Silverado Senior Living - Calabasas.

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Kelly Dulek and Quoc Huynh conducted an unannounced required annual visit. Upon arrival, LPAs were greeted by the front desk staff and met with Administrator Patrice O'Grady shortly thereafter. Entrance interview conducted. Beginning at 10:25AM, the LPAs, along with Administrator, toured the physical plant areas inside and outside to ensure there are no health and safety hazards and facility is in compliance with Title 22 Regulations. The following was observed: BEDROOMS/RESTROOMS: The LPAs observed a random selection of ten (10) resident rooms, all of which contain private restrooms. All bedrooms were furnished appropriately with clean linens, furnishings and sufficient lighting. Separate carbon monoxide detectors and smoke detectors were tested in various resident rooms and all functioned properly at the time of the visit. Restrooms were clean, sanitary and in operating condition with grab bars and non-slip surfaces. Water temperature was tested in various resident restrooms and temperatures ranged from 113.0 to 117.1 degrees Fahrenheit. COMMON SPACES: The facility contains multiple common areas throughout, including but not limited to: two (2) dining areas, three (3) activity/snack areas, common entry area, and a spa room. Walls and flooring were checked for cleanliness and good condition. Department required postings were found in the front lobby near the restrooms. Fire extinguishers were charged and serviced 09/11/2025. EXTERIOR: The facility has several enclosed courtyards with appropriate outdoor seating for resident use. The swimming pool on the premises was observed to be locked. Report Continued on LIC 809-C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 FOOD SERVICE: LPAs observed the facility's commercial kitchen, which was locked and inaccessible to residents in care. Kitchen appeared to be clean and appliances operable. Facility has sufficient supply of both perishable and non-perishable food, along with emergency food and water. The facility has a system for special diets, including a visual board and diet cards to ensure residents' special diets and dietary preferences are recognized. Storage for chemicals is separate from food storage, per regulation. FILES: Record review began at 11:19AM. The LPAs reviewed a selection of five (5) staff files for documents including, but not limited to: health screening, TB test results, background clearance, and training records. All staff records reviewed were observed to be complete and in compliance with regulation at this time. The LPAs reviewed five (5) resident files for but not limited to: physician's report, needs and service appraisals, personal rights. All five (5) resident files reviewed contained all required documents. INFECTION CONTROL/EMERGENCY DISASTER PLAN: LPAs reviewed both the facility's infection control plan and emergency disaster plan. Both documents were observed to be complete and updated annually as required. The facility conducts emergency disaster drills on each shift quarterly, with the last disaster drill documented on 02/19/2026. Fire system 5-year inspection was completed on 05/16/2024 and the annual inspection was completed on 08/05/2025. No defects were noted during either inspection. MEDICATION REVIEW: Began at 01:47PM; LPA Huyhn, along with facility nurse, reviewed medications for five (5) residents. One resident (Resident #1-R1) did not have a centrally stored medication and destruction record (CSMDR), although R1's medications are being centrally stored by the facility. Nurse explained that the pharmacy sends the CSMDRs for the residents, however R1's prescriptions are filled at another pharmacy that does not provide a CSMDR. Administrator indicated that going forward, the facility will utilize Silverado's CSMDR, which meets the licensing requirements. All medications reviewed appeared to be administered as prescribed. INTERVIEWS: Throughout the visit, LPAs interviewed five (5) staff and five (5) residents. No concerns were noted. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was provided.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kelly Dulek conducted a Case Management - Incident visit regarding a self-reported incident. LPA met with Administrator Patrice O'Grady and explained the reason for the visit. A suspected abuse report was emailed to the Woodland Hills Regional Office (RO) on Friday night 12/12/2025. Corresponding incident report related to Resident #1 (R1) and Resident #2 (R2) was emailed to the RO on Saturday 12/13/2025. Incident Report indicated R1 reported to facility staff that R2 had sexually assaulted R1. Immediately following R1's reporting of the incident, the facility placed R2 on 1:1 care, informed both residents' responsible parties, and reported to local police. Police responded to the facility and a police report was filed. During LPA's visit today, LPA discussed the incident report with Administrator at 11:34AM, toured the facility with Administrator at 11:52AM and LPA obtained copies of pertinent documents. No immediate health and safety hazards were identified during facility tour. Administrator was informed that the incident was referred to Community Care Licensing Division's Investigations Branch (IB). If after reviewing all information further investigation is warranted, LPA and/or IB investigator may return at a later date. No deficiencies cited during today's visit. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

