Remington Club II

Allegation investigated: Staff were not adequetely trained for emergency procedures.

The following determination of findings have been made by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson. The findings were delivered to Director of Health and Wellness Raquel Mathews via phone. On 06/19/2026 it was alleged that staff were not adequately trained for emergency procedures, specifically the evacuation chairs for the stairwells. The Department’s investigation consisted of an unannounced facility visit, interviews with facility staff, resident, and records review. Staff informed that quarterly fire drills were conducted for all shifts; the facility elevators were both out simultaneously for approximately 2-3-days before one elevator was repaired and back operational. Staff informed that all resident services were adjusted to accommodate this, such as free tray service, activities being brought to each floor, and ambulatory residents being assisted down the stairs by caregivers. (Continued on LIC9099 p.2) Unsubstantiated (Continued from LIC9099 p.1) Staff informed that only 1 resident was taken down the stairs by evacuation chair - they were taken down by paramedics, not staff. Staff informed that the Quarter 2 fire drill training was arranged to be trained by the evacuation chair vendor/contractor. Staff provided records of the training as well as photos of paramedics taking the resident in question down the stairs in the evacuation chair, which corroborated statements. The resident in question who was taken down the stairs in the evacuation chair affirmed that the paramedics took them down the stairs with no issue. The resident informed that staff did not take them down the stairs. Relevant records were reviewed for the investigation. The records showed that the facility conducted quarterly fire/emergency drills, per requirement. The drills contained signatures from staff of all shifts. Photos were taken of the resident in question being taken down the stairs by two paramedics in an evacuation chair. Fire Drill training records corroborated staff statements that drills were conducted quarterly for all shifts. During an unannounced facility visit LPA directly observed evacuation chairs at the top of each stairwell in the building. The chairs contained a cover with written instructions and images on how to operate the chairs. The quarterly fire drill training records state that "Location of life safety equipment & emergency shut offs" are included in the fire drills. Evidence shows that the resident who was taken down the stairs in an evacuation chair was not taken down by staff, but EMS. Evidence also showed that the facility conducted quarterly fire drills, as required, which addressed the evacuation chairs. The evidence additionally showed that the instructions on use of the chairs was written on the cover of each evacuation chair, in the event staff needed to use it in lieu of the paramedics. Based on interviews, direct LPA observations and records review, a preponderance of evidence does not exist to prove that the alleged violation occurred, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Raquel Mathews, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided via email. A copy of this report will be mailed to the Licensee.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 30, 2026 · control 08-AS-20260619141822

Allegation investigated: Licensee did not ensure facility was maintained in good repair. Licensee did not ensure facility was free from malodor.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced visit to initiate and deliver findings regarding the above complaint allegations. LPA introduced themselves and disclosed the purpose of the visit to Executive Director Daniel Slaughter. On 07/03/2026 it was alleged that Licensee did not ensure the facility was maintained in good repair or free from malodor. The Department’s investigation consisted of an unannounced facility visit, interviews with facility staff, residents, and records review. The disrepair in question was related to an out-of-order elevator, which flooded due to an outside contractor breaking a pipe during routine elevator maintenance. This incident was investigated during an unannounced Case Management visit by this LPA on 06/24/2026. Staff interviews revealed that on 06/09/2026 while doing routine maintenance, the elevator technician broke a sprinkler head at the top of the elevator causing water to flood the elevator bay and ground level flooring outside of the elevator area. This incident required elevator repair and remediation due to the water damage. Facility management notified the Department of the issue on 06/15/2026 and informed that action was being taken to repair the elevator. (Continued on LIC9099 p.2) Unsubstantiated (Continued from LIC9099 p.1) A review of facility records revealed the the facility submitted an incident report for the incident in addition to notifying the Department via email within the required timeframe. Additional records revealed an email exchange between facility management and the elevator contractor regarding the repair services and materials. Additional records showed invoices from the restoration contractor detailing the projected remediation repairs to include wall masking, drywall repair, baseboard installation, cleaning, hallway door removal and reinstallation, moisture inspection, floor protection installation, and labor costs. The contractor paperwork noted that additional drying time was needed for certain parts of the flooring before the drying standard could be achieved. Documentation pertaining to the carpet cleanings was reviewed as well as communication between management and the elevator contractor to increase the closure time of the second elevator, which was completed. During two unannounced facility visits LPA directly observed both elevators at the facility on 06/24/26 and 07/10/26. The main elevator was closed and taped off for safety during both visits, as it was still under repair. On 06/24/2026 LPA observed the stairwell next to the main elevator to have increased humidity with a temporary plastic cover over a hole in the wall, connected to the elevator. Due to the moisture, an odor was present in the stairwell, which staff informed was being corrected by the restoration company. On 07/10/2026 LPA observed four (4) restoration contractors repairing and painting the walls of the elevator vestibule, main hallway outside of the elevator, and mail room. LPA observed the stairwell next to the main elevator a second time. The wall had been repaired with plaster and only a slight chemical smell was present, evidencing that the carpet and walls had been treated to prevent mold. LPA observed the second elevator to be in service during both visits. On 07/10/2026 LPA observed the second elevator door to have a 9-second open time with working sensors that stopped the door upon sensing that an object was in the door frame. LPA additionally observed a freshly painted concrete entryway, corroborating management statements that a plan was in place for cosmetic upgrades around the facility. LPA observed a second floor outdoor walkway to have faded paint due to normal wear and tear. This area was the same color as the freshly painted entryway and was observed to have no tripping hazards or broken concrete. LPA spoke to three residents during the facility visit. The residents acknowledged that the main elevator had been under repair and they had observed contractors working in the area. The residents informed that the facility had not delayed in repairing the elevator and floor issues, and have accommodated residents during this time as to not interrupt services. The residents confirmed that they had been able to utilize the secondary elevator and received complimentary tray service. Based on interviews, direct LPA observations and records review, a preponderance of evidence does not exist to prove that the alleged violations occurred, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Executive Director Daniel Slaughter, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 10, 2026 · control 08-AS-20260703163606

