Illustration — no photo of this home on file yet

Laurel Haven

Mid-size home·Licensed for 15·San Jose, California

Licensed since 2014Licence #435202423
  • Care approvals on fileWheelchair · Hospice · BedriddenState licensing record · September 27, 2026
  • Starting rate$5,000 a monthListed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026
  • Home sizeLicensed for 15Mid-size care home · a licensed care home (RCFE)
  • Room at the last state visit14 of 15 beds occupiedNovember 9, 2024 · not a current opening
  • Ways to payAsk the homeMedi-Cal ALW participation not on file
  • Last state visitMay 20, 2026CDSS inspection record
  • Licence holderLaurel Care, Inc.Since 2014 · 5 licensed homes

Laurel Haven is a mid-size care home in San Jose — a licensed residential care facility for the elderly (RCFE), the licence category behind “assisted living” and “board and care.” It is licensed for 15 residents since 2014. Dementia care is not on file.

Built from CDSS public records · September 27, 2026. Every fact below names its source and date.

Quick answers and the state record

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

Quick answers about Laurel Haven

Is Laurel Haven licensed?

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

How many residents is Laurel Haven licensed for?

15 residents — a mid-size home, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Has Laurel Haven been cited?

0 Type A and 1 Type B citation since 2014, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. Those records count 12 state visits over the same years.

Is Laurel Haven still open?

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

What does Laurel Haven cost?

$5,000 a month to start — listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026.

The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for assisted living private room, seen September 9, 2026.

Among 50 other homes of a similar licensed size in San Jose that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $3,500 to $4,500 a month, and the middle figure is $4,200 (n = 50 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 Laurel Haven take Medi-Cal?

On Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver: this home is not on the DHCS participation list dated September 23, 2026. Ask the program about current options. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.

Who holds the license?

The license is held by Laurel Care, Inc., per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. See the homes licensed to Laurel Care, Inc. — at least 5 on the state roster.

Is there a hospital nearby?

Regional Medical Center of San Jose is 3.1 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.

Can Laurel Haven keep a resident on hospice?

Hospice care is approved on this license, covering up to 4 residents, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.

Laurel Haven license and inspection record

  • Name on the license: “LAUREL HAVEN”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
  • License #435202423. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • Licensed for 15 residents — a mid-size home, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • Licensed to Laurel Care, Inc., per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • First licensed in 2014, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 12 state inspection visits since 2014, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
  • 0 Type A and 1 Type B citation on file since 2014, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. The same records count 12 state visits in that period.
  • 5 complaints and 1 substantiated allegation on file since 2014, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
  • The most recent state visit on file is May 20, 2026, per CDSS records as of September 27, 2026.
Type A citationa violation that poses an immediate risk to health, safety or personal rights if it is not correctedType B citationa violation that could become a risk if not corrected, or one involving records, resources or required services

California writes these definitions for every licensed home, not for this one. CDSS citation definitions (PDF) ↗

See the state’s own record

Can they support the care needed?

California licenses a home for specific kinds of care. The state’s record lists what this home is approved for; the home’s own answers fill in what changes as needs change.

  • Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryApproved · covers up to 15 residents
  • Dementia / memory careNot on file · ask the home
  • Hospice careApproved · covers up to 4 residents
  • BedriddenApproved · covers up to 1 resident

State licensing record · September 27, 2026. An approval may cover specific rooms or residents; it does not establish an opening.

Read the state’s own wording
LICENSED TO SERVE 15 ADULTS SIXTY (60) AND OVER, ALL OF WHICH MAY BE NONAMBULATORY, ONE MAY BE BEDRIDDEN. SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE HOSPICE WAIVER FOR FOUR (4).

935 - ELDERLY

CDSS record, verbatim · September 27, 2026

As needs change

  • Staying through hospice

    Hospice waiver on file · covers up to 4 — care may continue at the end of life

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

    State licensing record · September 27, 2026

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?”

What it costs here

This home’s starting rate

$5,000a month to start

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

Likely monthly total

$5,000a month

Likely $5,000–$5,600

With a shared room and basic help.

