Illustration — no photo of this home on file yet

Lakewood Gardens

Large community·Licensed for 150·Downey, California

Licensed since 2006Licence #197606651Medi-Cal ALW
  • Care approvals on fileWheelchair · HospiceState licensing record · September 13, 2026
  • Starting rate$7,225 a monthListed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026
  • Home sizeLicensed for 150Large care community · a licensed care home (RCFE)
  • Room at the last state visit91 of 150 beds occupiedAugust 4, 2026 · not a current opening
  • Ways to payMedi-Cal ALW acceptedDHCS participant list · August 9, 2026
  • Last state visitAugust 4, 2026CDSS inspection record

Lakewood Gardens is a large care community in Downey — a licensed residential care facility for the elderly (RCFE), the licence category behind “assisted living” and “board and care.” It is licensed for 150 residents since 2006. Dementia care and bedridden care are not on file.

Built from CDSS public records · September 13, 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 Lakewood Gardens

Is Lakewood Gardens licensed?

The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.

How many residents is Lakewood Gardens licensed for?

150 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.

Has Lakewood Gardens been cited?

2 Type A and 0 Type B citations since 2006, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026. Those records count 21 state visits over the same years.

Is Lakewood Gardens still open?

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

What does Lakewood Gardens cost?

$7,225 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 120 other homes of a similar licensed size across Los Angeles County that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $3,088 to $5,925 a month, and the middle figure is $4,183 (n = 120 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 Lakewood 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 Meh Health Management, LLC, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.

Is there a hospital nearby?

Kaiser Foundation Hospital-Downey is 0.6 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.

Can Lakewood Gardens keep a resident on hospice?

Hospice care is approved on this license, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.

Lakewood Gardens license and inspection record

  • Name on the license: “LAKEWOOD GARDENS”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
  • License #197606651. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.
  • Licensed for 150 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.
  • Licensed to Meh Health Management, LLC, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.
  • First licensed in 2006, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.
  • 21 state inspection visits since 2006, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026.
  • 2 Type A and 0 Type B citations on file since 2006, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026. The same records count 21 state visits in that period.
  • 11 complaints and 2 substantiated allegations on file since 2006, per CDSS records as of September 13, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
  • The most recent state visit on file is August 4, 2026, per CDSS records as of September 13, 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 150 residents
  • Dementia / memory careNot on file · ask the home
  • Hospice careApproved by the state
  • BedriddenNot on file · ask the home

State licensing record · September 13, 2026. An approval may cover specific rooms or residents; it does not establish an opening.

Read the state’s own wording
FACILITY IS LICENSED TO SERVE 150 NON-AMBULATORY RESIDENTS 60 YEARS AND ABOVE. DEMENTIA SPECIAL PROGRAM - FACILITY HAS DELAYED EGRESS SYSTEM. HOSPICE WAIVER GRANTED FOR 27 RESIDENTS.

935 - ELDERLY

CDSS record, verbatim · September 13, 2026

As needs change

  • Staying through hospice

    Hospice waiver on file — care may continue at the end of life

    Ask: “If hospice is needed, can care continue here until the end?”

    State licensing record · September 13, 2026

4 more questions to ask the home
  • Two-person transfers or a lift

    Not on file

    Ask: “If two people or a lift are needed to transfer, can the person stay?”

  • Someone awake overnight

    Not on file

    Ask: “Who is awake overnight, and how do residents ask for help?”

  • Medicines

    Not on file

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

  • 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.

What it costs here

This home’s starting rate

$7,225a month to start

Listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026 · See listing

Likely monthly total

$7,225a month

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 · where the price comes from
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$7,225this 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.

  • Help with daily careIncludedper the home

    The home lists its rent as all-inclusive on Caring.com, seen September 9, 2026. Ask which care needs would change the monthly rate.

  • 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 $7,225
$7,225
First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $7,225–$11,225
$9,225

Costs & moving in

  • How care costs are added to the rentAll inclusive

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

  • Lowest monthly rate stated$7,225/moMemory Care shared bedroomWe 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.

    Reported on seniorly.com · source dated August 24, 2026.

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 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.

17 homes like this within 10 miles publish starting rates mostly between $1,500–$4,900.

  • 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 17 nearby homes behind this estimate

Where it is

  • 12055 S. Lakewood Blvd., Downey, CA 90242Address from the public record · September 13, 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 20 documents for this home, and its records count 21 visits since 2006. The most recent — a complaint investigation report on August 4, 2026 — closed with the state’s outcome word: “Unsubstantiated.”

