Sunlit Gardens Assisted Living

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) LaVette Farlow conduct an unannounced case management visit to collect a signature from a previous complaint. The complaint number is 56-AS-20250805112307 and the visit was completed on 8/7/2025. LPA met with Luis Gonzalez, Administrator. LPA reviewed the report and collected the signatures from staff. An exit interview was conducted where this amended report (LIC9099) was reviewed, discussed and provided to Luis Gonzalez, Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 12, 2026

Allegation investigated: Resident is being over charged. Medications not dispensed as prescribed. Prescribed special diet not provided. Staff ignores resident verbally abuse. Dementia resident in Assisted Living unit. Unable to watch TV Not sufficient staff during meals.

On October 2, 2025 at 2:07PM Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) LaVette Farlow conducted an unannounced visit to the facility in order to deliver findings for the above allegations. LPA discussed the purpose of the visit with Administrator, Luis Gonzales. The investigation consisted of interviews, observation and record review. Regarding the allegation that resident is being overcharged: LPA interviewed ten (10) residents and nine (9) out of ten (10) residents stated their responsible party handles their financial affairs and they are not aware of any issues. R1 could not show any documents that would indicate the facility is over charging any fees. S1 stated that residents’ fees are based on needs and services and a point system. S1 stated that R1 charges are set by InnoVage and R1 receives all the amenities associated with the facility. LPA interviewed six (6) staff, and all six (6) staff stated they are not aware of and neither have the seen or heard families or residents being overcharged. LPA observed documentation by the facility detailing Resident one (R1) rental and admission agreement. Based on interviews, observation, and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Unsubstantiated Regarding the allegation that medication not dispensed as prescribed: LPA interviewed ten (10) residents and six (6) staff. LPA observed Med-Tech dispensing the residents medication. Staff stated residents receive medication in a timely manner. LPA interviewed residents and witnesses, and it was revealed that staff dispense the medication in a timely manner and as prescribed. LPA observed the medication room and reviewed the MARs and records appeared to be maintained and without any discrepancies. Based upon interviews, observation, and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation, the prescribes special diet not provided. Interview with R1 reveal R1 did not have a prescribed special diet from a physician. LPA reviewed R1 file and documents provided by R1 and R1 did not provide any documentation from a doctor regarding a special diet. LPA spoke with and toured the kitchen and observed how the facility documents and keeps track of residents with special dietary needs. The Dietary Service Director has a chart of residents with dietary needs posted in the kitchen for staff to maintain. Based upon interviews and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation staff ignore resident verbal abuse. LPA interviewed staff and residents. Interviews with six (6) staff revealed that staff intervene with resident’s verbal altercations. LPA Interviewed residents in care and nine (9) out of ten (10) residents stated they don’t have any issues with staff ignoring resident verbal abuse. R1 stated they are being bullied by R7 and R8 and staff are not assisting. Interviews with staff revealed that R1 has been observed being verbally abusive toward residents and staff. Based upon interviews and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation that Dementia residents are in the Assisted Living unit. LPA interviewed six (6) staff, and it was revealed that all residents are placed based on their needs and service. An interview with S1 revealed that they do not have Dementia residents in the Assisted Living cottage. The residents in the Assisted Living cottage may have mild cognitive impairment. Based upon interviews and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation, residents are unable to watch TV. LPA interviewed ten (10) residents and six (6) staff. During the interview it was revealed that residents have access to watch TV. The interview with residents in care stated residents have their own TV and when they desire, they will watch TV in the activity/Common area. The only issue was with Spectrum power outage or residents might misplace the remote control. Interview with staff revealed that residents have full access to watch TV in the activity/ common area. Staff reported the only issue is residents have misplaced or stolen the remote control. S1 stated due to the issues with the remote control, it is now maintained at the reception desk. Based upon interviews and observation, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation there is not sufficient staff during meals. LPA interviewed six (6) staff and ten (10) residents. Interviews with 9 out of 10 residents revealed there is sufficient staff during meals. R1 stated they are always served last and seated last. Other residents reported things are good with meals being served in a timely manner. LPA interviewed six (6) staff, and it was revealed that yes, they have their normal call off but when needed they will pull staff from other cottages or units to assist with meals, but it has not been an issue or ongoing problem. Based upon interviews, observation, and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation staff unable to communicate to Spanish speaking residents. LPA observed several Spanish speaking staff interacting and assisting Spanish speaking residents. LPA interview staff and residents and it was revealed that the facility has several staff that are fluent Spanish speaker. Based upon interviews and observation, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation, food is served cold and burnt. LPA interviewed ten (10) residents and six (6) staff. LPA interview with nine (9) out of ten (10) residents revealed that residents are satisfied with the meals and residents stated cold meals are cold and hot meals are hot. LPA observed the lunch meal being served during today’s visit, and ten (10) out of ten (10) residents were pleased with the meal and the temperature. LPA interviewed six (6) staff and the information from staff revealed meals are served hot and on time, and the meals that are delivered cold are cold meals. Based upon interviews and observation, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation there is an insufficient table setting during meals. LPA conducted a tour of the kitchen and dining area and observed enough table setting and sufficient eating utensil for residents in care. Interviews with residents and staff revealed the facility does provide sufficient table settings for residents in care. S1 stated the facility has made special arrangements for R1 to eat in the activity room due to conflict with residents but always has enough table settings for residents in care. Based upon interviews and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation there are dirty dishes and utensils. LPA interviewed ten (10) residents and six (6) staff. The interview with 6 out of 6 staff reveals the facility is good with maintaining clean dishes. If a dirty dish is observed, staff will replace it immediately. S1 stated the only thing they had observed was a dish with a water stain, but not any dirty dishes. The interview with 9 out of 10 residents reveals that the dishes are clean and if they observed dirty dishes staff would replace them. Based upon interviews this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation there are no alternative meals. LPA observed the facility meal schedule post on the facility board, with alternative meal options. During the tour of the facility LPA observed staff asking residents what they would like for lunch and provided residents with several meal choices. Interviews with residents revealed they have several meal choices and options for breakfast, lunch and dinner. LPA interview with staff revealed residents do have alternative meal options such as hamburgers, hot dogs, soups, hot and cold meals. S1 stated, the facility welcomes resident’s suggestion. S1 stated, the only thing we don’t offer is fries due to dietary needs. Based upon interviews and record review, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation, the facility manager refused to provide contact information. R1 stated, S1 refused to provide the contact information of the owner. S1 stated, they provided the email for R1 to contact the owners of the facility. R1 stated, they had the brochure of the facility which had contact information for the facility as well. LPA asked R1 did they used the information provided to contact the owner and R1 stated they did not have any contact information. Based upon interview and information reviewed, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations is unsubstantiated at this time. No deficiencies were cited during this visit. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed with, and a copy LIC9099 and LIC9099C was provided to the Administrator Luis Gonzalez.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 2, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250610175523

