask for you. Not on file for Karlton Residential Care Center: two-person transfers or a lift and help with medicines. When we check availability, we ask about these too.
Check availabilityWhat it costs here
This home’s starting rate
$5,500a month to start
Listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026
Monthly cost breakdownWith a studio and basic help · room, care and fees$5,500likely a month
Starting monthly rate$5,500this home
The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for memory care shared bedroom, seen September 9, 2026. We don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.
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 $5,500–$6,100
- $5,500
- First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $5,500–$9,650
- $8,000
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.
Rates at nearby homes10 nearby homes publish starting rates of $1,200 to $5,783
10 homes like this within 5 miles publish starting rates mostly between $1,650–$4,500.
- Anaheim Crown PlazaAnaheim · 1.2 mi · Large community$2,250Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
- New Horizon LodgeStanton · 1.8 mi · Large community$1,700Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
- Ivy Park at La PalmaLa Palma · 2.5 mi · Large community$4,495Listed on its own website · studio apartments · seen October 27, 2026
- Rowntree GardensStanton · 2.8 mi · Large community$5,063Listed on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026
- Katella Senior Living CommunityLos Alamitos · 3.0 mi · Large community$1,832Listed on its own website · studio · seen October 5, 2026
- Fullerton VillaFullerton · 3.8 mi · Large community$1,200Listed on Seniorly · assisted living shared bedroom · seen September 9, 2026
- Brookdale Garden GroveGarden Grove · 4.0 mi · Large community$2,300Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
- Ivy Park at Seal BeachSeal Beach · 4.4 mi · Large community$4,495Listed on its own website · private studio & companion suites available floor plans · seen October 27, 2026
- Emerald CourtAnaheim · 4.7 mi · Large community$3,500Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
- Walnut VillageAnaheim · 4.9 mi · Large community$5,783Listed on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026
How this estimate worksWhere this price comes from
The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for memory care shared bedroom, seen September 9, 2026. We don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.
- 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.
An estimate for planning, not a quote. A home sets the price after hearing about the care needed.
Daily life
Rooms, meals, activities and house rules, in the home’s own words. Open any detail to see where it came from.
Rooms & the spaces they will use (8)Shared / companion rooms · Outdoor space · Laundry
Shared / companion rooms
Reported on Caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Outdoor spaceTwo patios · Walking paths
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
LaundryDone by staff
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Housekeeping frequencyDaily
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Air conditioning in common areas
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
AmenitiesComplete hair salon
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Housekeeping
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Salon or barber
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Meals, preferences & familiar food (4)Meals provided per day · Special diets supported · Snacks available
Meals provided per day3
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Special diets supportedSpecial diets
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Snacks available
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Meals provided
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Activities & the rhythm of a day (5)The shape of an ordinary day, as the home describes it · Activity types offered · Activity calendar published
The shape of an ordinary day, as the home describes itMemory Activities
Reported on Caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Activity types offeredPicnics on outdoor patios · Sing-alongs · Playing trivia · Activities (daily) · Large and small groups activities · Reminisce · and 1 more
Picnics on outdoor patios · Sing-alongs · Playing trivia · Large and small groups activities · Reminisce · Aromatherapy — reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Activities — reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Activity calendar published
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Activities tailored to the individual
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Exercise or fitness programDaily exercises
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Pets, routines & independence (2)Residents may bring a pet · Stated bathing frequency
Residents may bring a petReported no
Reported on Caring.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Stated bathing frequencyAs needed
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Visiting & staying involved (3)Routine communication cadence · Neighborhood or area named · Events the home invites families to
Routine communication cadenceDaily
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Neighborhood or area namedNorth Orange County
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Events the home invites families to
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
About the home (2)Brand or trade name · Family-owned claim
Brand or trade nameKarlton Residential Care Center
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Family-owned claim
Reported on karltoncare.com · source dated August 7, 2026.
Where it is
3615 West Ball Rd., Anaheim, CA 92804Address from the public record · October 26, 2026. Confirm the entrance with the home before visiting.
Opening the neighborhood map…
- Anaheim Community Hospital, LLCHospital · General acute care, on the state’s list0.4 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 directionsThe 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 #306000295 · See the state’s own record
The last 36 months — 13 of 23 documents
Complaint outcomes in these 36 months, in the state’s words: 1 “Substantiated” and 7 “Unsubstantiated”.
20263 state visits · 3 documents
Sep 22, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident sustained multiple skin lesions and rib fractures due to neglect and lack of supervision.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rose Ruppert conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on an investigation completed by the Department. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility by Matthew Weiner and met with Elena Weiner, Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. During the course of the investigation, the Department interviewed staff and witnesses; and subpoenaed and reviewed hospital medical records. The Department also reviewed documents for Resident #1 (R1) and obtained a resident and staff roster. The investigation revealed the following: Resident #1 (R1) is ninety years old and was admitted to the facility on December 21, 2023. Per Physician report dated March 10, 2025, R1 had a diagnosis of Major Neurocognitive Disorder due to unspecified disease; unspecified Dementia. Physician report further assessed R1 was non-ambulatory and required supervision for self-care needs and activities of daily living. (Continued on LIC 9099-C) Unsubstantiated (Continued from LIC 9099) On February 26, 2026, R1 went to Urgent Care due to scattered rashes on various parts of the body. Per Unusual Incident Report, R1 was assessed by the physician, a treatment was prescribed and staff continued to monitor R1’s skin integrity. On May 2, 2026, R1 was transported to Kaiser Hospital via ambulance, due to lethargy, and was admitted to the hospital. Upon admission, R1 had a small scratch on the left cheek and on the left forearm. Hospital records from May 2, 2026, evaluated R1 with diagnoses of Pleural Effusion Hypoxemia, Shortness of breath and Major Neurocognitive Disorder due to Alzheimer’s Disease. Chest x-rays on this date revealed there was an acute mildly displaced right lateral third rib fracture. R1 remained in the hospital due to aspiration pneumonia and was discharged on May 7, 2026. On May 26, 2026, the Department interviewed Resident #1 (R1) at their new Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE). R1 could not recall when they moved from Karlton Residential Care Center (KRCC) to their current location, or when they were in the hospital. R1 did not remember having any falls but recalled having a rash at KRCC. R1 denied any neglect or lack of supervision by the KRCC facility caregivers. Two of two additional residents interviewed stated that staff were attentive to their needs and that care was being provided. Three of three residents denied the allegation of neglect and lack of supervision. The Department interviewed Witness #1 (W1) who is familiar with R1. The witness stated that the facility notified them of R1’s rash issues and that they were monitoring the rash. W1 stated that R1 has dementia and did not have any complaints or problems with the care R1 received. W1 stated that they, as well as the facility, were not aware of any falls and that the rib fracture was discovered from the last hospital visit when R1 had shortness of breath. W1 denied the allegation that R1 sustained multiple skin lesions and rib fractures due to neglect and lack of supervision. Additionally, four of four staff were interviewed regarding R1’s skin lesions and rib fractures. Four of four staff were unaware of R1 having a fall and sustaining a rib fracture. Staff were informed by the hospital on May 2, 2026, regarding the rib fracture. Four of four staff denied the allegation that the skin lesions and rib fractures were sustained due to staff neglect and lack of supervision. (Continued on LIC 9099-C1) (Continued from LIC 9099-C) Based on the Department’s records review, interviews and observations the allegation that Resident sustained multiple skin lesions and rib fractures due to neglect and lack of supervision is Unsubstantiated. The allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Elena Weiner, and a copy of this report and LIC 811 was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 22, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260504161046