On file since
2021
State visits
21
Most recent visit
August 4, 2026
Occupied at that visit
91 of 150 bedsa count on that day, not an opening

We hold 13 complaint reports the state published for this home, dated July 16, 2021 to August 4, 2026. 13 of the 13 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (2), “Unsubstantiated” (11). 13 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word. Summary composed by computer from the 13 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 citations0typical 1
  • Substantiated allegations2typical 2
  • Total complaints11typical 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 2006.

Year by year
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated202634020255522024330202344020223302021110

The last 36 months — 12 of 20 documents

20263 state visits · 4 documents
Aug 4, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident was sexually abused while in care.

Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Christian Gutierrez conducted a subsequent unannounced complaint visit in response to the above allegations. LPA met with Administrator Jenne De Castro who assisted with today’s visit. The investigation consisted of the following: During the initial visit conducted on 06/12/2026 LPA interviewed Administrator, obtained copies of Staff/Resident Rosters, toured facility alongside of Administrator; there were no concerns, obstructions, or anything out of the ordinary witnessed during the visit. During today’s visit LPA Gutierrez obtained copies of preplacement appraisal information, doctor’s notes, current physician’s report LIC 602, and ID/emergency information, interviewed Administrator, staff #1-staff #7 (S1-S7), resident #1-Resident #7 (R1-R7), and witness #1-witness #2 (W1-W2). LPA delivered findings. See LIC 9099 Unsubstantiated In regard to the allegation “Resident was sexually abused while in care”, it is alleged that resident was touched by staff while in care. During interviews with witnesses, Administrator and staff all stated that R1 has a history of hallucinations and fabricating stories. W1 stated that this has been ongoing even before R1 came to facility. S2 stated R1 accuses staff of things and that staff is not even working that day. Administrator stated that R1 has a diagnosis of dementia and schizophrenia and these behaviors are part of the illness. During interviews with residents five (5) out of seven (7) residents stated they have never been touched and are treated well at the facility. Two (2) residents could not answer LPA’s questions. During the record review, it was revealed that R1 shows moderate signs of altered mental status with lapse in memory recall. R1 also has a history of paranoia and grandiose delusions, in addition to auditory hallucinations. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegations. 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, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was given to Jenne De Castro.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 4, 2026 · control 28-AS-20260612091638
May 7, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christian Gutierrez conducted the required annual inspection. LPA arrived unannounced and met Jeene De Castro and explained the purpose for today’s visit. The facility is licensed to serve 150 non-ambulatory residents ages 60 years and above. Facility has a Dementia Special Program with Delayed Egress System and an approved Hospice waiver for 27 residents. Facility currently has 10 residents under hospice care.The Facility is a single story building located in Downey, CA. A tour of the facility included: main entrance/lobby, Administrator Office, Administrative Assistant Office, this is a locked facility that requires code to access inside, there are 75 resident bedrooms with private bath, 2 activity rooms, 2 changing rooms, 1 shower room, beauty shop, craft room/staff training room, staff lounge, 2 storage rooms, oxygen tank closet, Medication Room, Doctors Office, 1 large dining room, 1 small dining room, kitchen, linen room, laundry room, 2 visitor restrooms and an outdoor patio area that is enclosed within facility. LPA toured the facility and observed the following: LPA toured a total of nine (9) resident bedrooms, and all had the required furniture and bedding. There are smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors and an emergency sprinkler system throughout the facility that are operable and in compliance. The fire extinguishers were observed throughout the facility and are fully charged. The kitchen was observed for the ability to prepare and serve food. LPA observed an appropriate food supply of two (2) days of perishables and one week (7 days) of non-perishables. There are no firearms or weapons stored at the facility. The hot water temperature in the bathrooms were measured between the required range of 105-120 degrees F. The resident bathrooms have the required grabs bars and non-skid mats. The facility does not have a swimming pool or bodies of water on the premises There is a shaded seating area for the residents in back patio area. Facility provides scheduled activities with a monthly calendar and the required full-time staff that conducts/evaluate planned activities. LPA reviewed Infection Control Plan and Emergency Disaster Plan. Last emergency drill was conducted on 03/05/2026. ***Due to time constraints, LPA was not able to complete the annual inspection for this facility. LPA will do a continuation of this inspection. ***Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, and California Health and Safety Code, there were no deficiencies observed during the visit. Exit interview held and a copy of the report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 7, 2026
Feb 19, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure that the facility was free of scabies.