Type of visit: Case Management - Legal/Non-compliance

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced Case Management -Legal/Non-compliance visit. LPA met with Executive Director Daniel Slaughter and discussed the purpose of the visit, to conduct an inspection to ensure ongoing compliance with regulations and laws and ensure the health and safety of residents in care. During today’s visit, LPA briefly toured the facility, observed residents in care, and provided consultation regarding Title 22 requirements. The Executive Director was debriefed on the regulations and there is an understanding of the regulations. Based on today’s inspection, there were no deficiencies cited at this time in the areas evaluated. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report along with Licensee's Appeal Rights (LIC 9058 03/22) were provided to the Executive Director Daniel Slaughter whose signature below confirms receipt of these rights.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 10, 2026

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced Case Management Visit. LPA was greeted by and met with Wellness Director Raquel Mathews to discuss the purpose of the visit. Today's visit is in response to the self report of overlapping malfunctions in both elevators at the facility. On 06/09/2026 during routine maintenance, the elevator near the lobby malfunctioned due to the contractor breaking an element of the sprinkler/water pipe. The damage resulted in the elevator area flooding. On 06/14/2026 the elevator near the dining room stopped working due to an unrelated mechanical issue. The facility scheduled a contractor and the dining room elevator was repaired on 06/16/2026. Between both incidents, there was a 2-day period where no elevator service existed. During this time, the facility assisted residents with tray service for all meals at no charge, provided activities on both floors, and one resident was assisted down the stairs in the evacuation chair by EMS when sent to the hospital. LPA conducted a wellness check at the facility; the resident who utilized the evacuation chair confirmed that EMS assisted them with no issue down the stairs. The lobby elevator in disrepair was clearly marked with signage and was taped off; the dining room elevator was directly observed by LPA to be operational. LPA visually confirmed that all stairwells contained evacuation chairs, with instructions imbedded on each chair for use. No health or safety issues were identified and no deficiencies were cited or observed on this date. An exit interview was conducted with Health and Wellness Director Raquel Mathews, who was provided with a copy of this report and Appeal Rights (LIC9056 03/22). Their signature confirms receipt of these documents.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 24, 2026

Type of visit: Case Management - Incident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced Case Management Visit. LPA was greeted by and met with Regional Health and Wellness Director Janet Mangaya to discuss the purpose of the visit. During the visit Health and Wellness Director Raquel Mathews arrived to the facility. Today's visit is in response to the self reported fall of Resident 1 (R1 - see LIC811 Confidential Names List). R1 suffered a fall resulting in a hip fracture on 05/10/2026. Staff interviews revealed that the fall occurred In R1's room with a family member, outside of caregiver assistance. A written statement from the family member and facility care notes showed that the fall occurred while R1 was being assisted with toileting with their family member. The required stability equipment was in place during the time of the fall. The information showed that upon standing, R1 stepped back without enough support and fell to the ground, causing a hip fracture. LPA conducted a wellness check at the facility; R1 was not present due being admitted into a rehabilitation facility. No health or safety issues were identified. No deficiencies were cited or observed on this date. An exit interview was conducted with Health and Wellness Director Raquel Mathews who was provided with a copy of this report and Appeal Rights (LIC9056 03/22). Their signature confirms receipt of these documents.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 20, 2026

Allegation investigated: Unlawful eviction.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings regarding the above complaint allegation. LPA introduced themselves and disclosed the purpose of the visit to Executive Director Daniel Slaughter and Health and Wellness Director Raquel Mathews. On 03/11/2026 it was alleged that the Licensee provided an unlawful eviction to Resident 1 (R1). The Department’s investigation consisted of unannounced facility visits, interviews with facility staff, resident, outside sources, and records review. Interviews with staff revealed that R1 had lived at the facility for approximately 2.5 months prior to receiving the 30-day Notice to Vacate letter on 02/19/2026. The reason for eviction was due to R1 violating the policies of the facility by being verbally abusive toward staff. Staff members who provided direct care to R1 were interviewed; these staff consistently informed that R1 spoke to them rudely, swore at them, used derogatory phrases, hit items out of their hands, threw items at them, and made demeaning comments toward them. Staff informed that these behaviors increased when R1 became intoxicated. (Continued on LIC9099 p.2) Substantiated (Continued from LIC9099 p.1) Facility management informed that a letter was provided to R1 on 01/30/2026, prior to the eviction notice, informing R1 that they were not in compliance with facility policies due to staff mistreatment. This letter referenced two prior direct conversations that had been held requesting for R1 to refrain from verbal abuse toward staff. Management additionally informed that the 30-day Notice to Vacate was served to R1 on February 19th, 2026, however the document did not contain all of the required information. Management informed that a second 30-day Notice to Terminate letter with all of the required information was given to R1 on February 24th, 2026. Management informed that upon confronting R1 regarding their behavior toward staff, R1 denied the claims and indicated that whatever statements that were made were outside of R1's awareness that staff could hear them. A private interview was conducted with R1 during an unannounced facility visit. R1 denied being disrespectful to staff and believed that a specific staff member was targeting them. R1 admitted to saying the word "stupid" once regarding a food situation, and stated they may have made a remark about staff who they thought were out of earshot. Outside sources were interviewed regarding the allegation. One outside provider informed that R1 was direct with their communication, but the source had not directly observed R1 engage disrespectfully toward staff. A second outside source from an advocacy agency informed that the situation had been made known to them, but they were not given permission by R1 to speak with any staff members in order to verify or refute the information. Records review corroborated staff statements regarding R1's behavior toward facility staff. A formal notice to R1 dated 01/30/2026 informed that R1 was not in compliance with facility policies due to their mistreatment toward staff. The 02/19/2026 30-day Notice to Vacate informed of the Licensee's intention to evict R1, however the document did not contain the required elements for the eviction to be enforceable. The second 30-day Notice to Terminate, dated 02/24/2026, included the required elements for a valid eviction notice and included a list of specific events where R1 swore at staff, threw items, and made demeaning statements. Care notes for R1, from their date of admission to the time of the eviction notice, detailed situations where R1 mistreated staff. The Resident Handbook stated that residents and guests were expected to behave in a civil manner that would not cause unreasonable distress, discomfort, annoyance, disturbance or inconvenience to other residents, employees and management of the community. (Continued on LIC 9099 p.3) (Continued from LIC9099 p.2) While the evidence gathered supports the Licensee's justification for R1's eviction due to violating the general policies of the facility, the first eviction notice provided to R1 on 02/19/2026 was unlawful due to not containing the required elements. The subsequent eviction notice dated 02/24/2026, however, was valid based on the reason for eviction and required elements existing in the document. Based on relevant interviews and records review, the preponderance of evidence has been met that alleged violation occurred and is therefore substantiated. Deficiencies are cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 (refer to the attached LIC 9099-D). A Plan of Correction was jointly developed with the licensee. An exit interview was conducted with Executive Director Daniel Slaughter and Health and Wellness Director Raquel Mathews, to whom a copy of this report, and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 29, 2026 · control 08-AS-20260311095205