Jul 7, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility failed to ensure resident room is clean and sanitary Facility did not provide incontinence care to resident Facility did not reposition resident per physician order Staff member assisted resident with incontinence care without consent Facility allowed unauthorized personnel to draw blood from resident
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Lyman conducted an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings on the above allegations. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, LPA toured the facility and interviewed staff and witness as well as reviewed and obtained pertinent documentation such as facility notes. Regarding the allegations that facility failed to ensure resident room is clean and sanitary, facility did not provide incontinence care to resident, facility did not reposition resident per physician order, facility allowed unauthorized personnel to draw blood from resident and staff member assisted resident with incontinence care without consent, the investigation revealed the following: Five out of five staff state there was no smells in the resident's room and the room was being cleaned daily. Staff indicate there was a taco in a hospital gown presented by family allegedly found in the closet. Staff deny the facility uses hospital gowns and is unsure where the item came from. LPA toured the facility and facility appeared clean and sanitary. Facility provides incontinence care every 2 hours or as needed along with repositioning. CONTINUED ON LIC 9099C DATED 07/07/2026 Unsubstantiated Two out of two caregivers as well as Administrator interviewed confirm incontinence care and repositioning was being provided to Resident 1 (R1). Facility uses resident monitoring checklists and review of checklists show caregivers were documenting incontinence care. R1's responsible party requested female caregivers only and staff state honoring the wishes. However, male staff would assist with transfers and repositioning due to resident requiring a two person assist. While transitioning from care in Los Angeles, a phlebotomist arrived to the facility in October 2025 to draw blood from the resident. The Administrator indicates the draw did not happen and both Administrator and family were advising the medical group to discontinue care for the resident. LPA reviewed emails to that affect. Seven out of seven staff denied all allegations through written statements obtained by LPA. Based on the interviews conducted and record review, the Department is unable to corroborate the allegations. Therefore, the allegations are found to be Unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegations may have happened or are valid; there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violations did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted, and this report was reviewed with Facility Representative. A copy of this report was provided to a facility representative.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 7, 2026 · control 22-AS-20260223134858
Mar 26, 2026Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rose Ruppert made an unannounced visit to conduct an Annual Required Evaluation. LPA was greeted and granted entry and met with Administrator (AD) Elena Weiner at 8am. The facility is a single story building with a fire clearance of seventy six non-ambulatory and seventy six bedridden. A hospice waiver is approved for fifteen residents. Currently there are forty-seven residents in care and eight residents receive hospice services. The facility was a comfortable 74 degrees. LPA toured the facility with AD and tested the hot water temperature in four of four resident bathrooms. The hot water temperatures ranged between 112.4 and 115.9 degrees Fahrenheit. The fire alarms, carbon monoxide detectors and sprinkler system were inspected by an outside vendor on October 22, 2025 and passed inspection. The fire extinguishers were charged and inspected on May 6, 2025. The fire extinguishers will be inspected in two weeks for 2026 and the next fire alarm inspection for the facility will be scheduled in July 2026. The last fire drill was conducted on January 13, 2026. During the visit LPA observed residents listening to music in the television area and participating in activities such as ball toss and Bingo. Hazardous chemicals were stored and locked in three different locations: the kitchen, a locked storage room and in the laundry area; which is a separate area outside of the building which residents do not have access to. Washer and dryers were operational. All secured chemical areas had binders with Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) and pictures of the chemicals. Upon touring the kitchen, the facility had more than two-days of perishable items and seven-days of non-perishable food on hand. (Continued on LIC 809-C) (Continued from LIC 809) A grocery delivery was to be delivered in the afternoon. The oil extinguisher, in the kitchen, was charged and inspected on May 6, 2025. Sharps and knives are secured in the kitchen and special diet instructions for residents were observed and separated on different carts with a color coding system. The dining room area was clean and LPA was told all dining room chairs are being updated and replaced. LPA toured the shaded central courtyard and the facility is also getting brand new patio furniture. There are no hazards or obstructions in the patio area; only sandbags which were used during the rainy season. LPA reviewed three of three staff training and fingerprint records and reviewed five of five resident records. Staff in-services coincide on pay days and cover a variety of topics. LPA interviewed alert residents regarding their quality of care and spoke to staff present regarding care provided. LPA audited five of five Medication Administration Records and medications were being given as prescribed. Based on the observations made during today’s visit, the facility appears to be in compliance with Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, no deficiencies cited on this date. An exit interview was conducted with Elena Weiner, Administrator and a copy of the report and files reviewed (LIC 858 & LIC 859) were given at the time of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 26, 2026
20255 state visits · 8 documents
Dec 16, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Lack of supervision resulting in resident sustaining multiple falls
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Samer Haddadin conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to deliver findings regarding the above-mentioned allegation. Upon arrival, LPA was greeted and granted entry by AD Weiner Elena . The investigation revealed that Resident (R1) was admitted to the facility on May 18, 2023. The Physician’s Report dated May 17, 2023, documented diagnoses of seizures, epilepsy, and dementia, and indicated R1 was non-ambulatory, required full assistance with all Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), and had generalized weakness. R1 was admitted under hospice care through Vitas Hospice of Orange County with terminal diagnoses of cerebrovascular disease and hypothyroidism. Hospice records indicated that R1 was completely dependent for all ADLs, incontinent of bowel and bladder, and identified as a high fall risk due to agitation and confusion. {***CONTINUE***9099C1} Substantiated The facility’s Appraisal and Needs and Services Plan dated May 18, 2023, contained only general instructions for redirection with ADLs and noted R1 “walks very fast at times.” It did not include individualized plan, instructions, directives or a defined supervision plan to ensure adequate supervision or preventative fall strategies. Between October 2023 and April 2025, R1 sustained at least nine documented falls. The earliest known incident occurred on October 29, 2023, when R1 fell while attempting to transfer from their bed to wheelchair per Vitas Hospice records. R1 was assessed by Vitas Hospice on November 2, 2023, and documented to have a skin tear to the left elbow. The facility had no records documenting the fall, assessing the R1 and discovering and treating the tear. Ten days later R1 sustained a second fall on November 8, 2023, and complained of left hip pain. R1 was transferred to Kaiser Hospital and diagnosed with left intertrochanteric femur fracture and underwent surgical repair the following day. R1 was later transferred to South Coast Post Acute Care for Rehabilitation. The facility’s internal self-report reflects the fall entry was not documented until November 29, 2023. Despite the seriousness of the incident, no significant changes were made to R1’s supervision schedule or care plan. On February 19, 2024, hospice documented that R1 was a high fall risk and uncooperative with transfers. On June 27, 2024, Hospice again documented that R1 was a high fall risk. On July 08, 2024, R1 sustained another fall as documented by Vitas Hospice. No injuries were noted on the report. Hospice records documented R1 sustained a follow up fall on August 11, 2024, and did not sustain any serious injuries. On December 17, 2024, R1 complained of knee pain and swelling which was reported by the facility Med Tech to Vitas Hospice nurse. The visiting nurse prescribed Tylenol for R1’s pain and instructions to staff to monitor the swelling and contract hospice if needed. On December 26, 2024, R1 was observed to still have left knee swelling by the hospice doctor, however, facility staff denied R1 sustaining any fall. A subsequent X-ray completed on December 27, 2024, by Pacific Coast Mobile Radiology confirmed a complete transverse fracture of the distal left femur. Facility documentation stated that R1 kicked the bed railing. Despite the seriousness of the incident, no significant changes were made to R1’s supervision schedule or care plan. The facility did not re-appraise R1. R1’s Physician’s Report was updated on March 13, 2024, and March 6, 2025, and reaffirmed that R1 remained non-ambulatory and dependent for all transfers. {***CONTINUE 9099C2} On