**This report supersedes report dated 12/02/2025. The purpose of this report is to change findings from substantiated to unsubstantiated and to include additional information that was not included on 12/02/2025 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Gutierrez met with Marie Jeene De Castro and explained the purpose of this visit. ***** Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christian Gutierrez conducted an unannounced complaint visit in response to the above allegations. LPA met with Administrator Marie Jeene De Castro who assisted with today’s visit. On today’s visit, LPA interviewed Administrator, Staff 1-staff 6 (S1-S6) and residents 1- residents 5 (R1-R5). LPA obtained copies of the following documents: Staff roster, resident roster, R1’s physicians reports, identification information, hospital discharge paperwork, wound progress notes, unusual incident report (LIC 624), and body assessment charts. LPA Gutierrez also delivered findings. SEE LIC 9099C Unsubstantiated In regard to the allegation “Staff did not ensure that the facility was free of scabies”, It is alleged that R1 was admitted to emergency for an unwitnessed fall and upon exam it was discovered R1 had scabies. During interview with Administrator, and staff five (5) out of seven (7) stated that they did not observe R1 to have any rash. Administrator stated that the Dermatologist came on 11/19/2025 and only treated R1 for redness around sacral/buttocks. S1 and S3 stated there was a little rash on back but was not reported only documented on body assessment chart. During interviews with residents four (4) out of five (5) residents stated that they have had no rash. LPA obtained documents that facility has ongoing pest services on a monthly basis. There is no evidence of a current scabies outbreak or documentation or evidence obtained that any other resident is currently diagnosed with scabies. LPA did not obtain any evidence that R1 obtained the scabies due to staff neglect and/or lack of care and supervision. It is undetermined how R1 contracted the scabies. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegations. 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, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was proved. In regard to the allegation “Staff did not address resident's change in condition”, It is alleged that R1 was not treated for skin condition prior to be admitted to hospital on an unrelated manner. Treating physician reported R1 had scabies and treatment was initiated due to the resident's skin condition/symptoms. During interview with Administrator, and staff seven (7) out of seven (7) stated that there was no report of a change of condition. Administrator stated that dermatologists are at facility weekly and no report of rash was reported. During interviews with residents five (5) out of five (5) residents stated that they have had no problems with rashes. During record review it was revealed that on 11/18/2025 body assessment chart taken by caregiver indicated little red spots on lower neck. On 11/19/2025 there was no evidence that R1’s NP addressed the redness caregiver observed as notes provided do not discuss this new red area observed or addressed. On 11/24/2025 R1 was discharged to facility with PIH document with scabies diagnosis. NP notes dated 11/26/2025 once again do not mention anything about the redness around the back neck or scabies. NP finally documents potential scabies on 12/03/2026 notes after R1 had been discharged from hospital with scabies diagnosis. Based on record review and interviews conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Deficiencies are being cited according to California Code of Regulations, Title 22 and Health and Safety Code. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 19, 2026 · control 28-AS-20251125123813

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87466 · Plan of correction due date: Feb 20, 2026

87466 Observation of the Resident The licensee shall ensure that residents are regularly observed for changes in physical, mental, emotional and social functioning and that appropriate assistance is provided when such observation reveals unmet needs. When changes such as unusual weight gains or losses or deterioration of mental ability or a physical health condition are observed, the licensee shall ensure that such changes are documented and brought to the attention of the resident's physician and the resident's responsible person, if any. Based on observations and interviews, on 11/18/2025 S1 observed R1 to have red spots on lower neck area. No evidence was provided by the facility that these observed changes were brought to the attention of R1’s physician, licensed medical professional, and/or R1’s responsible party on 11/18/2025.This poses an immediate risk to the health, safety, and personal rights of the persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 19, 2026

Plan of correction: Administartor will conduct training on section 87466 and submit to LPA by POC due date.