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87224(d)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Apr 29, 2026

The licensee shall set forth in the notice to quit the reasons relied upon for the eviction with specific facts to permit determination of the date, place, witnesses, and circumstances concerning those reasons. The notice to quit shall include the following information:...” This requirement was not met, as evidenced by: Based on interviews and records, Licensee did not provide the required information in an eviction notice to R1. This resulted in a personal rights risk to 1 of 75 resdients in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 29, 2026

Plan of correction: Licensee acknowledged that the eviction notice on 02/19/2026 did not contain all of the required information, and did not enforce it. Management agreed to review the Title 22 requirements regarding eviction procedures, provided during the visit, and adhere to the requirements for future evictions.

Allegation investigated: Staff did not follow resident's care plan, resulting in fall.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced visit to initiate a complaint investigation and deliver findings regarding the above complaint allegation. LPA introduced themselves and disclosed the purpose of the visit to Executive Director Daniel Slaughter and Health and Wellness Director Raquel Mathews. On 04/24/2026 it was alleged that staff did not follow Resident 1 (R1's) care plan, resulting in a fall. The Department’s investigation consisted of an unannounced facility visit, interviews with facility staff, resident, outside sources, and records review. Staff interviews informed that R1 suffered weakness to the left side of their body due to a recent medical condition and required assistance with help during transfers. Staff informed that R1's leg brace and gait belt were to be used when assisting R1 with transfers. Staff informed that R1 did not have the gait belt or brace on during the incident in question. (Continued on LIC9099 p.2) Substantiated (Continued from LIC9099 p.1) Staff 1 (S1), who was involved in the transfer, confirmed that a conversation was not had with R1 regarding the assistive devices during the incident. S1 informed that while R1 has refused using the items in the past, they did not refuse them during this incident. Staff informed that R1 fell forward during the transfer in question, hitting their head on a dresser. S1 informed that they did not have a walkie to request help upon the fall so they informed R1 that they were going to find help and return, which was done within approximately 1 minute while R1 was lying on the ground. S1 acknowledged that R1 should have been wearing the gait belt and leg brace during the transfer and did not know why they were not on. Staff informed that updated instructions have been communicated to all caregivers and nurses regarding ensuring R1's assistive devices are on during each transfer, and calling for a second caregiver if R1 shows signs of weakness upon transferring. Staff additionally informed that signs are now up in R1's room, reminding staff to ensure R1's assistive devices are on during all transfers. An interview was conducted with R1 during and unannounced facility visit. R1 informed that they were supposed to wear their gait belt and leg brace during each transfer and that the items were not on during the transfer in question. R1 informed that they did not have a conversation with S1 regarding the brace/gait belt being on or off prior to the transfer. R1 stated that their foot "buckled" during the transfer, causing them to fall forward and hit the left side of their forehead on the front flat part of a dresser. R1 informed that signs are now placed in their room regarding the use of the gait belt and leg brace for transfers, and that staff now request an additional caregiver to assist them when needed. Outside source interviews were attempted, however LPA's phone calls were not returned. Records Review included the Unusual Incident/Injury Report for the incident, R1's progress notes, Service Plan, and photos. R1's service plan showed that the expectation at the time of the incident was for R1 to utilize a gait belt, leg brace, and cane during all transfers. The Unusual Incident/Injury Report and progress notes pertaining to the incident were consistent with staff and resident statements regarding the details of the fall during transfer. LPA directly observed the assistive equipment and furniture involved during the incident in question. R1 described and affirmed LPA's understanding of R1's contact with the dresser upon falling. LPA took photos of the dresser and signs posted on the wall that were placed after the fall. (Continued on LIC9099 p,3) (Continued from LIC9099 p.2) LPA personally walked and timed the path of travel that S1 took when requesting help for R1 after the fall. LPA walked at a conservative pace (not running) from R1's room to the open balcony on the second floor where S1 yelled for help to the reception desk below. The total amount of time round trip was 00:58:42. LPA's direct observation corroborated S1's statements regarding being away from R1 approximately 1 minute to get help after the fall. Based on relevant interviews and records review, the preponderance of evidence has been met that alleged violation occurred and is therefore substantiated. Deficiencies are cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 (refer to the attached LIC 9099-D). A Plan of Correction was jointly developed with the licensee. An exit interview was conducted with Executive Director Daniel Slaughter and Health and Wellness Director Raquel Mathews, to whom a copy of this report, and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 29, 2026 · control 08-AS-20260424115624

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.2(a)(4) · Plan of correction due date: May 1, 2026

(a)In addition to the rights... personal rights: (4)To care, supervision, and services that meet their individual needs and are delivered by staff that are sufficient in numbers... This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews and records review, the licensee did not ensure care/services were provided that met the individual needs of R1 during a transfer. This resulted in a safety risk for 1 of 75 residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 29, 2026

Plan of correction: Health & Wellness Director retrained staff to include utilization of required assistive devices during transfers and requesting assistance from a second caregiver when needed. Additional transfer training will be provided to staff, with proof of training sent to LPA by POC due date.