March 10, 2025, R1’s appraisal was updated and notated that they were a fall risk and was sent to the hospital for behavioral management. The Needs and Services Plan documented that R1 constantly attempted to get up and walk unassisted due to confusion yet still lacked specific plan, instructions or directives regarding supervision frequency or staffing interventions. On March 20, 2025, R1 sustained an unwitnessed fall and was found by facility staff on the floor with no visible injuries noted. On April 16, 2025, R1 was observed to have a bruise to their left forehead. Two days later, hospice held a meeting with the facility staff and documented that a six-bed facility may be more appropriate to meet R1’s increased needs. Later that night, R1 sustained an unwitnessed fall around 8 PM. Hospice records note that the facility refused a visit upon the fall and requested hospice to visit the following day. Interviews conducted revealed that the Administrator (AD) stated staff were expected to conduct resident checks every fifteen to thirty minutes during the day and every fifteen minutes at night. However, interviews with two of two caregivers indicated that checks were typically conducted approximately every two hours. Hospice records documented repeated recommendations for increased supervision, and when they attempted to discuss the matter with the Administrator (AD), AD replied that she was “too busy.” Facility documentation reflected that bed rails, bed alarms, and floor mats were in place. However, multiple hospice notes indicated delayed or inconsistent staff response, demonstrating that these measures were insufficient to prevent repeated falls and injuries. Based on review of hospice medical records, hospital discharge summaries, facility incident reports, and interviews with staff and hospice personnel, the facility failed to modify its supervision plan or implement effective interventions despite repeated falls and serious injuries to R1 over an 18-month period. The preponderance of evidence has been met and the allegation Lack of supervision resulting in resident sustaining multiple falls is deemed to be SUBSTANTIATED. The following is being cited per Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. A Civil Penalty is pending determination by Community Care Licensing Division as per Health & Safety Code 1569.49(f). An exit interview was conducted, and copies of this report, LIC 9099-D, Appeal Rights, Immediate Civil Penalty Assessment, and LIC 811 (Confidential Names) were provided to AD, Weiner Elena, at the conclusion of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 16, 2025 · control 22-AS-20250417112836
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87464(f)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Dec 29, 2025
87464(f)(1) “Basic services shall at a minimum include: Care and Supervision” This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on record review, interviews, and observations, the facility failed to provide adequate Care and supervision and follow-up interventions for R1, who sustained multiple falls, including a hip fracture and femur fracture, without corresponding changes in their supervision plan or care strategy. This lack of supervision posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 16, 2025
Plan of correction: Licensee will conduct a review of title 22 section 87464(f)(1) and provide a documented training for all working staff in the facility. Training record will be kept in staff file and send proof to LPA by POC due date
Dec 16, 2025Facility evaluation reportCase Management - DeficienciesDeficiency pages: Type A, Type B
Type of visit: Case Management - Deficiencies
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Samer Haddadin conducted an announced case management visit to the facility. LPA Haddadin was greeted and granted entry by Administrator (AD) Weiner Elena. The purpose of the visit was to address deficiencies identified during the investigation of complaint #22-AS-20250417112836. The following deficiencies were observed: Per hospice records, between October 2023 and April 2025, R1 sustained at least nine documented falls. The earliest occurred on October 29, 2023, when R1 fell while attempting to transfer from bed to wheelchair. On November 2, 2023, Hospice record also showed that R1 had a skin tear to the left elbow. Facility had no records documenting regarding the falls or the skin tear. R1 sustained a second fall on November 8, 2023, and complained of left hip pain. R1 was transferred to Kaiser Hospital and diagnosed with left intertrochanteric femur fracture and underwent surgical repair the following day. R1 was later transferred to Post Acute Care for Rehabilitation. The facility’s internal self-report reflects the fall entry was not documented until November 29, 2023. Despite the seriousness of the incident, no significant changes were made to R1’s supervision schedule or care plan. On December 17, 2024, R1 complained of knee pain and swelling which was reported by the facility Med Tech to Vitas Hospice nurse. The visiting nurse prescribed Tylenol for R1’s pain and instructions to staff to monitor the swelling and contract hospice if needed. {***CONTINUE***809C} On December 26, 2024, R1 was observed to still have left knee swelling by the hospice doctor, however, facility staff denied R1 sustaining any fall. A subsequent X-ray completed on December 27, 2024, by Pacific Coast Mobile Radiology confirmed a complete transverse fracture of the distal left femur, resulting in a ten day delay of diagnosis and treatment of R1’s injuries. On February 19, 2024, hospice documented that R1 was a high fall risk and uncooperative with transfers. On June 27, 2024, Hospice again documented that R1 was a high fall risk. Despite this, updates to the facility’s Needs and Services Plans dated May 18, 2023, May 18, 2024, and March 10, 2025, did not address R1’s increased needs of supervision. The facility did not revise the plans as required to reflect R1’s high fall risk and need for closer supervision and assistance. Furthermore, between October 2023 and April 2025, the facility reported only one fall incident to Community Care Licensing, which was received on April 25, 2025. A search of the SIR portal system confirmed that no other fall incidents were reported during this period. Based on record review, the following are being cited per Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report, confidential names list and appeal rights were provided at the time of exit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 16, 2025
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87463(b)(1)(E · Plan of correction due date: Dec 16, 2025
87463(b)(1)(E) ".Appraisal, shall be updated in writing as frequently as necessary" Based on record review, the facility did not update R1’s Needs and Services Plan following significant changes in condition, including nine falls resulting in two fractures between November 2023 and December 2024. The Needs and Services Plans dated May 18, 2023, May 18, 2024, and March 10, 2025, did not include individualized supervision requirements or interventions necessary to address R1’s fall risk needs. This posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 16, 2025
Plan of correction: Administrator will conduct training and update all current residents’ Needs and Services Plan and sent proof to LPA by POC due date
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR87465(a)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Dec 16, 2025
87465(a)(1)"licensee shall arrange, or assist in arranging, for medical care appropriate to the conditions and needs of residents"Based on record review, the facility did not ensure that R1 received timely medical attention following a change in condition. On December 17, 2024, R1 sustained a fracture of the distal left femur; however, R1 did not receive an x-ray diagnosing the fracture until approximately 10 days after initial swelling. This posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in carethe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 16, 2025
Plan of correction: Licensee along with Administrator will conduct training to all staff and in the facility and signed and date training conducted; training must be filed, and send proof to LPA by POC due date
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87211(a)(1)(D) · Plan of correction due date: Dec 16, 2025
87211(a)(1)(D)"licensee shall furnish to the licensing agency such reports as the Department may require, including Any incident which threatens the welfare, safety or health of any resident" Based on record search of CCL SIR portal system the facility did not report incidents involving R1 that threatened the resident’s health and safety: nine repeated fall resulting in at least two fractures between November 2023 and December 2024. The facility’s failure to submit the required incident reports posed a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 16, 2025
Plan of correction: Licensee along with Administrator will conduct training to all staff as to when and how to report incidents to CCL, and send proof to LPA by POC due date
Nov 6, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Lack of supervision resulting in resident sustaining multiple falls.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ruth Martinez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conclude investigation into the above identified complaint allegation. LPA arrived at the facility and was greeted at the door and granted entry. LPA spoke with Elena Weiner, Administrator, and explained the purpose of the visit. Findings are based upon this investigation which included tour of the facility, resident file review, and interviews conducted. It is alleged that lack of supervision resulting in resident sustaining multiple falls. Records review revealed that resident (R1) was admitted to the facility on January 26, 2024, with a diagnosis of Congestive Heart Failure and no history of falls. Appraisal needs and services plan was completed on January 26, 2024, Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated and on May 6, 2024, when the change of condition was noted. R1 had an incident on May 2, 2024, which was due to R1 having a UTI. May 6, 2024, incident was for an unwitnessed fall. Both incidents R1 was sent to two different hospitals for evaluation. Interview with staff stated that despite the first incident being ruled as a UTI, bed alarm and also half side rail was implemented with prescription. Upon noted change of condition they reassessed R1 on May 6, 2024, and made the necessary changes. Interview with 4 of 4 residents stated that staff check on them often, help them when they need help and are good to them. Residents stated they had no complaints to make. Based on the information mentioned above, the Department is unable to ascertain if the allegation occurred as reported. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove or refute the alleged violation occurred; therefore, this allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with the Administrator and a copy of this LIC9099 report was left at facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 6, 2025 · control 22-AS-20240506110111