Feb 19, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff refusing to allow resident to return to facility after hospitalization.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christian Gutierrez conducted an unannounced complaint visit in response to the above allegations. LPA met with Administrator Jeene De Castro who assisted with today’s visit. On today’s visit LPA’s obtained copies of the following documents: Staff roster, resident roster, special incident report (SIR) R1’s hospital discharge paperwork, psychiatric progress notes, emails between case worker and facility, and facility notes. LPA interviewed Administrator and staff #1(S1) and residents 1-8 (R1-R8). LPA delivered findings. SEE LIC 9099C Unsubstantiated In regard to the allegation “Staff refusing to allow resident to return to facility after hospitalization.”, It is alleged that facility did not allow R1 to return to facility. During interviews with Administrator and staff two (2) out of two (2) staff stated resident was never denied re-entry. Staff both stated that because of behavior issues facility was requesting a psychiatric evaluation for the safety of R1 and of other residents. Administrator provided emails between hospital caseworker and facility stating they would gladly accept R1 back as long as Psych MD stated R1 was able to return. During interviews with residents five (5) out of eight (8) residents stated they have never had any problems returning to facility after a hospital visit. Three (3) residents were confused by LPA’s questions. During record review of hospital notes there was no indication that facility was refusing to accept R1 back to facility. LPA observed Psychiatric behavior notes dated 02/10/2026 from So Cal Hospital. R1 returned to the facility as of 02/12/2026. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegations. 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, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 19, 2026 · control 28-AS-20260212125011
20255 state visits · 5 documents
Dec 2, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure that the facility was free of scabies. Staff did not address resident's change in condition.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christian Gutierrez conducted an unannounced complaint visit in response to the above allegations. LPA met with Administrator Marie Jeene De Castro who assisted with today’s visit. On today’s visit, LPA interviewed Administrator, Staff 1-staff 6 (S1-S6) and residents 1- residents 5 (R1-R5). LPA obtained copies of the following documents: Staff roster, resident roster, R1’s physicians reports, identification information, hospital discharge paperwork, wound progress notes, unusual incident report (LIC 624), and body assessment charts. LPA Gutierrez also delivered findings. SEE LIC 8099C Substantiated In regard to the allegation “Staff did not ensure that the facility was free of scabies”, It is alleged that R1 was admitted to emergency for an unwitnessed fall and upon exam it was discovered R1 had scabies. During interview with Administrator, and staff five (5) out of seven (2) stated that they did not observe R1 to have any rash. Administrator stated that the Dermatologist came on 11/19/2025 and only treated R1 for redness around sacral/buttocks. S1 and S3 stated there was a little rash on back but was not reported. During interviews with residents four (4) out of five (5) residents stated that they have had no rash. During record review LPA obtained hospital discharge paperwork that stated R1 had scabies along with instruction for medications and the need for isolation. In regard to the allegation “Staff did not address resident's change in condition”, It is alleged that R1 was not treated for skin condition prior to be admitted to hospital on an unrelated manner. Treating physician reported R1 had scabies and treatment was initiated due to the resident's skin condition/symptoms. During interview with Administrator, and staff seven (7) out of seven (7) stated that there was no report of a change of condition. Administrator stated that dermatologists are at facility weekly and no report of rash was reported. During interviews with residents five (5) out of five (5) residents stated that they have had no problems with rashes. During record review it was revealed that on 11/18/2025 body assessment chart indicated little red spots on lower neck.In house Dermatologist was at facility on 11/19/2025 and did not address body part that was reported by caregiver Based on record review and interviews conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Deficiencies are being cited according to California Code of Regulations, Title 22 and Health and Safety Code. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 2, 2025 · control 28-AS-20251125123813

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Dec 3, 2025

87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (2) To be accorded safe, healthful and comfortable accommodations, furnishings and equipment. Based on observations and interviews licensee did not ensure, R1 was fee and clear of scabies in facility which poses an immediate risk to the health, safety, and personal rights of the persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 2, 2025

Plan of correction: Administrator will insure residents are checked for rashes and insure proper training with staff on section 87468.1(a)(2) is conducted. Administrator will submit training to LPA by POC due date.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87466 · Plan of correction due date: Dec 3, 2025

87466 Observation of the Resident The licensee shall ensure that residents are regularly observed for changes in physical, mental, emotional and social functioning and that appropriate assistance is provided when such observation reveals unmet needs. When changes such as unusual weight gains or losses or deterioration of mental ability or a physical health condition are observed, the licensee shall ensure that such changes are documented and brought to the attention of the resident's physician and the resident's responsible person, if any. Based on observations and interviews licensee did not ensure, R1 was checked for a change of conditon like rashes on body which poses an immediate risk to the health, safety, and personal rights of the persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 2, 2025

Plan of correction: Administartor will conduct training on section 87466 and submit to LPA by POC due date.

Sep 23, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not dispense medications as prescribed