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced Required Annual Inspection. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPA was welcomed by and discussed the purpose of the visit to Health & Wellness Director Raquel Mathews and Executive Director Ryan Golze. The facility's license shows a maximum capacity of one hundred and forty (140) non-ambulatory residents, of which eighty two (82) may be non-ambulatory and sixteen (16) bedridden. Hospice waiver for sixteen (16). During today’s inspection there were sixty-five (65) residents in care. LPA and Health & Wellness Director toured the interior and exterior of the facility and inspected each room. The facility was clean, sanitary, and in good repair. Pathways were free of obstruction and slip hazards. Client bedrooms contained the required furnishings. Doors, windows, screens, toilets, and showers were in working order. Extra linens and hygiene supplies were present, as well as Personal Protective Equipment. The facility had sufficient space and equipment to facilitate dining, laundry, visitation, meetings, and client activities. The facility contained at least 2 days of perishable food, and at least 7 days non-perishable food, all safely stored. Cooking, dining equipment, and utensils were present. No toxic chemicals or poisons were accessible to clients. Medications were labeled, as required, and stored in locked areas. No pools or bodies of water exist on the premises. Per Health & Wellness Director, no firearms or ammunition are kept at the facility. Carbon monoxide detectors, emergency lighting, and facility telephone were all in working order. Fire extinguisher(s) were serviced within the last 12 months. First aid kit(s) were complete and readily accessible. Required licensing postings were observed in visible areas of the facility. LPA interviewed staff and clients, and reviewed facility records. The files reviewed by LPA contained required documents. Confidential records were stored in locked areas. Deficiencies are cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 (refer to the attached LIC 809-D). A Plan of Correction was jointly developed with the licensee. An exit interview was conducted with Health & Wellness Director Raquel Mathews, to whom a copy of this report, the LIC811 Confidential Names List, and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided. A continuation visit will be necessarythe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 20, 2026