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

See the full cost breakdownRoom, care and fees · how people pay · 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$5,000this home

    The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for assisted living private room, seen September 9, 2026.

  • Shared room insteadAsknot on file

    This home’s listed starting rate is for assisted living private room. A shared room, if one is offered, may cost less — 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 (45 California homes publish a care-level range, seen in September 2026).

  • One-time move-in fee$2,000one time · likely $0–$4,000

    Homes that list a one-time entry or community fee charge a median of $2,000 (134 California listings; middle half $1,000–$4,000). Many homes list none — ask.

Likely monthly totalLikely $5,000–$5,600
$5,000
First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $5,000–$9,100
$7,000

Lines marked “Ask” are not in the totals.

How people payPrivate pay, Medi-Cal waiver, SSI/SSP, veterans, insurance
  • Private payMost residents pay from savings, a home sale or family help. Ask for the rate and what it includes in writing.
  • Medi-Cal Assisted Living WaiverThis home is not on the DHCS participation list dated September 23, 2026. Ask the program about current options. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.
  • SSI/SSPCalifornia’s 2026 standard is $1,626.07 a month; $1,444.07 of it goes to the home and $182 stays with the resident. Whether this home accepts it is not on file — ask.
  • VeteransVA Aid & Attendance can add to a veteran’s or surviving spouse’s pension. Ask whether residents here have used it.
  • Long-term care insuranceMost policies pay for licensed care homes. Ask what paperwork the home provides for claims.
  • MedicareDoes not pay for room and board in a care home. It can still cover hospice or home-health visits inside one.
If the money runs out, what Medi-Cal covers
Avoid surprises on the billWhat changes the price, and what to ask
  • The care level

    Some homes charge one all-inclusive rate. Others add levels or points as needs grow. Ask how the level is set, who decides, and what the next level costs.

  • What is billed separately

    Medication management, incontinence supplies, transportation and a second person in the room are often extra. Ask for the list in writing.

  • Move-in costs

    A one-time community fee or deposit is common. Ask what it covers and whether any of it comes back if the stay is short.

  • Increases

    California requires at least 90 days’ written notice, with reasons, before a rate rises (Health & Safety Code §1569.655). A change in the resident’s care level is the section’s own exception and can be billed sooner.

  • What is the full monthly cost for the room and care we need, and what does it include?
  • What would the next care level cost, and who decides when it changes?
  • What is billed separately, and is there a one-time fee or deposit at move-in?
  • Is any private-pay period required before another payment program can begin?
How this estimate worksWhere this price comes from

The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for assisted living private room, seen September 9, 2026.

11 homes like this within 3 miles publish starting rates mostly between $2,750–$4,400.

  • 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 11 nearby homes behind this estimate

Where it is

  • 1157 South Sixth St., San Jose, CA 95112Address from the public record · September 27, 2026. Confirm the entrance with the home before visiting.

Opening the neighborhood map…

The state record

California inspects every licensed home and publishes what it found. Here are the dated documents and the state’s own words, beside what is typical for homes this size.

Since 2021, the state has filed 14 documents for this home, and its records count 12 visits since 2014. The most recent is a facility evaluation report, dated February 6, 2026.

On file since
2021
State visits
12
Most recent visit
May 20, 2026
Occupied · November 9, 2024 visit
14 of 15 bedsa count on that day, not an opening

We hold 7 complaint reports the state published for this home, dated November 22, 2021 to November 9, 2024. 7 of the 7 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (1), “Unsubstantiated” (6). 7 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word. Summary composed by computer from the 7 complaint reports below — every count derives from them, and the documents themselves are the state's records, verbatim. We never grade, score, or color a record.

Beside homes the same size

  • Type A citations0typical 0
  • Type B citations1typical 0
  • Substantiated allegations1typical 0
  • Total complaints5typical 1

“Typical” is the statewide median across the 327 licensed mid-size homes (7–15 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 2014.