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christian Gutierrez conducted an unannounced complain visit on 09/23/2025, in regard to the allegations listed above. LPA met with Administrator Jeenne De Castro and explained the purpose of the visit. The investigation consisted of the following: LPA did a random medication check on four residents, interviewed Administrator, staff 1- 4, attempted to interview residents R1-R6 and interviewed R1’s family. LPA obtained copies of the following documents: staff roster, resident roster, R1’s physicians reports, identification information , appraisal needs and service plan, hospital discharge paperwork, medication list, and facility notes. During today’s visit LPA delivered findings. See 9099C Substantiated In regard to the allegation” Staff did not dispense medications as prescribed”, It is alleged that staff administered wrong medication to R1 resulting in a positive urine test of an opioid causing R1 to be hospitalized. During interview with Administrator, and staff three (3) out of five (5) stated that to their knowledge no medication error has occurred. Two staff stated that they do not give out medication. During interviews it was revealed that R1 took Morning medication at 8:00 AM given by med-tech and that by 9:20 AM R1 appeared weak and was slurring. S3 stated that in the early morning R1 was awake and given breakfast with no problems. S4 stated the night before R1 was taken to hospital there were no signs of any problems during his/her shift. LPA attempted to interview six (6) residents but due to their cognitive condition LPA was unable to interview them. LPA interviewed R1’s family and it was revealed that R1 only takes two medications omeprazole in the morning, and Zoloft (sertraline) which him/her dispenses in the afternoon and when tested at hospital Tricyclic was found in urine. Based on record review and interviews conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Deficiencies are being cited according to California Code of Regulations, Title 22 and Health and Safety Code. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was given to Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 23, 2025 · control 28-AS-20250915201751

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 24, 2025

87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (2) To be accorded safe, healthful and comfortable accommodations, furnishings and equipment. Based on interviews conducted and documents review R1 received wrong medication which poses an immediate risk to the health, safety, or personal rights to the persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 23, 2025

Plan of correction: Administrator will conduct medication training to med-techs and send to LPA by POC due date.

May 20, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not address a resident's change in medical condition