Allegation investigated: Licensee did not provide meal service. Staff did not respond to residents' call button. Licensee did not provide supervision residents. Licensee did not provide opportunities for socialization. Licensee did not ensure facility was sanitary.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Nacole Patterson conducted a delivery of findings complaint meeting regarding the above complaint allegations. This meeting was conducted virtually with Director of Health and Wellness Raquel Matthews, to whom LPA introduced themselves and disclosed the purpose of the meeting. On 08/12/2025 it was alleged that Licensee did not provide meal service, staff did not respond to residents' call button, Licensee did not provide supervision to residents, Licensee did not provide opportunities for socialization, and Licensee did not ensure facility was sanitary. The Department’s investigation consisted of unannounced facility visits, interviews with facility staff, residents, outside sources, and records review. Regarding the allegation, "Licensee did not provide meal service", it was alleged that residents were not provided tray meal service to their rooms. (Continued on LIC9099 p.2) Unsubstantiated (Continued from LIC 9099 p.1) Staff members interviewed were not aware of an issue regarding residents' receiving tray service when needed and management stated they had not received any complaints from residents or family members regarding food service. Staff informed that most residents eat meals in the dining room during meal times. The facility offers three (3) meal services, all of which have two serving times: 7:30am/8:30am, 11:30am/12:30pm, 4:30pm/5:30pm. Tray service is an additional charge that can be requested from residents or included in their service plan upon admission. If a resident is unable to attend dining room service due to being sick, the facility will provide for (4) complimentary tray services per month. Tray service is an agreement signed by the resident, and information about the service is provided in the Residency Agreement. At the time of interview, less than five (5) residents were on the list for tray service. Review of the facility's Residency Agreement showed that the facility provided three (3) meals plus snacks as a basic service. The document stated that residents could pay an additional $10 for each tray service, and corroborated staff interviews that residents could receive four complimentary (4) sick trays. The facility's food menus showed an extensive variety of food options, with meals including protein, vegetables, and a dessert for lunch and dinner. LPA directly observed the facility's food service during an announced facility visit. The food was observed to be of good quality and variety, absent of indications that it was not fresh or improperly cooked. LPA additionally observed three (3) separate staff delivering food trays to respective resident rooms while the other residents were eating in the dining room. Resident interviews revealed no concerns regarding tray service or food service at the facility. Outside sources interviewed did not express concern about food service at the facility. Regarding the allegation, "Staff did not respond to residents' call button" and "Licensee did not provide supervision residents", it was alleged that staff did not respond to a resident's call for an extended period of time and that staff did not meet resident care needs due to inadequate supervision. Staff members interviewed had not observed long wait times. Staff noted that, at times, residents have misperceptions of how long they have waited. A staff member offered an example of a resident who claimed they had waited twenty (20) minutes for help, however the computer system showed that the wait time was approximately five (5) minutes. Staff additionally informed that there were times when a resident was tended to timely but the staff member forgot to clear the call. (Continued on LIC9099 p.3) (Continued from LIC9099 p. 2) Staff informed that resident pendant calls specifically alerted the staff working on the respective floor during each shift, and that the concierge was also utilized to let staff know when a pendant call remained on the screen after fifteen (15) minutes. Records review revealed that the average staff response time during a sample period was 11 minutes, 6 seconds. Review of Resident Council Meeting notes prior to the complaint showed that four (4) new staff members had been hired. The notes were absent of resident complaints regarding pendant response times. Review of staff assignments and schedules showed that 3-4 staff were assigned to each floor, depending on shift, with two (2) Med Techs on the AM and PM shift. The schedule additionally showed that a Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) was present during AM shifts, as well as the Wellness Director who is a licensed medical professional. The facility's Residency Agreement revealed that activities of daily living (ADL) assistance was provided to residents per their level of care. Residents interviewed did not express concern regarding pendant response times or staff supervision. Outside sources interviewed did not express concerns about pendant response times. During and unannounced facility visit LPA directly observed staff assisting residents and responding to resident pendant calls. LPA observed the call log screen twice during the visit, observing no outstanding pendant calls. LPA observed specific staff pagers during interview, with none showing pendant alerts with egregious wait times. LPA additionally observed staff approach residents without being paged in common hallways and in the dining room. LPA overheard the concierge inquire about an outstanding pendant call, and the staff responsible for the section informed that they were assisting another resident but would be there shortly. Regarding the allegation, "Licensee did not provide opportunities for socialization", it was alleged that residents were left without social interaction. Staff interview revealed that two volunteers visit the facility 1-2 times per week and offer activities such as arts and crafts, horse race derby games with prizes, bingo, or walk around and engage with residents. Staff informed that caregivers intentionally invite residents to the scheduled monthly and daily activities. (Continued on LIC9099 p.4) (Continued from LIC9099 p.3) The facility also produced a community newsletter for residents, and all monthly and daily activities were posted around the facility. Staff stated that residents will also sit and chat with each other in common areas around the facility. Residents interviewed did not express concern regarding activities and socialization opportunities at the facility. Outside sources interviewed did not express concerns regarding the socialization opportunities for residents. The facility's Residency Agreement shows that socialization activities are a basic service that the facility provides. The facility's monthly Activity Schedule showed an extensive variety of activities for residents to gather and socialize, with 6-11 activities being offered each day in the month of August 2025. One exception was on 08/30/25, which offered 3 activities plus a facility-wide Luau Party event. During unannounced facility visits LPA directly observed residents gathering in various parts of the facility and engaging with each other. LPA observed residents sitting in groups chatting, eating meals together, playing games, and being entertained by live performers. Additionally LPA has observed staff members approach residents sitting in common areas to ask how they were doing, as well as stopping to speak with residents in passing in hallways. Regarding the allegation, "Licensee did not ensure facility was sanitary", it was alleged that resident rooms and common areas were inadequately cleaned, malodorous, and contained trash. Staff members interviewed informed that the housekeepers pick up trash daily inside and outside of the facility, vacuum multiple times per week, wipe down surfaces in common areas. Staff informed that each resident room is cleaned once per week, and caregivers help to maintain this. Caregivers clean up spills when they occur and housekeeping is called to clean and sanitize accidents that occur in the common bathrooms. Residents interviewed did not express concern regarding the cleanliness of the facility or their rooms. Outside source did not express concern regarding the facility's cleanliness. (Continued on LIC9099 p.5) (Continued from LIC9099 p.4) Records review revealed a weekly cleaning schedule where 6-9 resident rooms were cleaned each day of the week. This schedule accounted for all occupied resident rooms plus common areas. Cleaning checklists show detailed steps for resident rooms and common areas to be cleaned; this form included check boxes for staff to mark when each task was complete. The facility's Residency Agreement showed that housekeeping was a basic service that the facility provides to residents. During multiple unannounced facility visits LPA observed common areas and resident rooms. No clutter, debris, or malodor was observed. An extensive observation of facility cleanliness was conducted during the unannounced visit on 08/18/2025. No odors, clutter, or debris was found. A sample of random resident rooms were found to be clean, organized, and sanitary. Housekeeping was observed going in and out of resident rooms per the weekly cleaning schedule. Based on interviews, direct LPA observations and records review, a preponderance of evidence does not exist to prove that the alleged violations occurred, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Director of Health and Wellness Raquel Mathews to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 10, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250812091812

Allegation investigated: Staff did not treat resdient with dignity.

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Ramin Hashemi and Nacole Patterson conducted an unannounced visit to initiate a complaint investigation and deliver findings regarding the above complaint allegation. LPAs introduced themselves and disclosed the purpose of the visit to Executive Director, Ryan Golze. On June 18th, 2025 it was alleged that staff did not treat resident with dignity. The Department’s investigation consisted of an unannounced facility visit, interviews with facility staff, residents, outside sources, records review, and LPA observations. Staff interviews revealed that staff had not heard of residents being treated without dignity. Staff confirmed that if they were to witness such an event they would immediately report it to management, per protocol. Staff interviews consistently informed the protocol for residents exhibiting behaviors by giving residents time to readjust, change of face, or elevating the situation to management. No Staff indicated that they had observed residents being treated without dignity or respect. Management was not aware of any reports of resident dignity being violated. (Continued on LIC9099 P2) Unsubstantiated (Continued from LIC9099 P1) Management informed that any allegation of resident abuse required an internal investigation and administrative leave for the accused staff. Three of four caregiver interviews revealed that Resident 1 (R1) tended to have combative days, which included claiming that they were being hurt even when no staff were nearby or touching them. Four residents were interviewed, during the investigation including the resident in question. All residents stated staff were nice, treated them well, and respected them. Residents who utilized their pendants stated that staff response times were 15 minutes or less. No residents including R1 stated that staff were rough or treated them without dignity. R1 specifically denied that staff interacted with them roughly or were rude. An outside source familiar with R1 informed that R1 has good days and bad days, which corroborated staff statements. Attempts were made to contact an additional outside source with no response. Records review did not corroborate the allegation. R1's Physician’s Report indicated secondary diagnosis of cognitive impairment. No progress or care notes during the time frame of the incident gave evidence to the allegation. During an unannounced facility visit, LPAs directly observed resident care. LPAs did not observe staff interact with residents in a way that did not honor their dignity or assist residents in a way that was unwelcome. Based on interviews, direct LPA observations and records review, a preponderance of evidence does not exist to prove that the alleged violation occurred, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Executive Director Ryan Golze, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 27, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250618161114