Allegation investigated: Illegal eviction

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) LaVette Farlow conducted an unannounced visit to deliver findings on the allegation mentioned above. LPA met with Lauren Rodriguez, Wellness Coordinator and explained the purpose of the visit. The Department's investigation involved observations, interviews, and records review. The allegation is the facility issued an illegal eviction. Interview with resident one (R1) revealed that R1 does not want to move, and feel the facility is refusing to meet their needs. R1 stated the facility did provide a 30 day eviction notice and optional placement but it is too far. R1 stated she wants to live in Rancho Cucamonga. LPA Farlow interviewed 4 staff and 4 out of 4 staff stated they have seen concerning behaviors from R1. Four (4) out of four (4) staff stated they have seen or personally experience R1 become verbally and or physically abusive towards staff or residents in care. Interview with S1, S2 and S3 revealed that the facility staff are assisting with R1 placement. ***Continued on LIC9099C*** Substantiated Based on document reviewed LPA Farlow was able to corroborate the allegation above. Records review indicated that the Administrator provided an Eviction Notice to R1 on July 14, 2025 and this eviction notice required more information and was less than 30 days which is not in compliance with Title 22, regulations for eviction procedures. The Administrator issued a second eviction notices on July 17, which required a reappraisal and a detailed explanation for the reason for the eviction. Due to the incomplete steps and procedures for the eviction process the eviction is denied. Based on LPA Farlow interviews, observation, and records review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, and therefore the above allegation of eviction procedures were not met is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. A finding that the complaint is SUBSTANTIATED means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. California Code of Regulations, (Title 22, Division 6 & Chapter 8) is being cited on the attached LIC9099D. An exit interview was conducted where this report, LIC9099, LIC9099C, LIC9099D, and Appeal Rights were discussed and provided to Wellness Coordinator, Lauren Rodriguez.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 15, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250729145016

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: HSC 1569.682(a)(A)(D) · Plan of correction due date: Aug 15, 2025

H&S 1569.682(a) A licensee of a licensed residential care facility for the elderly shall, prior to transferring a ...forfeiture of a license, as described in subdivision (a), possible transfer trauma, (d)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. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based upon record review and interviews, Administrator/Licensee did not submit complete eviction notice with an updated reappraisal explaining the changes in behaviors, and actions that lead to the eviction. This violation posed a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 15, 2025

Plan of correction: Administrator was advised to review and discuss with Owner/Licensee the proper procedure for an eviction procedure and provide a written statement acknowledging review of the of cited regulation within 7 days to LPA by POC date via email or fax.