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christian Gutierrez conducted an unannounced complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA was met by Rita Rena Assistant Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. Administrator Jeene De Castro arrived shortly. The investigation consisted of the following: LPA Gutierrez requested and obtained copies of staff roster, resident roster, R1’s identification and emergency information, physicians report, body assessment documentation, SIR reports, caretakers notes, and city of Downey police Officer business card. LPA conducted interviews with Administrator, staff 1- staff 2 (S1-S2), and resident’s 1 – 8 (R1-R8). SEE 9099C Unsubstantiated In regard to the allegation “Staff did not address a resident's change in medical condition “, it is alleged that R1 arrived at hospital and had suffered a fracture from a fall. During interviews with Administrator, and staff three (3) out of three (3) stated that R1 had not fallen to their knowledge. Caregiver in the early morning had noticed swelling and redness and immediately acted by giving doctors order pain medication and calling for ambulance for pick up. Administrator stated that when asked R1 stated he/she had not fallen. During interviews with residents five (5) out of six (6) stated that staff seek medical attention if needed. R1 stated that he/she fell and that they did not tell staff. During investigation it was revealed that RP did not suspect abuse or neglect with resident however they were told that any fall should be reported. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegations. 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, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was proved.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 20, 2025 · control 28-AS-20250519093602
May 16, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Tena Herrera conducted the required annual inspection. LPA arrived unannounced and met with Rita Pena and Jeene De Castro and explained the purpose for today’s visit. The facility is licensed to serve 150 Non-Ambulatory residents ages 60 years and above. Facility has a Dementia Special Program with Delayed Egress System and an approved Hospice waiver for 27 residents. Facility currently has 20 residents under hospice care. The Facility is a single story building located in Downey, CA. A tour of the facility included: main entrance/lobby, Administrator Office, Administrative Assistant Office, this is a locked facility that requires code to access inside, there are 75 resident bedrooms with private bath, 2 activity rooms, 2 changing rooms, 1 shower room, beauty shop, craft room/staff training room, staff lounge, 2 storage rooms, oxygen tank closet, Medication Room, Doctors Office, 1 large dining room, 1 small dining room, kitchen, linen room, laundry room, 2 visitor restrooms and an outdoor patio area that is enclosed within facility. LPA utilized the Compliance and Regulatory Enforcement (CARE) tools for the visit today and observed the following: Infection Control: Facility has sufficient PPE supplies and the required Infection Control Plan on file. Operational Requirements: The facility has an approved fire clearance, there is a plan of operation with required Dementia Plan and training, and facility maintains the required liability insurance, expires 7/2025. Staffing: There appears to be sufficient staffing at all times in the facility. With night staff that is trained and able to assist in care and supervision of the residents in the case of an emergency. (Continued on LIC809-C) Physical Plant & Environment Safety: LPA toured facility, a total of 9 residents’ bedrooms were checked and had the required closet/drawer space to accommodate each resident comfortably available. The resident rooms have signal systems located in each bathroom and near their bed that were tested and operating properly. There are smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors and an emergency sprinkler system throughout the facility that are operable and in compliance. The fire extinguishers were observed throughout the facility and are fully charged. No bodies of water were observed at the facility. There are no security bars or weapons on the premises. Hygiene products are readily available. The hot water temperature was tested throughout the facility resident private bathrooms and measured within the required range of 105-120 degrees. There is a large shaded patio area for residents. Personnel Records-Training: Staff have criminal record clearance, current First-Aid training along with training in postural supports, Alzheimer’s and Dementia, medication assistance, and other ongoing training are documented in personnel files. LPA reviewed 7 staff files with no issues observed. Administrator Marie "Jeene" De Castro certificate expires on 6/10/25, has already begun the renewal process. Resident Records-Incident Reports: Resident files are kept in a secure location and have the following documents in their files - Pre-admission appraisal/Appraisal Needs & Services Plan, Admission Agreements, Identification & Emergency Information and current Physician's Report. LPA reviewed 8 Resident Files with no issues observed. Residents Rights-Information: Residents are provided with telephone and internet at the facility. The facility has the following posters posted: Residents Rights, Complaint Poster, and Ombudsman. Planned Activities: Facility provides scheduled activities with a monthly calendar and the required full-time staff that conducts/evaluate planned activities. There is sufficient space both indoor and outdoor for activities. Food Service: The kitchen was observed for the ability to prepare and serve food. LPA observed an appropriate food supply of two (2) days of perishables and one week (7 days) of non-perishables. Incidental Medical & Dental: Medication is properly labeled and are centrally stored and are in their original containers. LPA reviewed 10 residents medications with no issues. Disaster Preparedness: The facility has an Emergency Disaster Plan with contact numbers and at least 2 relocation sites. The last drill was conducted on 5/8/25. Residents with Special Health Needs: Facility admits residents with dementia and hospice, staff files reviewed today all have required training documented. Residents under hospice care had the required documentation on file. Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, and California Health and Safety Code, there were no deficiencies observed during the visit. Exit interview held, a copy of the report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 16, 2025
May 1, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff physically assaulted resident.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elizabeth Irra conducted a complaint visit to investigate the above allegation. LPA met with Jeenne De Castro/S-1 and discussed the purpose of today’s visit. During today’s visit, LPA obtained a copy of the resident and staff rosters, staff contact information, reviewed R-1’s file and obtained relevant documentation, interviewed Staff #1 (S-1) through Staff #5 (S-5) and interviewed Resident #1 (R-1) through Resident #7 (R-7). LPA left a message for Staff #6 (S-6) for a return call. LPA also attempted to interview Resident #8 (R-8) and was unsuccessful. Refer to LIC 9099C for the continuation of this report. Unsubstantiated Allegation: Staff physically assaulted resident. It has been alleged that a staff member (unknown) “punched” R-1 on R-1’s face. Staff interviews revealed that staff do not physically assault/hit any residents. Interviewed staff indicated that they have not received reports from other residents pertaining to staff allegedly hitting residents. Interviewed staff indicated that they have not witnessed any staff hitting any residents. Interviewed staff also reported that R-1 was not observed to have any signs of bruising, discoloration, swelling or scratches. Staff interviews revealed that they are trained in mandated reporting and resident rights. Resident interviews revealed that staff do not physically assault/hit residents. Interviewed residents indicated that staff are nice, treat them well and are respectful. Interviewed residents indicated that they feel safe and comfortable residing at this facility. Resident interviews revealed that they have not witnessed any staff hitting anyone. Interviews do not corroborate this allegation. Based upon interviews and records reviewed, the findings indicate 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, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted. A copy of the report and appeal right was provided to Jeenne De Castro.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 1, 2025 · control 28-AS-20250424095324
20243 state visits · 3 documents
Jun 11, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analysts (LPA's) Tyler Reyes and Valeria Maldonado conducted an unannounced required annual inspection using the CARE tools. LPAs met with Administrator Jeene De Castro and explained the reason of the visit. The facility is an Residential Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) licensed to serve (150) non-ambulatory residents, ages 60 years and above. Hospice waiver was approved for for (27) residents. Administrator Jeene has an RCFE Certificate issued for 6/11/23 with an expiration date of 6/10/25 . LPA and Administrator Jeene toured the facility and the following was observed: the 2 outside patios are clean and there are shaded seating areas for the residents. Passageways and exits are free of obstruction. The water temperature was tested in the 3 residents’ bathrooms and 1 common bathroom and measured between at 112 and 118 degrees F, which is within the required 105 - 120 degrees F. The bathrooms are clean and have the required grab bars in the shower and near the toilet for non-ambulatory residents. Showers also have the required non-skid mats. Resident bedrooms have the required furniture such as bed frames, dressers, lamps and chairs. Bedrooms also have enough closet space. Resident beds have the required linen and the linen is in good condition. Smoke detectors were observed in each room and throughout the facility and are properly operating. There are multiple carbon monoxide detectors throughout the facility and are properly operating. There are multiple fire extinguishers throughout the facility, which are fully charged. Kitchen appliances are clean and were operating at the time of the visit. Sharps are kept in the kitchen and are inaccessible to the residents. Cleaning supplies and toxins are kept in a locked storage. Sufficient supply of 2 days perishable & 7 days non-perishable foods was observed in the kitchen. First Aid kit was fully stocked with current manual and it is kept in the medication room. Residents medication are centrally stored in the medication room. Residents and staff files are centrally stored in the administrator’s office. (CONTINUED TO LIC 809C) LPA reviewed medication for six residents and observed that medications are documented properly and given as prescribed. LPA reviewed files for five residents and five staff and observed all required documentation on file. Required signs are posted throughout the facility, and hand-washing signs were observed in bathroom. Sufficient hand soap, hand sanitizer, and paper towels were observed. Supply of 30-day Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was observed in the storage room. Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, and California Health and Safety Code, there were no deficiencies observed during today's visit. Exit interview was conducted with Jeenne De Castro administrator and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 11, 2024
Mar 29, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility has bed bugs. Resident was prohibited from using their bathroom. Resident's Representative was prohibited from installing a safety bed alarm for resident. Resident was forced to wear diapers while in care. Facility has bad odor