Year by year
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated202611020251102024571202311020221102021230

The last 36 months — 9 of 14 documents

20261 state visit · 1 document
Feb 6, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Marcela Yanez conducted an unannounced Required 1 Year visit and met with Malou Holmes, Lead Staff LS, and Merle Laurel, Administrator who had to leave for prior appointment during visit. LPA announced the purpose of the visit. During visit, LPA toured the facility inside and out. LPA observed the kitchen area and observed locked cabinets for medications, sharp objects, and cleaning supplies. LPA observed perishable food supply of at least two days and a non-perishable food supply of at least seven days. LPA toured 10 resident bedrooms. Each bedroom had available bedding and clothing storage areas as well as functioning lights. LPA toured 1 staff room and storage room. LS tested the smoke detector in the hallway and found the smoke detector to function properly when tested. LPA toured 3 resident bathrooms. Each bathroom had available soap and paper towels and functioning lights. The water temperatures in the bathroom sinks measured with thermometer at 107-114 degrees F. LPA toured the outside area and found the exits to be clear of obstructions. LPA observed fire extinguisher was last serviced on 01/06/26. LPA reviewed Fire and Earthquake log, last disaster drill on 02/02/26. LPA reviewed resident records for 5 residents and centrally stored medication record. LPA reviewed 4 staff records. No deficiency were cited as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Malou Holmes and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 6, 2026
20251 state visit · 1 document
Feb 13, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced Required 1 Year visit and met with Administrator Merle Laurel. During visit, LPA Marrufo toured the facility inside and out. LPA toured the kitchen area and food storage areas. LPA observed there to be a perishable food supply of at least two days and a non-perishable food supply of at least seven days. LPA reviewed the first aid kit and found it to be complete. LPA toured the facility and tested the smoke detectors in the hallways and each resident room. All smoke detectors functioned properly when tested. The carbon monoxide detector functioned properly when tested. LPA toured each resident room and found each room to have functioning lights and available bedding and clothing storage areas. LPA toured three out of three resident bedrooms. Each bedroom had available soap and hand drying machines as well as working lights. The water temperatures in the bathroom sinks were 116 F - 118 F. LPA toured the outside area and found the exits to be clear of obstructions. LPA reviewed six resident records and six Centrally Stored Medication and Destruction Records and found them all to be complete. LPA reviewed five staff records and found them to be compete. The Disaster Drill Log indicates the last drill was conducted on February 1st, 2025. No deficiencies were cited as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Administrator Merle Laurel and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 13, 2025
20245 state visits · 7 documents
Nov 9, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff physically abused resident Staff neglected resident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jason Lund arrived unannounced to complete a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA Lund met with Staff Alex Ignacio and explained the reason for the visit. Administrator Merle Laurel could not make the visit today and gave permission for staff Alex Ignacio to sign the required paperwork. Census: 14 Staff physically abused resident - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on facility records review, San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140, interviews with staff, and residents in care. According to San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140 on 8/2/2023 Resident (R1) was pushed by a suspect (Staff) from the back, into the residents’ room. R1 was pushed approximately 20 times from the back supposed staff. Unsubstantiated On 8/2/2023 R1 called 911 to go to the ER. On 8/4/2023 San Jose police officer interviewed R1 regarding the incident on 8/2/2023. San Jose police officer interviewed case manager, Administrator Merle Laurel, and care staff from the facility. Case manager for R1 stated to the officer that R1 would not be going back to the facility and would find new housing. Functional Capability Assessment dated 7/14/2023 states that R1 loses balance easily which leads to R1 falling. Doctor recommended that R1 use a walker to help with walking. Staff stated to LPA Lund that R1 would refuse to use the walker. San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140- States that no injuries completed. Based on facility records review, San Jose Police Report-SJ 2023-232160140, interviews with staff, and residents in care on the information provided, it was unclear if staff physically abused resident, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff neglected resident - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on facility records review, San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140, interviews with staff, and residents in care. Resident (R1) was placed at the facility on 7/14/2023 and Functional Capability Assessment dated 7/14/2023 states that R1 loses balance easily which leads to R1 falling. Staff interviewed stated that they would continually remind R1 to use walker and on 8/2/203 R1 called 911 to go to the ER. On 8/4/2023 San Jose police officer interviewed R1 regarding the incident on 8/2/2023. San Jose police officer interviewed case manager, Administrator Merle Laurel, and care staff from the facility. Case manager for R1 stated to the officer that R1 would not be going back to the facility and would find new housing. Residents interviewed stated that staff treat well and here to help them when needed. San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140- States that no injuries completed. Based on facility records review, San Jose Police report-SJ 2023-232160140, interviews with staff, and residents in care on the information provided, it was unclear if staff neglected resident, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. As a result of this investigation, this Department finds the allegation to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. A complaint allegation finding of Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted and report left.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 9, 2024 · control 26-AS-20230808145034
Oct 26, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff did not treat resident with dignity and respect Staff did not administer resident’s medication Staff yell at residents Staff confined resident to room Facility has rodents