Nov 6, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident sustained pressure injuries while in care. Staff leaves resident in wheel chair for extended periods of time. Staff does not ensure resident's podiatry needs are being met. Staff does not ensure resident's hygiene needs are being met.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ruth Martinez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conclude investigation into the above identified complaint allegation. LPA arrived at the facility and was greeted at the door and granted entry. LPA spoke with Elena Weiner, Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. Findings are based upon this investigation which included tour of the facility, resident file review, and interviews conducted. It is alleged that resident sustained pressure injury while in care. Interview with staff stated that resident (R1) was sent out to the hospital on August 31, 2024, and returned the same day with home health referral. Record review revealed that R1 was sent to hospital on August 31, 2024, for left foot pain and Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated swelling. Discharge paperwork indicates R1 with cellulitis. The appraisal needs and services plan indicated that R1 had skin break down and a home health was ordered for her care. Continuous care was provided by home health as well as a physical therapy evaluation. It is alleged that staff leaves resident in wheelchair for extended periods of time. Interview with staff stated that R1 gets transferred out to their bed after lunch per R1’s request and was moved often. Staff stated that R1 gets physical therapy at the facility by an outside vendor. Records review revealed that progress notes from September and October 2024 reflect that R1 received physical therapy treatments. Resident monitoring logs for R1 reflect that R1 is moved out of the wheelchair often throughout the day. It is alleged that staff does not ensure resident's podiatry needs are being met. Interview with staff stated that R1 and residents from the facility received podiatry services at the facility by an outside vendor that would come and provide services. Interview with 5 of 5 residents indicated that a person comes and does their nails and looks at their feet at the facility. It is alleged that staff does not ensure resident's hygiene needs are being met, specifically to not being showered. Records review revealed that facility maintained a shower list for R1 and reflects that R1 received showers various times throughout the week. Interview with 5 of 5 residents stated that the staff make sure they shower at all times. Based on the information mentioned above, the Department is unable to ascertain if the allegations occurred as reported. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove or refute the alleged violations occurred; therefore, these allegations are deemed Unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with the Administrator and a copy of this LIC9099 report was left at facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 6, 2025 · control 22-AS-20241007132932
Nov 6, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility did not ensure that resident was kept clean and dry Facility did not ensure that resident was accorded dignity.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ruth Martinez conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conclude investigation into the above identified complaint allegation. LPA arrived at the facility and was greeted at the door and granted entry. LPA spoke with Elena Weiner, Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. Findings are based upon this investigation which included tour of the facility, resident file review, and interviews conducted. It is alleged that facility did not ensure that resident was kept clean and dry. Interview with staff stated that resident (R1) was never left in soiled diapers and when R1 calls for a diaper change they change them even if it’s every five minutes. Interview with R1 stated that staff change their diaper as needed. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated R1 stated that they have never had a problem by being left in a soiled diaper. R1 stated that they wake up in a dry bed and they don’t recall being in soiled pants for over 4 hours. Record review monitoring logs from October 1, 2024, to November 20, 2024, reflected that R1 was changed every 2 hours or as needed for soiled diaper. It is alleged that facility did not ensure that resident was accorded dignity, specifically to hitting R1. Interview with resident stated that facility staff treat them good and treat them with respect and dignity. Record review shift notes revealed that on November 11, 2024, R1 was sent out to the hospital due to R1 being aggressive and agitated, R1 pushing care staff and refusing to get help, unable to control. Monitoring logs from October 1, 2024, to November 20, 2024, reflect that R1 when agitated they hit and push staff and refused to get help. Based on the information mentioned above, the Department is unable to ascertain if the allegations occurred as reported. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove or refute the alleged violations occurred; therefore, these allegations are deemed Unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with the Administrator and a copy of this LIC9099 report was left at facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 6, 2025 · control 22-AS-20241113114841
May 23, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident sustained severe injuries while care
On 05/23/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassandra Mikkelson contacted the licensee via phone and email to deliver final findings regarding a complaint that was received on 08/05/2024. **Report continued on 9099- C page** Unsubstantiated Resident sustained severe injuries while care Interviews conducted with Administrator indicated that Resident R1 was considered a fall risk so staff monitored closely and escort R1 when they walk around the facility. Interviews with care staff indicated that R1 had fallen on 7/30/2024 while in the dining room. R1 attempted to stand on their own but was unable and they fell to a sitting position on the floor. Staff were quick to help R1 and check for injuries. Records reviewed indicated that R1 was a fall risk and needed assistance with moving about the facility and needed overnight observation due to wandering risk. Incident reports reviewed indicated that R1 had bruising/discoloration on forehead and right eye when R1 was admitted to facility on 07/28/2024. R1 also had a fall on 07/30/2024 which both physician and responsible party were notified about. Facility staff quickly and appropriately assisted R1. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, the allegation resident sustain sever injuries while in care is unsubstantiated. Licensee was advised a copy of this report will be sent via certified mail. Two copies of this report will be sent. The Licensee is to sign and return a copy to the Orange County Regional office.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 23, 2025 · control 22-AS-20240805115109
Mar 12, 2025Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rose Ruppert made an unannounced visit to the facility today to conduct an Annual Required Evaluation. LPA was greeted and granted entry and met with Elena Weiner, Administrator (AD). The facility is a single story building with an approved fire clearance of seventy-six non-ambulatory and bedridden residents of which fifteen may be on hospice. The facility currently has a census of forty-eight residents in care with eight receiving hospice services. During today’s visit, LPA toured the facility and inspected the physical plant, including but not limited to testing hot water temperature in five of five resident bathrooms. The hot water temperature measured between 114.9 and 117.5 degrees Fahrenheit. Fire extinguishers were charged and serviced on July 2, 2024. The facility’s last fire drill was conducted on January 4, 2025. Building sprinklers, smoke and carbon monoxide alarms were tested with an outside vendor on April 10, 2024. LPA and AD inspected the facility kitchen food supply and observed the facility retained a minimum of two days perishable and seven days non-perishable food on hand. Food expiration dates were clearly written on food items. LPA observed medication storage and reviewed the centrally stored medications with AD and MedTech. LPA discussed with AD and MedTech writing start dates on bubble packs for easier inventory and audit. Per review medications are being given as prescribed. The facility has an enclosed indoor courtyard and shaded seating areas were observed. There were no hazards or obstructed passageways outdoors. LPA toured the laundry area which is separate from the main building which is inaccessible to residents. (Continued on LIC 809-C) (Continued from LIC 809) LPA reviewed five of five staff training and fingerprint records and reviewed five of five resident records. LPA interviewed alert residents regarding their quality of care and spoke to staff present regarding care provided. LPA observed residents participating in a music sing-a-long and in Bingo. LPA confirmed that administrator has a current administrator certificate which expires on July 20, 2025. Based on the observations made during today’s visit, the facility appears to be in compliance with Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, no deficiencies cited on this date. An exit interview was conducted with Elena Weiner, Administrator and a copy of the report and files reviewed (LIC 858 & LIC 859) were given at the time of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 12, 2025