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sanjay Vaid conducted a subsequent complaint visit regarding the allegations and discussed the findings of the complaint investigation. LPA Vaid met with Administrator Jennie De Castro and discussed the purpose of the visit, which was to deliver complaint investigation findings. On 01/28/2022 LPA Nina Galarza toured the physical plant, including rooms 11,43,34,74,33,25, and 75 with Staff #1 (S1). LPA conducted interviews with Administrator, S1 and Resident #1 (R1). LPA obtained copies of; staff roster resident roster, and most recent pest control receipt. On todays visit, LPA Vaid interviewed residents and Administrator, and staff, and toured the physical plant with administrator DeCastro and LPA observed the facility to be in good repair and cleanliness all around, rooms included in tour were Rm 11, 13, 25, 33, 34, 43, 44, 52, 74 and 75. LPA requested and obtained a copy of staff schedule and rsident roster, including a list of any residents receiving incontinent care and pest control invoices. LPA Vaid observed the facility has no malodor. LPA tour was comprised of interviews with R#1-R#10 residents in the above rooms and interviewed S#2-S#7 staff (administrator, caregivers, housekeepers, maintenance) working today. Con't on 9099C Unsubstantiated Regarding allegation: Facility has bed bugs. It is alleged, a resident was observed by medical staff whom indicated resident appeared to have been bitten by bed bugs. 10 out of 10 resident interviews revealed the residents are unaware of bedbugs in the facility. 7 out of 7 staff interviews revealed that the facility is free of pests including bedbugs. Interviews with Administrator revealed monthly pest control invoice show no detection of pests. LPA observed bedding and linens on beds to be clean and no bed bugs were seen today. Review of pest control invoices indicate monthly pest control checks are made to the facility, no pests found on both visits according to Pest Control Company dated 2/26/24 and 3/14/24. Regarding allegation: Resident's Representative was prohibited from installing a safety bed alarm for resident. It is alleged that resident family requested a bed alarm be placed on resident bed due to resident falls, however, the staff delayed processing the request and ignored the request. 10 out of 10 resident interviews revealed they are not aware of this. 7 out of 7 staff interviews revealed bed alarms are placed only after physician’s order is reviewed and verified. Interview with Administrator revealed R1’s physician report dated 10/22/2021 revealed no written order for bed alarm was given. The report indicates use of low bed, therefore bed alarm was not approved by physician. No written order on file. Regarding allegation: Resident was forced to wear diapers while in care. It was alleged, staff placed adult briefs on resident in order to keep resident in bed during the time resident bathroom access was blocked. 10 out of 10 resident interviews revealed they are not forced to wear adult briefs. 7 out of 7 staff interviews revealed if there is a physicians order on file only then can staff provide adult briefs/ diapers to residents. Interviews with Administrator revealed the residents are provided adult briefs only upon physician’s orders and as indicated in Needs and Service plan, Physicians report for R1 dated 10/22/2021 recommended use of adult briefs due to use Foley catheter and to prevent resident from soiling self. Con't on 9099 C.... Regarding allegation: Facility has bad odor. It is alleged, that a visitor smelled urine coming from a sliding door due to a resident urinating by the sliding door. 10 out of 10 resident interviews revealed the residents has not experienced bad odor from the facility. 7 out of 7 staff interviews revealed only bad smell occurs when residents have bladder/bowel movements in the clothes, the staff acts quickly to clean and eliminate the smell of urine and/or feces. Interviews with Administrator revealed the facility to be clean and odor free, housekeeping is very good at keeping facility clean and odor free. Caregivers assist residents if the clothes become soiled after bladder/bowel accidents. Based upon records review and interviews conducted, the findings indicate that, 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, therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. Exit interview conducted with Administrator Jennie De Castro. A copy of the licensing report was provided at time of visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 29, 2024 · control 28-AS-20220126151537
Jan 12, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff are not addressing an outbreak of scabies Staff are allowing residents to wear other residents' clothing