Type of visit: Collateral

Licensing Program Analyst’s (LPAs) Carmen Lopez and Arian Golbakhsh conducted an unannounced collateral visit to the facility. LPAs Lopez and Golbakhsh identified themselves and were granted entry by Sabrina Uchino, Resident Services Associate. LPAs stated the purpose of the visit with Raquel Mathews, Director of Health and Wellness. During the visit, LPAs Lopez and Golbakhsh spoke with staff to aid in an open investigation involving a different unlicensed care facility. No deficiencies were observed or cited during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report along with Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided to Raquel Mathews, Director of Health and Wellness, at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms the receipt of the documents.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 13, 2025

Allegation investigated: - Financial abuse

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Carmen Lopez conducted an unannounced visit to open a complaint investigation. While at the facility LPA investigated and delivered findings regarding the above-mentioned allegation. LPA identified herself and was granted entry by concierge Sabrina Uchino. LPA stated the purpose of the visit and reviewed the findings of the complaint with Raquel Matthews, Director of Health and Wellness. The Department’s investigation consisted of interview with staff and records review of relevant documents pertinent to this investigation. On January 28, 2025, it was alleged that financial abuse transpired at the facility. It was specifically alleged facility staff #1 (S1) financially abused resident #1 (R1) and staff #2 (S2) assisted with the financial abuse. On February 5, 2025, LPA reviewed the Facility’s current Resident Roster dated February 5, 2025, which R1s name was not found on the roster. (Continuation on LIC9099-C) Unfounded (Continuation of LIC9099) LPA reviewed the staff Daily Assignment schedule for January 13, 2025, through January 18, 2025, and did not observe the names of S1 or S2 on their assignment sheet. Upon further review of the roster for all Remington Club residents, it was determined that R1 did not reside in the licensed Assisted Living facility. LPA interviewed Director of Health and Wellness and confirmed that R1 did not ever reside in the assisted living facility. It was also confirmed that S1 and S2 are not employees of the facility. Based on the Department’s investigation of the above-mentioned allegation and the evidence obtained during records reviewed and interview with staff, we have found that the complaint was unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. The allegation was not pertinent to this licensed facility. The Department has cross-reported this complaint to the appropriate agencies for follow-up. The report was discussed, and an exit interview was conducted with Raquel Matthews, Director of Health and Wellness. A copy of this report along with Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 3/22) were provided to Director of Health and Wellness Matthews at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms the receipt of these documents.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 5, 2025 · control 08-AS-20250128133240

Type of visit: Case Management - Annual Continuation

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Carmen Lopez conducted a complaint investigation and in conjunction conducted this unannounced required annual continuation visit to complete the annual inspection started on January 23, 2025. LPA Lopez identified herself, was granted entry by concierge Sabrina Uchino. LPA discussed the purpose of the visit with Director of Health and Wellness, Raquel Mathews. Megan Milligan, Business Office Manager later arrived and joined the visit During today's visit, LPA finalized the review of resident records and reviewed staff records. Due to time constraints, the inspection could not be completed, and a subsequent visit will be conducted at a later date to complete the required annual inspection. There were deficiencies observed and cited during today’s visit and can be reviewed on the LIC809-D page of this report. An exit interview was conducted with Director of Health and Wellness Raquel Mathews, and Megan Milligan, Business Office Manager to whom a copy of this report along with the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms the documents were received.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 5, 2025

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87412(g)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 28, 2025

Personnel Records 87412 (g)(1) The licensee shall be permitted to retain such records in a central administrative location provided that they are readily available to the licensing agency at the facility as specified in Section 87412(f). This requirement was not met as evidence by: Based on records review the facility did not comply with the section cited above in one out of the five staff records were not readily available with complete documents, which posed a potential personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 5, 2025

Plan of correction: Facility will obtain records and place them in the staff file for S1 and send a copy to LPA by POC due date, 02/28/2025.

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR87506(b)(16) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 28, 2025

Resident Records 87506 (b)(16) Records of resident's cash resources as specified in Section 87217, Safeguards for Resident Cash, Personal Property, and Valuables. This requirement was not met as evidence by: Based on records review the facility did not comply with the section cited above in four out of the ten residents did not have a Personal Property/Valuables form on file, which posed a potential personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 5, 2025

Plan of correction: Facility will send a completed copy of the SPV forms for the following residents: R2, R5, R6 and R7 and submit to LPA once they are completed by POC due date, 02/28/2025.