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jason Lund arrived unannounced to complete a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA Lund met with Administrator Merle Laurel and explained the reason for the visit. Census: 14 Staff did not treat resident with dignity and respect - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on facility records review, interviews with staff, and residents in care. Staff have been trained on how to recognize & report elder abuse & understanding mental illness with residents with schizophrenia. Staff interviewed stated that they would report immediately to management if they were to see any staff disrespect or mistreat any residents in care. Residents interviewed stated that they have been treated with dignity and respect. Unsubstantiated Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff did not treat resident with dignity and respect, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff did not administer resident’s medication - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on facility records indicate that staff have had the six-hour Medication Training Program. Four hours of initial instruction & 2 hours of hands-on shadowing. LPA reviewed Medication Administration Records (MARS) from residents in care from May 2022 through August 2022 and were in compliance. Staff interviewed stated most residents take their medications when told, if not we come back to them. If a resident doesn’t take their medication, we mark in their Medication Administration Records (MARS) and notify parties involved if needed. Residents interviewed stated that they are given their medications on time and staff give it to them properly. Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff did not administer resident’s medication, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff yell at residents - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on facility records review, interviews with staff, and residents in care. Staff have been trained on how to recognize & report elder abuse & understanding mental illness with residents with schizophrenia. Staff interviewed stated that they would report immediately to management if they were to see any staff yell at residents in care. Residents interviewed stated that they have not been yelled at by staff. Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff yell at residents, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff confined resident to room - LPA Lund interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on interviews with staff, and residents in care. Staff interviewed stated that they have never told any residents to staff in their rooms unless it was under if they have had COVID-19 and we would try to tell residents in care to stay in their rooms. Residents interviewed stated that they have never been forced to stay in their rooms. Based on interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff confined resident to room, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Facility has rodents - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on reviewed facility records, interviews with staff, and residents in care. LPA Lund reviewed Clark Pest Control report dated 5/6/2022 states the facility is clear of rodents. LPA Lund reviewed pest control reports from 4/29/2024 through 10/24/2024 states the facility is clear of pests and rodents. Staff interviewed stated that have not seen any rodents are pests at the facility. Residents interviewed stated that have not seen any rodents are pests at the facility. Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff failed to keep facility free of pests, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. As a result of this investigation, this Department finds the allegation to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. A complaint allegation finding of Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted and report left.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 26, 2024 · control 26-AS-20220615085116
Oct 26, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Resident has scabies Staff misplaced resident’s medication Staff failed to keep facility free of pests Facility restrains residents in their bedrooms