Feb 28, 2025Facility evaluation reportCase Management - IncidentReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Incident
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Rose Ruppert made an unannounced case management visit to follow-up on an Unusual/ Special Incident Report (SIR) received in our Regional Office on February 18, 2025. LPA was greeted and granted entry at 1pm by Staff #1. LPA met with Administrator (AD) Elena Weiner and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA obtained the following for review: Current resident and staff rosters, Resident Identification and Emergency Information, Physician's Report and Preplacement Appraisal Information. LPA requested the staffing schedule for February 12, 2025; the date when the incident occurred. LPA also obtained hospital discharge paperwork. LPA interviewed two of three staff members who witnessed the incident. Staff members stated that the incident was brief. Staff #1 had been in the resident's room and went to answer the door. Two other staff members were nearby when the resident began to slip from the bed. Resident does not have a history of falls. The resident tried to get up as the two staff members attempted to help resident and Staff #2 immediately called 911 and notified the family. Resident was sent out to the hospital for evaluation. The resident has returned to the community. LPA interviewed the resident who stated she did not feel pain. She did not remember the events that transpired on February 12, 2025 but stated she is not completely fine; just okay. LPA reviewed the staffing schedule and noted there were two med techs and eight caregivers on-site at the time of the incident. Based on the observations, record review and interviews made during today’s visit, the facility appears to be in compliance with Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, no deficiencies cited on this date. An exit interview was conducted with Elena Weiner, Administrator and a copy of the report and files reviewed (LIC 858 & LIC 859) were given at the time of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 28, 2025
20242 state visits · 2 documents
Jul 30, 2024Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Michael Tea conducted an unannounced visit. The purpose of today’s visit was to conduct the Annual Required inspection. At around 8:00 AM, LPA Tea was greeted and granted entry into the facility by caregiver Rosa Ramirez and explained the reason for the visit. The Administrator (AD) Elena Weiner and Assistant Administrators (AA) Matthew Weiner and Sylvia Garcia arrived shortly after to assist during the visit. The facility is a residential care facility for elders, focused on memory care. The facility is licensed for 76 non-ambulatory residents, in which 76 may be bedridden, and have a hospice waiver for 15. Currently there are 52 residents in care and 8 of the residents are on hospice. At 8:15 AM, LPA Tea reviewed six resident files and six staff files. Resident files and staff files contained all required documentation. Upon review of records, the facility is up to date with required quarterly fire drill, which was last conducted on June 15, 2024. AD Weiner’s current certificate expires on July 20, 2025, but due to the department’s back log in processing administrator certificates she has yet to physically receive her administrator certificate. LPA Tea along with AD Weiner and AA Matthew Weiner toured the physical plant at 10:58 AM. LPA toured the physical plant, checked food service, and the first aid kit. The facility is a single-story unit building that consists of 38 resident rooms with shared bathrooms. There are common areas, dining rooms, resident shower rooms, and kitchen for meal preparation. In the middle of the facility is the courtyard where there is a shaded patio seating area for residents to enjoy. The kitchen was inspected. Perishable and non-perishable food supply was checked and adequately stocked at time of visit. Emergency food supplies were in the pantry of the kitchen and emergency water supply was stored in a secured closet in the front part of the facility. Annual continuation on LIC809C LPA observed smoke detectors/carbon monoxide in common areas and bedrooms are operational. The fire and smoke detectors are serviced and maintained through a third-party company. They were last serviced on May 28, 2024. Fire extinguishers are fully charged throughout the facility. Resident bedrooms had the required furniture, bed linens and closet/drawer space to accommodate each client comfortably. Resident bathrooms were checked. Toilets and water faucets worked properly. Grab bars were secure, and showers were free of mold/mildew in resident shower rooms. Water temperature measured between 117.1 F degrees and 128 F degrees being the highest. AA Weiner adjusted the water temperature of the water tanks to meet regulation standards while on site. It would take half day for the tank to adjust to the temperature changes due to the size of the water tanks. Resident bath towels, toiletries and personal hygiene supplies were adequately stocked at time of visit. Common areas were clean and clear of hazards, doorways were free of obstructions. LPA Tea observed residents in the morning and throughout the day doing exercises in the common area. Residents were also singing songs and playing bingo later in the afternoon. Activities are posted in the front and back of the facility with different activities for residents to participate. At 11:45 AM LPA reviewed medication storage and administration. Medications are stored in a med room that is locked and secured. Medications are being administered per physician order. LPA interviewed residents regarding their quality of care and spoke to staff present regarding care provided. Based on the observation made during today’s visit, no deficiencies were noted today in the areas inspected per Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. This report was reviewed with Assistant Administrators Matthew Weiner and Sylvia Garcia a copy of this report LIC809, 809-C, LIC858, LIC859, and LIC9102TV was read and provided to the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 30, 2024
The state marks this report as 4 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 2. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.
May 6, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff are not following infection control practices Staff failed to provide adequate incontinence care to a resident
On this day, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kevin Saborit-Guasch made an unannounced visit to the facility for the purpose of following up on the investigation of the two allegations listed above. LPA was greeted and granted entry by facility staff after explaining the purpose of the visit. Administrator Elena Weiner was present on the premises and assisted with the visit. An initial complaint investigation visit was held on February 13, 2024. LPA accompanied by administrator conducted a tour of the facility's physical plant including a dedicated unit currently in place after a total of 18 residents tested positive for COVID starting on or around February 5th, 2024. LPA reviewed resident clipboards maintained for residents flagged with risks of skin breakdown due to the use of incontinence supplies and was provided a list of residents being provided with incontinence supplies. CONTINUED ON FORM LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated CONTINUED FROM LIC9099 During the follow-up visit, LPA conducted or attempted interviews with five residents out of the 49 currently admitted individuals, multiple of which were among the residents who tested positive during the COVID outbreak reported in February 2024. Regarding the allegation that Staff are not following infection control practices, the following has been concluded: During the walk-through of the facility conducted on February 13, 2024, LPA observed that all residents who had tested positive had been put in isolation in a clearly identified wing of the facility. The use of Personal Protection Equipment was confirmed and disposal bins for donning and doffing were observed at both exits of the isolation section of the facility. It was also confirmed that facility had reported the cases as required and solicited guidance from the local public health authority and used that guidance to manage the outbreak. The presence of COVID-positive residents was confirmed to be notified to potential visitors and marked throughout the facility. Regarding the allegation Staff failed to provide adequate incontinence care to a resident, the following has been concluded: during the walk-through of the facility's physical plant as well as during interviews conducted during the present visit, LPA observed residents were clean, well-kept and that the facility was free of odors associated with the failure to manage incontinence. Interviews conducted failed to corroborate a failure to provide adequate incontinence care to the residents. Furthermore, records reviewed during the visit demonstrated the presence of a surveillance system designed to ensure the adequate monitoring of residents with incontinence issues. As a result, both allegations are found to be Unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegations may have happened or are valid; there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violations did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted, and this report was reviewed with Executive Director. A copy of this report was provided to a facility representative.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 6, 2024 · control 22-AS-20240209141147
Earlier years2021 to 2022 · 10 documents
20226 state visits · 9 documents
Dec 12, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Lack of supervision resulting in multiple falls.