Allegation investigated: Facility staff are interfering with residents’ ability to sleep. Staff do not ensure residents are accorded dignity and respect.

On 08/7/2025, Licensed Program Analyst (LPA) LaVette Farlow, conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to commence a complaint investigation. LPA was greeted and granted entrance and met with Lauren Rodriquez, Wellness Coordinator. LPA identified self and discussed the purpose of the visit. The investigation consisted of interviews with resident, staff, obtained and reviewed facility records. The allegation is the facility staff are interfering with residents' ability to sleep. LPA interviewed 7 out of 7 residents in care, and based on the interviews it was revealed that staff are not interfering with their ability to sleep. Interview with R2 revealed the only time R2 is woken early is for medical appointments and the transportation pick up time is early for InnoVage. Residents in care stated staff do not interfere with their sleep and some resident stated they get up on their own and others stated they sleep in. LPA Farlow interviewed 7 staff and 7 out of 7 staff stated they have not seen, neither have they been instructed to wake residents in care up early to assist the morning shift. Seven (7) out of seven (7) staff stated the only time residents are woken up early is for InnoVage appointments. 7 out of 7 staff stated they do not wake residents up or bother them if they are sleeping. It's their right to refuse to get up. ***Continued on LIC9099C*** Unsubstantiated The second allegation is the staff do not ensure residents are accorded dignity and respect. LPA interviewed 7 out of 7 residents in care, and based on the interviews it was revealed that resident are satisfied with the staff. Resident stated staff treat them with dignity and respect. R7 stated there was a staff that was rude to residents but that staff has since been fired. LPA Farlow interviewed 7 staff and 7 out of 7 staff stated they have not seen, neither have they observed staff not ensure resident are accorded dignity and respect. 7 out of 7 staff stated we all treat our residents with respect and dignity. 7 out of 7 staff stated they have not heard any complaints from family or residents regarding mistreatment. Based on the information above, the allegations is unsubstantiated. A finding of UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted where this report LIC 9099 and LIC 9099C was discussed, and a copy was provided to Med-Tech Shinobu Willis.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 7, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250805112307

Allegation investigated: Staff are not providing adequate activities for residents in care

On 06/12/2025, Licensed Program Analyst (LPA) LaVette Farlow, conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to commence a complaint investigation. LPA was greeted and granted entrance and met with Administrator, Luis Gonzalez. LPA identified self and discussed the purpose of the visit. The investigation consisted of interviews with residents, staff, obtained and reviewed facility records, and did a walk-through of the facility. It is alleged that staff are not providing adequate activities for residents in care. Interview with resident one (R1) stated that the staff are not providing activities for resident in the assisted living program and the activities are not catering to the needs of the residents in care. LPA interviewed 9 residents and 8 out of 9 residents stated the facility does provide activities. ***Continued on LIC9099C*** Unsubstantiated Residents stated that the facility provide music event, arts and craft, bingo, and domino games. LPA's interviews revealed that some residents participate and some do not depending on the activities. Interview with staff revealed that the facility are providing activities for resident in the assisted living program and memory care program. Staff stated some residents participate and other don't depending on the activity and the day. Staff stated the activities consist of bingo games, arts and craft, walks, music events, and bean bag games. Based on the information above, the allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding of UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted where this report LIC 9099 and LIC 9099C was discussed, and a copy was provided to Administrator, Luis Gonzalez.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 12, 2025 · control 56-AS-20250611105115