indicate R1 has a diagnosis of dementia and R1 moved into the facility on 02/21/2025. Interview with R1's family member revealed that R1 previously resided at home, however, there were safety concerns with that living situation. After a hospitalization, R1's family member moved R1 into the facility. Interview with staff revealed that R1 frequently verbalizes that they do not wish to remain at the facility and would like to return to their private home, however, R1 has not attempted to seek exit from the facility. All parties interviewed confirmed that R1 has not been held at the facility. Staff stated that the front door does have delayed egress and while R1 does sit in the front lobby and look out the windows, R1 has not attempted to open the door or exit the facility. LPAs also observed R1 in the front lobby but not attempting to exit the facility. The information obtained during the investigation did not include evidence sufficient to corroborate the allegation. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not sufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation "resident is being held at the facility against their will" is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. No citations issued. Exit interview conducted. A copy of today's report was provided.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kelly Dulek conducted a Case Management - Incident visit regarding a self-reported incident. LPA met with Regional Nurse Specialist Laken Lacy and explained the reason for the visit. A self-reported incident related to Resident #1 (R1) was received in the Woodland Hills Regional Office on 12/27/2024. Incident Report indicates "noted with an abrasion to R1's right knee. Injury obtained during transfer." LPA called the facility to inquire the circumstances surrounding the transfer and requested additional documents to be faxed to the Woodland Hills Regional Office, which were received on 12/31/2024. During LPA's visit today, LPA interviewed Regional Nurse Specialist beginning at 10:37AM, toured the facility with Regional Nurse Specialist at 01:19PM and LPA obtained copies of pertinent documents. No immediate health and safety hazards were identified during facility tour. Interview and document review revealed that R1 had previously undergone right knee replacement prior to R1 moving into the facility. Interview with Regional Nurse Specialist revealed that R1 does require transfer assistance and on 12/22/2024, an agency staff was assisting R1 with transferring between wheelchair and bed when R1's right knee bumped the wheelchair. R1 was observed with a small abrasion but did not report nor appear to be in any pain at that time. The following day, R1 appeared to be in pain, so R1 was sent to the hospital for additional medical attention. Hospital records reviewed indicate "apparent fracture of the distal femur above the site of the prosthesis." R1 returned to the facility with a knee immobilizer and pain medication. Follow up was scheduled with orthopedic specialist on 01/16/2025. Records reviewed do not indicate the injury is acute, nor do records indicate the fracture was sustained as a result of improper transfer or that the injury occurred due to lack of care and supervision. Based on the information obtained there is insufficient evidence to determine whether lack of care and/or supervision contributed to the injury R1 sustained. No deficiencies cited during today's visit. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

Department Incident Report related to the complaint allegation, reviewed medical records for Resident #1 (R1), documents related to R1 and Resident #2 (R2), and interviewed facility staff, residents, and other relevant parties on the following dates: 10/22/2024, 11/13/2024, 11/14/2024, 11/20/2024, and 12/07/2024. The following was then determined: It was alleged that facility staff did not provide an appropriate level of supervision, resulting in R2 attacking R1 and R1 sustaining a head injury. Review of R2’s facility records revealed that R2 had moved into the facility on 06/21/2024. Interviews with R2’s physician, Power of Attorney (POA) designee, and trustee all revealed that R2 did have a diagnosis of dementia, but R2 had no history of aggressive or assaultive behavior at the time R2 moved into the facility. Hospital records dated prior to facility admit did indicate R2 is “supposed to have 24/7 caregivers” but did not indicate the reason 24/7 care was requested. Trustee indicated they had informed the hospital staff of this request