This unannounced inspection is being conducted by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sean Haddad for the purpose of delivering findings for the investigation into the above identified complaint allegation. LPA met with Administrator (AD) Elena Weiner and explained the reason for today’s inspection. The investigation into the allegation of Lack of supervision resulting in multiple falls revealed the following: During the course of the investigation, LPA inspected the facility, interviewed AD, staff, residents, and witnesses, and requested and reviewed copies of the resident roster, staff roster, Resident #1’s (R1) Resident Appraisal (LIC603A) dated 12/31/19, R1’s Appraisal/Needs and Services Plan (LIC625) dated 01/03/20, R1’s Physician’s Reports (LIC602A) dated 12/31/19, 09/15/20, 02/21/22, and 06/22, Unusual Incident/Injury Reports (LIC624) dated 07/04/22 and 08/03/22, and R1’s Medical Records dated 12/01/22 and 11/22/22. It was reported that on 11/22/22 R1 had a fall at the facility and that this was R1’s third fall this year. On 12/01/22, LPA conducted a health and safety check on R1, observed no health and safety issues, and observed that R1 had a mild bruise that appeared to be healed. Unsubstantiated LPA interviewed R1 who stated the facility took good care of them, but was unable to provide additional information. LPA reviewed R1’s Resident Appraisal (LIC603A) dated 12/31/19, R1’s Appraisal/Needs and Services Plan (LIC625) dated 01/03/20, and R1’s Physician’s Reports (LIC602A) dated 12/31/19, 09/15/20, 02/21/22, and 06/22 which indicate that R1 has Dementia, is non-ambulatory, has a history of falls, and is considered a fall risk. LPA reviewed an Unusual Incident/Injury Report (LIC624) dated 07/04/22 which states that on 06/30/22 R1 tried to get up from their wheelchair, fell forward, and suffered a cut to their forehead. LPA reviewed an Unusual Incident/Injury Report (LIC624) dated 08/03/22 which states that on 07/29/22 R1 lost consciousness while on their wheelchair and suffered a cut to their forehead. This fall was investigated in connection with Complaint Control No. 22-AS-20220729170339. LPA interviewed facility staff who stated that on 11/22/22 R1 was in one of the front common areas on a couch, R1 thought a family member was there and tried to get up to see them, but slid off the couch and hit their head on the armrest of the couch, and that this incident was witnessed with staff present. LPA interviewed AD who stated that this incident was not a true fall because R1 slide off of the couch as opposed to falling while walking or standing, that R1 was not injured, that the facility offered to take R1 to the hospital via ambulance to ensure that there were no injuries or medical conditions relating to the incident, but that R1’s family decided to take R1 to the hospital themselves. AD stated that R1 was in the front common room on 11/22/22 as a fall precaution because residents in that room are closely observed by staff, but that R1 was not considered to be at a particularly high risk of falls at the time and had been doing well recently. LPA inspected the front common room and confirmed that this is where residents who are fall risks are observed closely by staff. After the incident on 11/22/22, AD and R1’s family discussed possible alternative placement for R1 due to R1’s fall risk, but R1’s family wanted to try medication changes and wanted to keep R1 at the facility. LPA interviewed R1’s family who stated that the incident on 11/22/22 was the result of R1 becoming agitated because R1 believed a family member was there to visit them when that was not the case, that R1 was not seriously injured during the incident, that R1’s family wants to keep R1 at the facility and a different facility would be a new environment that could lead to increased agitation, that R1’s family has no complaints about the facility or the care and supervision R1 receives there, and that R1 was placed on a new medication after 11/22/22 to help with the agitation. LPA reviewed R1’s Medical Records dated 12/01/22 which show a new psychotropic medication was prescribed to R1. LPA reviewed R1’s Medical Records dated 11/22/22 which state that R1 was diagnosed with a “Fall in elderly patient” and “Cephalhematoma” but that no other injuries were noted. AD stated that the facility is currently taking the following precautions and measures to address R1’s falls: a new medication for agitation; a scheduled evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the medication; home health checks on R1 once or twice a week; a behavior log to track R1’s behavior and fall risk; 1-on-1 supervision as necessary and approved by the family; calling R1’s family to speak to R1 when necessary to ease agitation; and keeping R1 under close observation. However, AD stated that if R1 continues to have falls, R1 may need a higher level of care than the facility can provide and AD will work with R1’s family to find new placement. While R1 had a recent fall at the facility, the investigation did not corroborate lack of care and supervision by the facility in connection with the fall. Based on the information gathered during the investigation and review of all documents obtained, the Department is unable to ascertain if the allegation occurred as reported. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove or refute the alleged violation occurred; therefore, this allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 12, 2022 · control 22-AS-20221123123607
Oct 13, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff did not prevent multiple falls from resident's wheelchair
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Lyman made an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings on the above allegation. LPA was greeted and granted entry by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, LPA toured the facility, interviewed staff and witnesses as well as reviewed and obtained pertinent documentation such as hospital discharge paperwork. Regarding the allegation that staff did not prevent multiple falls from resident's wheelchair, the investigation revealed the following: Resident 1 (R1) was seen in the emergency room on 06/30/2022 for a closed head injury after falling out of the resident's wheelchair. Facility staff indicate the resident passed out in the wheelchair and fell forward. On 07/07/2022, R1 was sent out for lethargy and not eating. R1 was determined to be septic and had an endoscopy to determine gallstones and common bile duct issues. Resident would subsequently have common bile duct surgery on 07/10/2022. Since the surgery, R1 has had no episodes of syncope. Facility indicates resident has a bed alarm and is always in the common area where there are staff watching the resident. Due to conflicting information, LPA is unable to corroborate the allegation. CONTINUED ON LIC 9099C DATED 10/13/2022. Unsubstantiated Therefore, the allegation is deemed unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted with and a copy of this report was providedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 13, 2022 · control 22-AS-20220729170339
Oct 3, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility did not issue refund.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Lyman made an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings on the above allegation. LPA was greeted and granted entry by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, LPA toured the facility, interviewed staff and witness as well as reviewed and obtained pertinent information such as facility billing invoice. Regarding the allegation that facility did not issue refund, the investigation revealed the following: Resident 1 (R1) resided at the facility from 06/08/2022 through 6/17/2022. Resident was sent out to the hospital on 06/17/2022 and family moved resident out of the facility without a written thirty day notice. Per health and safety code, a refund of 80 percent of the preadmission fee, minus $500, is due back if resident moves out within the first month. Facility did not refund any money to the resident's responsible party. Based on observations made and interviews conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of .Regulations, (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8) are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 3, 2022 · control 22-AS-20220902113459
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: HSC 1569.651(h)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Oct 4, 2022
If the resident leaves the facility for any reason during the first month of residency, the resident shall be entitled to a refund of at least 80 percent of the preadmission fee amount in excess of five hundred dollars ($500). This req is not being met as evidenced by: Based on interviews conducted, Licensee failed to ensure resident/ responsible party received a refund for 80 percent of preadmission fee. This poses a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 3, 2022
Plan of correction: Licensee refunded $700 to resident/ responsible party on 09/08/2022. CLEARED.