Allegation investigated: - Facility staff did not provide resident with timely medical assistance - Facility staff left resident on the floor - Facility staff did not provide resident with medication(s) as prescribed - Facility staff did not assist residents care needs - Residents personal rights were violated - Facility staff did not provide resident with meals - Facility did not follow admission agreement - Facility did not provide resident with basic services

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Carmen Lopez conducted an unannounced complaint visit to deliver findings for an opened complaint investigation. LPA identified herself and was granted entry by concierge Sabrina Uchino and Geizel Dasig. LPA stated the purpose of the visit and reviewed the findings of the complaint with Raquel Matthews, Director of Health and Wellness and Meagan Milligan, Business Office Manager. The Department’s investigation consisted of interviews with staff and records review of relevant documents pertinent to this investigation. On November 20, 2024, it was alleged that the facility did not provide resident with timely medical assistance; facility left resident on the floor; facility staff did not provide medications as prescribed; facility did not assist resident with care needs; residents personal rights were violated; facility staff did not provide residents with meals; facility did not follow admission agreement; and facility did not provide resident with basic services. (Continuation on LIC9099-C) Unfounded (Continuation of LIC9099) Based on the Department’s investigation of the above-mentioned allegations and the evidence obtained during staff interviews, and records reviewed, we have found that the complaint was unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. The allegations were not pertinent to this licensed facility and were out of the Department’s jurisdiction. The Department has cross-reported this complaint to the appropriate agencies for follow-up. The report was discussed, and an exit interview was conducted with Raquel Matthews, Director of Health and Wellness, and Meagan Milligan, Business Office Manager. A copy of this report along with Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 3/22) were provided to Director of Health and Wellness Matthews at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms the receipt of these documents.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2025 · control 08-AS-20241120094141

Type of visit: Case Management - Incident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Carmen Lopez conducted an unannounced Case Management visit for a report that was submitted to the San Diego Regional Office. LPA Lopez identified herself and was granted entry by the concierge Sabrina Uchino and Geizel Dasig. LPA stated the purpose of the visit and reviewed the basic elements of today’s visit with the Director of Health and Wellness Raquel Matthews (DHW). Today’s visit was in response to the death of Resident #1 (R1 – See LIC811 Confidential Names List for identification of R1), which was reported to the San Diego Regional Office, Community Care Licensing Department (CCLD) on 01/10/2025. According to the IR, on 01/08/2025, the resident was getting ready to bathe when they lost their balance and fell. Facility staff were present, and a nurse was called to the scene. The nurse assessed the resident and determined the resident needed a higher level of care due to the resident’s condition and medication being taken. The nurse contacted emergency services and resident was taken to the hospital. The resident’s results returned with no evidence of mass, lesions, or acute cortical infarct or intracranial hemorrhage, and was returned to the community about 4 hours later. A caregiver was assisting the resident when the resident became unresponsive. Facility staff immediately contacted 911 and upon their arrival, the resident was pronounced deceased. On 01/23/25, LPA spoke with staff, and requested relevant facility records pertinent to this incident. According to facility records, the resident had underlying medical condition that required them to take anticoagulants since 2017. Records further indicated that the resident was a high fall risk but used an assistive device and was able to ambulate independently. Resident had a call device for assistance as needed. Records indicated that care staff would check on R1 every 2 hours. Additional records indicated that R1 had no evidence of acute intracranial hemorrhage or spinal fractures. According to further records, a waiver was provided by the medical examiner and a waiver number was provided to LPA. (Continuation on LIC809-C) (Continuation of LIC809) DHW said that they were notified via radio. Upon their arrival, they saw R1 was on the ground for no more than 5 minutes when 911 was initiated which included their arrival time to the room and in conducting a quick assessment of the R1 and determined they needed emergency response. They are aware that R1 was on anticoagulants which was a factor that contributed to contacting emergency response. LPA informed the Health and Wellness Director that, at this time, the case requires additional telephone calls or visits relating to this incident. No deficiencies were identified or cited on this date. An exit interview was conducted with Director of Health and Wellness, Raquel Matthews, to whom a copy of this report, the LIC811 Confidential Names List, and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 01/16) were provided at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms the documents were received.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2025

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Carmen Lopez conducted an unannounced case management, delivered findings for a complaint investigation and in conjunction performed a required Annual Inspection visit. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPA Lopez identified herself, was granted entry by concierge Sabrina Uchino and Geizel Dasig. LPA discussed the purpose of the visit with Director of Health and Wellness Raquel Mathews. According to the facility’s license, there may be a maximum of 140 ambulatory residents of which 82 may be non-ambulatory and 16 may be bedridden in at any given time at the facility site. A hospice waiver is approved for 22 residents. During today’s inspection, the facility’s current census is 54 residents living at the facility. There were 54 residents present at the facility site during the inspection. During today's visit, LPA reviewed facility records and will complete the review of records at a later date. Due to time constraints, the inspection could not be completed, and a subsequent visit will be conducted at a later date to complete the required annual inspection. There were no deficiencies observed or cited during today’s visit. An exit interview was conducted with Director of Health and Wellness Raquel Mathews, to whom a copy of this report along with the Licensee Rights (LIC9058 3/22) were provided at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms the documents were received.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 23, 2025

Type of visit: Case Management - Incident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Carmen Lopez, conducted an unannounced visit to initiate a case management visit. LPA Lopez identified herself and was granted entry by Raquel Matthews, Director of Health and Wellness. LPA Lopez stated the purpose of the visit and reviewed the basic elements of the visit with Director of Health and Wellness Matthews. Executive Director Matthew Ryan later arrived and joined the visit. This visit was in response to an Unusual Incident/Injury Report (IR) that was received at the San Diego Regional Office on July 23, 2024. The IR said that the Assisted Living was undergoing work on their air conditioning units. During today's visit LPA Lopez spoke with staff, toured the facility, and requested and obtained relevant documents pertinent to this incident. According to the Health and Wellness Director Matthews the residents had portable air conditioning units and hydration stations throughout the facility. There were no issues with residents during the reparations. No deficiencies were observed or cited during today’s visit. An exit interview was conducted with Executive Director Mathew Ryan, and a copy of this report, and Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058) were provided to Executive Director Ryan at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms that the documents were received.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 6, 2024