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jason Lund arrived unannounced to complete a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA Lund met with Administrator Merle Laurel and explained the reason for the visit. Census: 14 Resident has scabies - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on reviewed facility records, interviews with staff, and residents in care. LPA Lund reviewed Residents (R1) Medication Administration Records (MARS) from 5/1/2022 through 8/30/2022. In 6/1/2022 through 6/18/2022 R1 was prescribed a cream but never used it. Staff interviewed stated that the facility never had scabies. Residents interviewed stated that they have never had scabies. On 7/22/2022 LPA David Marrufo observed that the facility didn't have scabies. Unsubstantiated Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if resident has scabies, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff misplaced resident’s medication - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on facility records indicate that staff have had the six-hour Medication Training Program. Four hours of initial instruction & 2 hours of hands-on shadowing. LPA reviewed Medication Administration Records (MARS) from residents in care from May 2022 through August 2022 and were in compliance. Staff interviewed stated most residents take their medications when told, if not we come back to them. If a resident doesn’t take their medication, we mark in their Medication Administration Records (MARS) and notify parties involved if needed. Residents interviewed stated that they are given their medications on time and staff give it to them properly. On 7/22/2022 LPA David Marrufo interviewed ten residents and three staff who stated they staff have never misplaced residents medication. Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff misplaced resident’s medication., therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff failed to keep facility free of pests - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on reviewed facility records, interviews with staff, and residents in care. LPA Lund reviewed Clark Pest Control report dated 5/6/2022 states the facility is clear of rodents. LPA Lund reviewed pest control reports from 4/29/2024 through 10/24/2024 states the facility is clear of pests and rodents. Staff interviewed stated that have not seen any rodents are pests at the facility. Residents interviewed stated that have not seen any rodents are pests at the facility. On 7/22/2022 LPA David Marrufo interviewed ten residents and three staff who stated the facility is free of pests. Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff failed to keep facility free of pests, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Facility restrains residents in their bedrooms - LPA Lund interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on interviews with staff, and residents in care. Staff interviewed stated that they have never told any residents to staff in their rooms unless it was under if they have had COVID-19 and we would try to tell residents in care to stay in their rooms. Residents interviewed stated that they have never been forced to stay in their rooms. On 7/22/2022 LPA David Marrufo interviewed ten residents and three staff who stated the facility has never forced residents to stay in their rooms. Based on interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if facility restrains residents in their bedrooms, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. As a result of this investigation, this Department finds the allegation to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. A complaint allegation finding of Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted and report left.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 26, 2024 · control 26-AS-20220714111842
Oct 26, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff does not treat resident with dignity and respect Administrator threatened resident Staff did not let resident use the facility's telephone

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jason Lund arrived unannounced to complete a complaint investigation regarding the above allegations. LPA Lund met with Administrator Merle Laurel and explained the reason for the visit. Census: 14 Staff does not treat resident with dignity and respect - LPA Lund reviewed facility records, interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on facility records review, interviews with staff, and residents in care. Staff have been trained on how to recognize & report elder abuse & understanding mental illness with residents with schizophrenia. Staff interviewed stated that they would report immediately to management if they were to see any staff yell at residents in care. Residents interviewed stated that they have not been yelled at by staff. On 10/10/2022 LPA David Marrufo interviewed six residents and three staff who stated they have never seen staff disrespect any residents in care. Unsubstantiated Based on facility records review, interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff does not treat resident with dignity and respect, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Administrator threatened resident - LPA Lund interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on interviews with staff, and residents in care. Staff interviewed stated that they would notify management or call 1-844-LET-US-NO if they where to see the Administrator threatened a resident. Residents interviewed stated that they have never seen Administrator threatened any residents in care. On 10/10/2022 LPA David Marrufo interviewed six residents and three staff who stated they have never seen a administrator threaten an resident. Based on interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if administrator threatened resident, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff did not let resident use the facility's telephone - LPA Lund interviewed staff, and residents in care. Based on interviews with staff and residents. Staff interviewed that resident have always been able to use the phone. Residents interviewed stated that they have been able to use the phone. On 10/10/2022 LPA David Marrufo interviewed six residents and three staff who stated they have been able to use the phone. Based on interviews with residents and staff on the information provided, it was unclear if staff did not let resident use the facility's telephone, therefore the allegation was deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. As a result of this investigation, this Department finds the allegation to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. A complaint allegation finding of Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted and report left.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 26, 2024 · control 26-AS-20221004141551
Apr 25, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Case Management - Annual Continuation