Aug 2, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnfounded
Allegation investigated: Inadequate staffing resulting in resident's showering needs not being met.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Lyman made an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings on the above allegation. LPA was greeted and granted entry by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. Licensee Barbara Weiner was present as well. During the course of the investigation, LPA Jim August interviewed facility staff. LPA Lyman toured the facility, reviewed pertinent documentation such as staff schedule and shower schedule and interviewed Administrator and Licensee. Regarding the allegation that inadequate staffing resulting in resident's showering needs not being met, the investigation revealed the following: Interview conducted as well as review of facility schedules indicates facility utilizes the following for staff: 6 caregivers on the first shift along with LVN, 5-6 caregivers on second shift, and 2 caregivers on the NOC shift. Administrator indicates staff will stay over if there is a call out and interview with Licensee indicates facility staffing is even more robust now than at time of complaint. Facility census at time of complaint was 46 and is presently 45. LPA August obtained five written statements from caregivers CONTINUED ON LIC 9099C DATED 08/02/2022 Unfounded stating that showers are being provided to residents. Therefore, the allegations are deemed UNFOUNDED, meaning the allegation is false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 2, 2022 · control 22-AS-20210701083224
Aug 2, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident sustained multiple falls while in care
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Lyman made an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings on the above allegation. LPA was greeted and granted entry by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. Licensee Barbara Weiner was present as well. During the course of the investigation, LPA August interviewed Administrator Weiner as well as reviewed and obtained pertinent documentation such as physician report and hospital paperwork. Regarding the allegation that resident sustained multiple falls while in care, the investigation revealed the following: On June 23, 2021, Resident 1 (R1) was exhibiting confusion, poor gait, loss of appetite and loss of balance. R1 was experiencing insomnia as well. R1 was noted to have no injuries and a urinalysis was performed. R1's physician was contacted and follow up was scheduled. Facility utilized a bed alarm for resident. On June 24, 2021, R1 was exhibiting more confusion and lost balance on the edge of the bed. R1 was sent out to the hospital for an evaluation. The resident was cleared to come back to the facility and a one on one care companion was put on the resident for approximately one week. On June 30, 2021 R1 was sent out again for altered consciousness as resident was R1 CONTINUED ON LIC 9099C DATED 08/02/2022. Unsubstantiated experiencing heightened confusion. R1 returned from the hospital with a diagnosis of Progressive Dementia and a medication change to address the insomnia. Once resident was able to sleep again and resumed eating, the resident returned to baseline. Per physician report dated 09/20/2020, R1 is diagnosed with Dementia and Parkinson's Disease. R1 is currently residing at a skilled nursing facility for wound care. Therefore, the allegation is deemed unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted with and a copy of this report was provided to facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 2, 2022 · control 22-AS-20210629113400
May 4, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care. Resident's diapering needs were not met.
Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Kimberly Lyman and Joseph Alejandre conducted an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings on the above allegations. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, the Department interviewed staff and witnesses as well as reviewed and obtained pertinent documentation such as physician report dated 08/23/2021, medication orders and Los Alamitos Medical Center admission paperwork dated 10/04/2021. Regarding the allegations that resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care and resident’s diapering needs were not being met, the investigation revealed the following: Resident 1 (R1) was sent to Los Alamitos Hospital on 10/04/2021 for repeated abdominal pain. While there, it was observed the resident had unusual bruising and a soiled diaper. Per an interview conducted with the facility Administrator, R1 had been at Los Alamitos Hospital the day prior with a diagnosis of constipation. R1 had returned to the facility with an order for an enema which the facility had administered upon return and the next day. The Administrator states R1’s diaper was CONTINUED ON LIC 9099C DATED 05/04/2022 Unsubstantiated changed right before they were transported to the hospital on 10/04/2021 per facility protocol. The Hospital contacted the Administrator questioning the soiled diaper. It was explained the resident had been given an enema per physician order and the diaper had been changed prior to being sent out. The Administrator reported facility protocol is to provide incontinence care to R1 frequently as R1 has a history of ripping off their diaper. General facility protocol for incontinence care is every two hours but, in this case, it is done more frequently. R1 was described by multiple reports as being non-compliant and combative with incontinence care. Besides the soiled diaper, the Los Alamitos Medical Center RN observed 10/01/2021 “Bruising of various stages on legs/ face, yellow bruising on bilateral shins. Purple bruises on left upper thigh. Patient has yellow bruising around left eye and purple bruise on upper lip to left side. Patient denies falling.” R1 stated in an interview with the hospital social worker that they tripped and fell while walking. Four (4) out of four (4) witnesses interviewed confirm R1 is combative, aggressive and throws themselves on the ground or into furniture. The Department’s interview with R1 was not completed due to R1’s verbal aggression and refusal. R1’s responsible party (RP) noted they had no concerns about the care provided by the facility. RP corroborated R1’s aggressive behavior as well as falls prior to admission into the facility. Due to conflicting information, the department is unable to corroborate allegations. Therefore, the allegations are deemed unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 4, 2022 · control 22-AS-20211004170327
May 4, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Physical abuse: Resident sustained unexplained injuries while in care
Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Kimberly Lyman and Joseph Alejandre conducted an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings on the above allegation. LPAs were greeted and granted entry into the facility by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, the Department interviewed staff and witnesses as well as reviewed and obtained pertinent documentation such as physician report dated 07/19/2021 and medical records dated 10/23/2021-10/29/2021. Regarding the allegation that resident sustained unexplained injury while in care, the investigation revealed the following: On 10/12/2021, Resident 1 (R1) was hospitalized at Chapman Global Medical Center for psychiatric treatment and self-injurious behavior. Upon return to the facility on 10/29/2021, R1 was observed to have visible bruises on legs, arms and right side of lip. R1 returned to Chapman Global Medical Center on 11/06/2021 for confusion and lack of sleep. Upon admission, it was observed that R1 had multiple bruises on lower extremity as well as a vaginal laceration with blood clots and drainage. R1’s family member and medical records reviewed indicated hospital CONTINUED ON LIC 9099 DATED 05/04/2022 Unsubstantiated personnel were not concerned with any sexual abuse following an examination and tests completed 11/06/2021. Upon R1’s return to the facility, the facility Administrator submitted a SOC 341, Abuse Report, on 11/09/2021. The report CA00761273 referenced an investigation completed by California Department of Public Health in regard to Chapman Global Health Center. On 1/11/2022, the Department received an email from public health indicating “The department was unable to substantiate the complaint allegation and found no violations of the regulation.” Interview conducted with Administrator on 12/02/2021 indicated Public Health investigator was advised by Chapman Global Medical Center that R1 had Thrombocytopenia which can cause the resident to bruise easily. Two (2) of two (2) Caregivers interviewed stated that R1 is known for self injurious and wandering behavior. Both caregivers interviewed deny seeing any staff work with R1 in a rough or aggressive manner. R1’s family member denies any concern with care at the facility. The investigation did not produce evidence and information to support an allegation of physical abuse. Therefore, the allegation is deemed unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted with and a copy of this report was provided to facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 4, 2022 · control 22-AS-20211109114256
May 4, 2022Facility evaluation reportCase Management - IncidentDeficiency page: Type A
Type of visit: Case Management - Incident
Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Kimberly Lyman and Joseph Alejandre conducted an unannounced case management visit to follow up on an incident report submitted to the department on 04/20/2022. LPAs were greeted and granted entry into the facility by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. Incident report dated 04/20/2022 indicate Resident 1 was found at Starbucks by Starbucks employees and 911 was called around 6 AM. Anaheim Police responded and notified facility resident was found. R1 was sent out to West Anaheim Medical Center for an evaluation and returned with medication changes. R1 had a one on one caregiver upon return. Resident was sent out the next day to Chapman Global Medical Center for a psychiatric evaluation and returned 05/03/2022 on hospice care. LPAs observed R1 during the visit. Resident appears safe and has a care companion with the resident. Investigation conducted by facility indicated that the resident took a folding chair from the entrance of facility and exited onto the front patio. Resident removed the alarm on the door. Resident climbed over the front gate using the chair for assistance and was then discovered at Starbucks, approximately .9 miles away. Facility has subsequently removed the folding chair from the entrance. Administrator indicated that there were three staff on shift at the conclusion of the NOC shift around 6 AM. Physician report dated 01/31/2022 indicated a diagnosis of Dementia with a history of wandering behavior. Based on the observations made during today's visit, the following violations are being cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report as well as appeal rights were discussed and provided with facility representative.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 4, 2022
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87464(f)(1) · Plan of correction due date: May 5, 2022
Basic services shall at a minimum include: Care and supervision as defined in Section 87101(c)(3) and Health and Safety Code section 1569.2(c). This requirement is not being met as evidenced by: Based on interview and record review, Licensee failed to ensure R1 was provided care and supervision. R1 eloped out of the facility and was discovered by Starbucks staff approximately .9 miles away. This poses an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 4, 2022
Plan of correction: Licensee agrees to provide elopement re-training to staff and forward proof to LPA by POC due date.
Mar 29, 2022Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Kimberly Lyman and Andrea Mendivil conducted an unannounced visit for the purpose of conducting a required/ annual visit. LPAs were greeted and granted entry into the facility and explained the reason for the visit. Administrator Elena Weiner has a current administrator certificate that expires on 07/20/2023. At 12:50pm LPAs toured the facility with Administrator Elena Weiner. Facility has 45 residents in care during today's visit with 7 residents on hospice care . Facility consists of Memory Care. LPAs observed a library and salon. LPAs observed residents relaxing in the facility. All residents appeared happy and well taken care of. Facility appears clean and sanitary. All resident rooms had the required elements as well as restrooms stocked with soap/ sanitizer. Rooms are single occupancy and double occupancy. Facility screens all visitors to the facility and LPAs observed the screening/ sanitizing station in the facility. Facility utilizes a visitor sign in sheet. Facility takes resident and staff temperatures daily and documents. LPAs observed the first aid kit has all required items. LPAs observed multiple outside visitation areas. LPAs observed the medication room and facility uses handwritten medical records for medication management. Facility has a plan for covid testing residents and staff as needed as well as a plan for isolation and quarantine. All residents and staff are vaccinated for Covid-19. LPAs consulted with Administrator on the importance of posting the "Let Us No" in the entrance of facility in regulation size, 20"X26" No deficiencies noted during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 29, 2022
20211 state visit · 1 document
Nov 10, 2021Facility evaluation reportCase Management - Health ChecksReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Health Checks
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Lyman made an unannounced health and safety visit in conjunction with complaint visit 22-AS-20211109114256. LPA was greeted and granted entry by Administrator Elena Weiner and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the visit, LPA toured the facility. LPA observed residents participating in activities as well as relaxing in their rooms. Facility appears clean and sanitary and is odorless. Residents appeared well taken care of. LPA observed staff assisting residents in the facility. LPA observed covid precautions and temps are taken upon entry. No health or safety violations noted during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 10, 2021
54 of 76 beds were occupied at the September 22, 2026 state visit — a count on that day, not an opening.
License holder
Karlton Residential Care Center, licensed since 1996.
The state’s totals for this licenseSince 1996, as the state’s facility page counts them
- State visits on file
- 24
- Total complaints
- 15
- Substantiated allegations
- 2
- Type A citations
- 1
- Type B citations
- 1
These are the state’s own totals for this license since 1996, 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 | 1 | 0 |
| Type B citations | 1 | 1 |
| Substantiated allegations | 2 | 2 |
| Total complaints | 15 | 6 |
“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 1,354 licensed larger communities (16+ beds) in the state record. The figures compared are the state’s totals, not the documents.
What the state’s words mean
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.
Frequently asked questions
A citation does not make a home unsafe, and an empty file does not make a home good.
Quick answers about Karlton Residential Care Center
Is Karlton Residential Care Center licensed?
The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
How many residents is Karlton Residential Care Center licensed for?
76 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Has Karlton Residential Care Center been cited?
1 Type A and 1 Type B citations since 1996, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. Those records count 24 state visits over the same years.
Is Karlton Residential Care Center still open?
This license was on the CDSS roster as of November 11, 2026.
What does Karlton Residential Care Center cost?
$5,500 a month to start — listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026.
The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for memory care shared bedroom, seen September 9, 2026. We don’t have this home’s dementia-care disclosure. California requires a home that advertises dementia care to describe that care in writing when you ask.
Among 5 other homes of a similar licensed size in Anaheim that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $2,588 to $4,521 a month, and the middle figure is $3,500 (n = 5 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 Karlton Residential Care Center 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 Karlton Residential Care Center, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Is there a hospital nearby?
Anaheim Community Hospital, LLC is 0.4 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.
Can Karlton Residential Care Center keep a resident on hospice?
Hospice care is approved on this license, covering up to 15 residents, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Karlton Residential Care Center license and inspection record
- Name on the license: “KARLTON RESIDENTIAL CARE CENTER”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
- License #306000295. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- Licensed for 76 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- Licensed to Karlton Residential Care Center, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- First licensed in 1996, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- 24 state inspection visits since 1996, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- 1 Type A and 1 Type B citations on file since 1996, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. The same records count 24 state visits in that period.
- 15 complaints and 2 substantiated allegations on file since 1996, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
- The most recent state visit on file is October 5, 2026, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
California writes these definitions for every licensed home, not for this one. CDSS citation definitions (PDF) ↗
Nearby
Other homes nearby
Licensed homes near this one in Orange County, most information on file first. Every listed home appears on the same terms.
- Map
Starting rate
$4,000 a month to start
Listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$2,850 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $2,200–$3,650On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,900 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $4,050–$6,050On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Dementia: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,300 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $3,500–$5,300On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,950 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $4,050–$6,100On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,650 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $3,800–$5,750On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
Street maps © Protomaps · © OpenStreetMap
Explore Orange County