due to R2’s care needs becoming greater and resulting weight loss, but reiterated that R2 had displayed no prior aggressive behaviors. Hospital records did not indicate any aggressive behaviors were observed. When R2 moved into the facility, facility staff conducted 72-hour behavior mapping, as outlined in the facility’s protocol for all new residents. R2 did not display any aggressive behavior towards other residents during the 72-hour period. From the time R2 moved into the facility until the date of the incident, per their responsible party’s request, R2 had a private companion with them during normal business hours Monday through Friday. Incident reports reviewed revealed R2 had been involved in an incident with another resident on 06/30/2024, where R2 had pushed another resident. However, the incident did not result in injury to either resident and facility staff had reported the incident to R2’s physician, who adjusted R2’s medication. No additional incidents or aggressive acts were observed involving R2 and any other residents until 08/23/2024. R2’s private companion had been working with them during the daytime, but had gone home for the day prior to the incident. Incident report reviewed and staff interviews revealed that facility staff had assisted R2 with getting ready for bed prior to 09:00PM on 08/23/2024. R2 had appeared somewhat frustrated when care staff were providing R2 with assistance, but staff reported this behavior is typical of residents with dementia, including R2. Care staff had left R2 in their room in bed, but that R2 did not require 1:1 supervision and residents are free to leave their rooms whenever they choose. Around 09:00PM, facility staff heard a noise in the hallway near the patio and staff reported to the area to see what had occurred. When staff arrived, R2 was standing up and R1 was laying on the ground on their back. Facility staff assessed both residents and called 9-1-1 due to R1’s observed injuries. As both residents have a diagnosis of dementia, it wasn’t until Report Continued on LIC 9099-C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 video recordings were reviewed that staff found out what had occurred between the two residents. Video recording shows that R1 was in the hallway facing R2 when R2 approached R1. R2 grabbed either one or both of R1’s arms, appears to shake R1, and R1 takes several steps back before falling backward. As R1 falls backward, R2 falls forward onto R1’s right side. R2 gets up off the ground before staff report to the hallway. R1 was taken to the hospital where x-rays revealed a “subdural hematoma along the left cerebral hemisphere and left falx cerebri with tiny parenchymal hemorrhagic foci indicating contusion seen in the left nondisplaced subtle fracture of the right occipital bone.” All staff interviewed acknowledged that at times R2 had been resistant to care provided and R2 would occasionally hit at the care staff while they were providing care. However, staff interviewed indicated they had not witnessed any prior incidents where R2 had acted aggressively toward another resident. All third-party interviews conducted revealed that R2 had no history of aggressive behaviors and that when any new behaviors were identified by facility staff, that the facility acted swiftly to communicate with R2’s medical provider and responsible parties. Additionally, prior to the incident occurring, there was no documentation or indication R2 required 1:1 staff supervision. Following the incident, facility management required R2 to have a 1:1 companion at all times while in the facility as a preventative safety measure. After reviewing video footage of the incident, facility management chose to initiate an eviction for R2. Based on interview and record review, although the allegation may be valid, at this time there is insufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. No citations issued. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

Staff did not address a change in the resident's condition. It is alleged that staff did not address a change in R1’s condition, and the concern of the Reporting Party (RP) is that the results of a swallow test given to R1, showed that R1can only eat pureed foods (pudding like). To investigate the allegation LPA Urena conducted record review and interviewed the RP. The LPA was unable to interview the facility Administrator employed at the time when the complaint was received by the Department, or the Director of Health Services (DHS), as they are no longer employed at the facility. Medical records obtained by the LPA indicates that on 05/24/2023, R1 had a Neurology Outpatient visit and the medical provider notes indicate that R1 was accompanied by R1’s POA, facility Administrator Terri Weitzman , and a facility caregiver. Furthermore, the case notes indicate that at the time of the visit; it was noted that R1 had developed dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) to solid foods in early 2023, and the recommendation was to provide R1 with soft