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) LaVette Farlow made an unannounced visit to the facility. The purpose of the visit was to conduct a required comprehensive annual inspection LPA met with Facility Business Office Manager, Lesley Hernandez and was granted entry to the facility. The facility is a Residential Care Facility for Elderly (RCFE), Licensed capacity is (172) current census (61). (LPA) LaVette Farlow was accompanied by Facility Wellness Director, Raquel Martin Del Campo, to conduct a general overall inspection, which included, but was not limited to, the following: Physical Plant: The facility consist of four (4) buildings. Buildings "A", "B", "C" and "D" and is operating in the capacity approved by Community Care Licensing (CCL). There are no obstructions to indoor and outdoor passageways. The facility is maintained at a comfortable temperature of 71, 74, 72 and 70 degrees in all four (4) buildings. LPA inspected residents bedrooms; they are equipped with required furniture such as: mattresses, night stands, storage space, and sufficient lighting; bathrooms were clean, and appliances were operating appropriately. LPA observed sufficient furniture and lighting throughout the facility. LPA measured and observed the water temperatures in the bathrooms to be at 115.4, 110, and 112.5 degrees F. The facility is equipped with operating smoke detectors and carbon monoxide alarms. Posters such as personal rights, the CCL complaint poster, and the disaster plan were posted in a common area. Cleaning supplies, toxins, sharps, and other dangerous items were kept inaccessible to clients in care. There was a designated storage space for client/staff files. Medications are kept inside Med-Room inaccessible to residents. Overall, the facility is clean, in good repair, and operating in safe conditions for residents in care. Food Service: Non-perishable and perishable food supply is sufficient for number of residents in care. Care & Supervision: Facility has sufficient care staff for coverage 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Record Review: LPA reviewed six (6) resident files for admission agreements, updated physician reports, and needs and services plans. LPA Farlow observed 1 out of 6 residents did not have a current LIC 602 on file. The resident LIC 602 hasn't been update since 2/2025. A technical violation issued. LPA Farlow also reviewed six (6) out of six (6) staff files for First Aid/CPR certification, criminal record clearance, training, and health screenings. LPA observed 1 out of 6 staff did not have a criminal background clearance, completed or record of the clearance in the staff file or on guardian. Deficiencies cited. LPA observed 4 out of 6 staff did not have a valid CPR/First Aid certificate. A deficiency cited. LPA observed that 6 out of 6 staff criminal background clearance has not been associated with the facility. A technical violation issued. LPA observed that 5 out of 6 staff personnel file was not complete, and missing CPR/First Aid, Background clearance, Training, Job description, and application. A technical violation issued. Medications were audited at random and appeared to be dispensed appropriately by staff members. Medication was secured and stored away from residents in care. Based on the observations made during today’s visit, three (3) deficiencies were cited and three (3) technical violations issued, per Title 22, Division 6, of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted, and this report LIC809, LIC809C, LIC809D, and appeal rights was discussed and provided to Facility Representative Raquel Martin Del Campo, and Lesley Hernandez.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 13, 2025

The state marks this report as 8 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 5. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

Type of visit: Case Management - Other

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Paola Guerrero arrived at the facility to conduct a case management visit. Upon arrival, LPA met with Facility Administrator Scarlett Augafa. On 11/25/2024, the Licensee received an approved fire clearance from Rancho Cucamonga County Fire Department for 24 bedridden residents. Building B Units 1-12 are approved for bedridden residents; Building C Units 1-12 are approved for bedridden residents; Buildings B and C are approved for delayed egress and secured perimeters. Capacity of 8.172 will remain the same. LPA will update the facility's file and issue a new license stating the change for Buildings Units B & C, along with the approved delayed egress and secured perimeters for Building Units B & C. An exit interview was conducted where this report LIC809 was discussed and provided to Facility Administrator Scarlett Augafa at the end of the visit.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 27, 2025

Type of visit: Prelicensing

On 03/01/2024 at 08:15 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Javier Prieto conducted an announced Prelicensing visit. This is an announced Pre-Licensing visit conducted with Administrator Scarlett Augafa who assisted in the tour of inside and outside of the facility and the evaluation. Administrator Augafa has the proper posting throughout the facility. The facility was evaluated in accordance with the California Code of Regulation (CCR), Title 22 Chapter 6, Division 8. Based on the observations and evaluation of the facility this date, the facility’s ready for licensure. A COMP III orientation was also conducted during today's visit with Administrator Scarlett Augafa, as well as with staff #2 (S2), S3 & and S4. Applicant/Administrator Scarlett Augafa will be notified once facility is licensed. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report (LIC809) was discussed and provided with Applicant/ Administrator Scarlett Augafa .the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 1, 2024

The state marks this report as 3 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 1. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.

Type of visit: Office

Component II completion: Successful Facility Type: Residential Care Facility for Elderly (RCFE) Application Type: Change in Ownership (CHOW) Capacity: 100 Census (if any clients in care): 72 COMP II Participants: Scarlett Augafa, Administrator Robert Sweet, Applicant Timothy O'Brien, Applicant Interview Method: Virtual interview (Microsoft Teams) On January 30, 2024 at 9:00 AM, Applicants and Administrator participated in COMP II. Identification of the Applicants and Administrator was verified through interview questions based on photo ID and other identifying personal information. During COMP II, Applicants and Administrator confirmed that they have read and understand community care facility licensing laws included in the Health and Safety Codes and the California Code of Regulations Title 22. During COMP II, CAB analyst confirmed Applicants and Administrator’s understanding of following areas: 1. Facility Operation: License type, client/resident populations, and program. 2. Admission Policies 3. Staffing Requirements & Training 4. Restrictive/Prohibited Health Conditions 5. General Provisions 6. Emergency Preparedness 7. Complaints & Reporting 8. Pre-licensing Readiness Exit interview conducted with Applicants and Administrator. Report sent via email and informed to return sign copy back to CAB by end of business day today.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 30, 2024