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced Case Management - Annual Continuation visit and met with Merle Laurel. LPA visited the facility to continue the annual inspection visit that began on 01/30/2024. During visit, LPA Marrufo inspected the water temperatures in 3 out of 3 resident bathrooms. The water temperatures were 119 F, 118 F, and 116.5 F. LPA Marrufo reviewed Centrally Stored Medication Logs and resident records for 5 residents and found them to be complete. LPA reviewed staff records and found them to be complete. LPA Marrufo reviewed the Emergency Disaster Drill Log and found the last drill occurred on 04/03/2024. LPA Marrufo reviewed 1 out of 1 Personal and Incidental Money Log and found it to be complete. No deficiencies were cited at this time as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Merle Laurel and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 25, 2024
Jan 30, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced Required 1 Year visit and met with Mhalou Holmes. During visit, LPA Marrufo toured the facility inside and out. LPA toured the kitchen area and the other food storage areas and observed there to be a perishable food supply of at least two days and a non-perishable food supply of at least 7 days. LPA Marrufo observed locked storage areas for sharps and cleaning supplies. The facility smoke detectors functioned properly when tested. LPA Marrufo toured 3 out of 3 bathrooms and observed the bathrooms to have available soap and paper towels as well as available lighting. The outside area exit was clear of obstructions. Due to time constraints, the annual inspection will need to be continued at a further date. No deficiencies were cited at this time as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Mhalou Holmes and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 30, 2024
Jan 17, 2024Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Facility unlawfully evicted a resident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit and met with Alex Ignacio, staff. On 12/28/2023, the Department received a complaint with the above allegation. On 01/03/2024, LPA Marrufo conducted an initial complaint investigation visit. LPA Marrufo obtained a screenshot of the text message that Licensee sent to resident R1's Case Worker on 12/28/2023. LPA Marrufo verified that the telephone number from where the text message was sent to R1's case worker is the same telephone number LPA Marrufo has used to contact the Licensee. See LIC9099-C for more information. Page 1 of 2. Substantiated The text message states, "...When I asked you for the 150 approval last September - you said it was approved. Just the email for the 55 patch in which to don't take. So pls find another place for [R1] as this is a 30 day notice. Ty" The text message did not include any of the five reasons for an eviction that a Licensee may provided as stated in Title 22 Regulation 87224 Eviction Procedures (a)(1-5). During interview, R1's Case Worker stated to have not received any other form of eviction notice. R1 stated during interview to have not received any verbal or written notice of eviction. A deficiency was cited as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. See LIC809-D for more information. This report was reviewed with Alex Ignacio and a copy of the report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 17, 2024 · control 26-AS-20231228114456

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87224(a) · Plan of correction due date: Jan 24, 2024

87224 Eviction Procedures (a) The licensee may evict a resident for one or more of the reasons listed in Section 87224(a)(1) through (5). Thirty (30) days written notice to the resident is required except as otherwise specified in paragraph (5). This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Licensee sent a text message to R1's case worker stating that R1 was being evicted for not paying the full patch amount. The text message did not include any of the legal reasons for eviction as stated in 87224(a)(1-5), which poses a potential safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 17, 2024

Plan of correction: Licensee agrees to submit a statement of understanding by POC date to CCL stating that the licensee has reviewed and understood CCL Regulation 87224 Eviction Procedures. Licensee also agrees to rescind or correct any current evictions that do not comply with CCL Regulation 87224 Eviction Procedures by POC date. Licensee shall either submit copies of rescinded or corrected eviction notices or issue a statement that there are no current non-compliant evictions by POC date.

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

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

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

Who holds the licence

Laurel Care, Inc., licensed since 2014, operates 5 licensed homes in California. Running more than one home is common and is neither good nor bad on its own.

Life here

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

Find a detail about life at this home.

Rooms & the spaces they will use

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

Explore Santa Clara County