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Alberto Lopez conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to determine the validity of the above-mentioned allegations. LPA met with Jeenne De Castro (Administrator) and explained the reason for the visit. The investigation consisted of the following: LPA Lopez obtained copies of the resident and staff rosters, Public Health Rash/Scabies Outbreak notification dated 12/04/2023, skin sweep assessment for all staff and all residents except 3 residents that became agitated and refused. West Coast Wound and Skincare Assessments for staff and residents dated 12/12/2023, In-service sign in sheet for scabies and reportable diseases and conditions dated 12/05/2023, Scabies line list dated 12/13/2023. Labcorb examination results for 12 residents that required followed up dated. 12/08/2023, and copy of email from DPH allowing new admissions dated 12/18/2023 (continued on 809C) Unsubstantiated West Coast copy of letter to Public Health Nurse (PHN) that no evidence of scabies was found at facility dated 12/12/2023, and Letter addressed to LPA Lopez from West Coast FNP-BC, Jason Kreider confirming test results of no evidence of scabies. LPA toured the activity room and random rooms, and interviewed six staff including Administrator, Staff#1 - Staff#6 (S1 – S6), and Resident #11 - R#8 (R1 - R8), and 2 witnesses (W#1-W#2). The investigation revealed the following: Regarding the allegation. Staff not addressing an outbreak of scabies. It is alleged that facility has scabies outbreak. LPA contacted Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (DPH) to notify them of the allegation on 12/04/2023 and LPA had contact with assigned nurse (W1) from DPH on same date. DPH made visit to facility on 12/04/2023 and provided facility with list of actions for facility to take immediately. Facility complied with all the actions recommended by DPH including precautionary treatment for all staff and residents until results of test came back. On 12/06/2023 all residents and staff were provided with skin sweep assessment and scabies was ruled out for all staff and all residents tested. 3 residents refused test and were isolated and precautions taken according to Administrator. Six of Six staff interviewed stated that they do not have scabies symptoms and did not know of any residents or staff that had or have scabies symptoms. LPA interviewed and observed 8 residents (R#1- R#8) and all 8 residents could not collaborate the allegation and all 8 denied any itching or rash. LPA did not observe any residents or staff with rash. W2 which is family member stated they were notified of the allegation and kept up to date throughout the ordeal. There is no evidence that facility failed to address the scabies outbreak because there was not a scabies outbreak at facility. Therefore, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Allegation: Staff are allowing residents to wear other residents' clothing. It is alleged that staff are allowing residents to wear other resident’s clothing. LPA interviewed six staff S1 – S6 including administrator and they all denied the allegation. Administrator stated that all clothing is labeled with resident’s name to prevent other resident’s from using other resident’s clothing. Several staff stated that at times, residents will put on a piece of clothing that does not belong to them and staff will attempt to correct the issue and most of time will do it without further incident. 6 of 6 staff stated they do not allow residents wearing other resident’s clothing. LPA interviewed 8 residents and all 8 could not collaborate the allegations. LPA inspected random rooms and resident’s clothing and they all had the resident’s name on the clothing. W2 which is a family member stated that W2 has not noticed her love one wearing other’s clothing or other resident’s wearing resident's clothing. There is not evidence that staff is allowing residents to wear other resident’s clothing, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. 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, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview held and a copy of the report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 12, 2024 · control 28-AS-20231130123048
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 rooms

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

  • Common areasIndoor Common Areas

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

  • Room typesFurnished Private · Semi-Private Rooms

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

Meals, preferences & familiar food

Activities & the rhythm of a day

  • Activity types offeredActivities On-site

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

  • Religious services off site

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

Pets, routines & independence

  • Residents may bring a petReported no

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

Visiting & staying involved

  • Transportation costs extraReported no

    Reported on aplaceformom.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 Los Angeles County, closest first. Every listed home appears on the same terms.

Explore Los Angeles County