Type of visit: Case Management - Incident

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Carmen Lopez, conducted an unannounced visit to initiate a case management visit. LPA Lopez identified herself and was granted entry by concierge Sabrina Uchino. LPA Lopez stated the purpose of the visit and reviewed the basic elements of the visit with Resident Service Director Raquel Mathews. Executive Director Amy Divas later arrived and joined the visit. This visit was in response to an Unusual Incident/Injury Report (IR) that was received at the San Diego Regional Office on Friday, June 14, 2024. The IR said that there was an incident that had transpired on Saturday, June 8, 2024, with resident #1 (R1) who sustained injuries. During today's visit LPA Lopez spoke with staff and resident and requested and obtained relevant documents pertinent to this incident. LPA Lopez verified that R1 was visiting with another resident #2 (R2) when the incident transpired. According to the IR and R2 confirmed, R1 had slid off a bed, and staff was called to assist R1. R1 did not report any pain and ambulated to activities per usual. R1s responsible party was notified of the incident. Per Resident Service Director, at that time paramedics were not contacted as R1 had full range of motion and did not report any pain. R1's RP visited the morning of June 10, 2024, when R1 reported feeling pain. Paramedics were immediately contacted and R1 was taken to the hospital. R1 is currently at a rehabilitation center and plan of care will be updated upon to R1s return to the facility. LPA informed Resident Service Director Mathews that there may be further follow-up telephone calls or visits necessary for this incident. No deficiencies were cited during today’s visit. An exit interview was conducted with Resident Service Director Raquel Mathews, and a copy of this report, LIC811 and Licensee Appeal Rights (LIC9058) were provided to Resident Service Director Raquel Mathews at the conclusion of the visit. The signature below confirms that the documents were received.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 18, 2024

Type of visit: Case Management - Annual Continuation

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Dang Nguyen and Juliana Barfield conducted an unannounced visit to continue a Required Annual Inspection which began on 01/22/2024. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPAs were welcomed by, identified themselves to, and discussed the purpose of the visit with Director of Resident Care Raquel Mathews and Executive Director Kevin Booth. According to the facility’s license, the facility has a maximum capacity of 140 residents, of which 82 may be non-ambulatory and 16 may be bedridden. During today’s inspection, there were a total of 62 residents in care, of which 59 were non-ambulatory, 3 were ambulatory, and zero were bedridden. The facility's fire clearance did not include endorsements for delayed-egress doors or secured perimeter, and neither were present during today's visit. The submitted facility sketch was consistent with the current layout of the facility. During the annual inspection, LPAs, accompanied by licensee’s staff, toured the interior and exterior of the facility and inspected common areas and a sampling of resident bedrooms. LPAs privately interviewed multiple staff and residents. LPAs also reviewed multiple staff and resident records/files. The facility was clean, sanitary, and in good repair. Pathways were free of obstruction and slip hazards. Resident bedrooms contained required furniture. Doors, windows and screens, toilets, and showers were in working order. Extra linens and hygiene supplies were present, as well as Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). The facility had sufficient space and equipment to facilitate dining, laundry, visitation, meetings, and resident activities. Confidential records and centrally stored medications were kept in locked areas. [CONTINUED ON LIC 809-C, 1 of 2] [CONTINUED FROM LIC 809] The facility had at least two days of perishable food and seven days of non-perishable food present. The facility had cooking and dining utensils to facilitate resident meal service. The Main Kitchen Walk-In Refrigerator’s temperature was compliant at 40 F, and the Main Kitchen Walk-In Freezer’s temperature was complaint at 0 F. The auxiliary Walk-In Refrigerator was compliant at 40 F. The facility’s ambient internal temperature was compliant at 76 F. There were no sharp objects, toxic chemicals/poisons, fireplaces, or open-faced heaters accessible to residents for whom they would be a danger. No pools or bodies of water were observed on the premises. Per the licensee, no firearms or ammunition are kept at the facility. Smoke and fire alarms, carbon monoxide detectors, emergency lighting, signals system, and facility telephone were all working. Fire extinguishers were serviced within the last 12 months. A complete first aid kit was present and readily accessible. Licensee's staff also presented proof of current/active business liability insurance. Required licensing postings were observed in visible areas of the facility. Where tested, hot water temperature at taps (which were used by residents for personal care) were initially non-compliant: Bedroom #103 sink was 128 F, Bedroom #112 sink was 125 F, Bedroom #142 sink was 128 F, Bedroom #210 sink was 122 F, and Bedroom #241 sink was 129 F. During the course of the annual inspection, Licensee adjusted the facility’s boilers to bring the water temperatures down to the compliant range. During a review of a sample of employee files, LPAs observed, and manager interview confirmed: Licensee did not maintain written evidence of a completed physical / health screening for Staff #1 (S1) and Staff #2 (S2) from time of hire, as was required. [See LIC811 Confidential Names List of select person identifiers used in this report.] Licensee did not maintain proof of current First Aid training for Staff #3 (S3) and Staff #4 (S4), both of whom assist residents with personal Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), as was required. [CONTINUED ON LIC 809-C, 2 of 2] [CONTINUED FROM LIC 809-C, 1 of 2] Three (3) deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 (refer to the attached LIC 809-D pages). Plans of Correction was jointly developed with Licensee. LPAs also issued Technical Assistance (TA) regarding infection control and training records (see the LIC 9172-TA pages). An exit interview was conducted with Mathews and Booth, to whom a copy of this report, the LIC 809-D pages, the LIC9172-TA pages, the LIC811 Confidential Names List, and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided during the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 29, 2024

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Dang Nguyen and Juliana Barfield conducted an unannounced visit to conduct a Required Annual Inspection. The facility file was reviewed prior to the visit. LPAs were welcomed by, identified themselves to, and discussed the purpose of the visit with Executive Director Kevin Booth. LPAs then met with Director of Resident Care Raquel Mathews, who arrived later during the visit. During today’s visit, LPAs briefly toured the facility, reviewed staff and resident records, and interviewed staff and residents. No deficiencies were cited during today’s visit. Due to time constraints, a return visit on a subsequent day is needed to complete the annual inspection. An exit interview was conducted with the Mathews, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided during the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 22, 2024