moistened solids, purees, thin liquids, and with direct staff supervision. On 06/02/2023, the POA communicated via email with the DHS to inform them that during a visit with R1, the POA observed that R1 had a plate of breakfast in their room, and the POA asked that R1 eat in the dining room where R1 could be supervised during meals. On 09/08/2023, the POA communicated via email with the DHS and two other facility staff about the concern of R1 not having breakfast and lunch meal during a recent doctor’s appointment, in which day, R1 returned late to the facility from the appointment, and the dining room was closed, consequently the R1 had to wait for dinner time, and someone (staff) provided R1 with chips and crackers to hold R1 over till dinner time. On 12/04/2024 the LPA reviewed records provided by the facility. Record review indicates that the facility received Diet Recommendations from the Speech Therapist at Rancho Los Amigos Rehabilitation Center on 07/12/2023. The recommendations indicate that R1 needs to receive a diet of puree foods, and nectar thick liquids. The recommendations include three (3) pages with a detailed description of a ‘Puree diet purpose’, ‘Description of the diet’, ‘Guidelines’, and a ‘Food list’. The recommendations were received by the DHS on 07/12/2023 and given to the culinary staff via a Diet Request Form (DRF) on 07/12/2023. However, the DRF does not indicate in the instructions the specifics of the puree diet, direct supervision by staff during mealtimes, nor did the facility provide documentation as to how the directive was passed on to the direct staff (caregivers, etc.). Continues on LIC 9099C pg.3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Pg. 3 On 12/04/2024, the LPA requested R1’s file for review, and specifically asked for R1’s Resident Appraisal (s) (LIC 603 A), Appraisal Need and Service Plan (LIC 625), Physician’s Report (LIC 602A), but the current Administrator was unable to locate R1’s file at the time of the visit on 12/04/2024. The LPA requested that when the file was located to email the LPA the requested records. Furthermore, on 12/05/2024, the LPA emailed the Administrator reminding them of the requested documents, and as of 12/10/2024, the LPA had not received the requested records. On 12/12/2024, additional records were provided by the Administrator. The Administrator provided appraisal (Service Plan) done by staff on 06/01/2023. Per the Administrator the appraisal is a live document where designated and approved staff can make updates to the document. The Facility’s Service Plan (SA) is dated as Effective Date: 06/01/2023 and Date Scheduled: 09/20/2023. Per the Administrator, the SA can be modified as needed, and the SA indicates the updated Needs/Goals/Action. When the LPA asked the Administrator if the SA was shared with the POA, the Administrator could not say since the SA was created at a time when they were not employed at the facility. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, based on record review, there is not sufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. Staff do not ensure resident's hygiene needs are met. On the allegation that staff do not ensure resident's hygiene needs are met; it is the concern of the RP that staff do not shower R1. The RP states that when they spoke to staff about R1’s hygiene, they were told that R1 does not like to take showers. The LPA was unable to interview staff/caregivers related to the allegation due to RP not recalling the name of R1’s caregiver. To investigate the allegation LPA Urena interviewed current staff and conducted record review. The staff’s interviews revealed that staff have a schedule they follow to give showers to residents. Per staff statements, when residents refuse to take showers, the staff/caregivers may delay the shower for the next day or try different approaches to getting the residents’ cooperation to take showers. The staff/caregivers stated that they keep records of the residents who did not get a shower and report during the “exchange” of the staff (AM, PM, NOC). The LVN keeps case notes of the residents who refused showers. The Administrator’s interviewed revealed that staff may attempt to give a shower to a resident but if the resident refuses, the residents cannot be forced, however the refusal of the shower is case noted and other methods to encourage the shower may be used, such as a different time of the day or a different face (caregiver). Continues on pg. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Pg. 4 The Regional Support Nurse (RSN) and staff stated that sometimes a PRN is needed (to relax the resident). The LPA interviewed the POA on 12/03/2024, and the RP stated that they were concerned about the hygiene of R1 as R1 had developed an odor, and the POA could tell R1 had not been showered. The POA stated that when they spoke to staff about R1’s hygiene, the POA was told by staff that R1 does not like to take showers, however the staff failed to notify the POA. The POA stated that they had to bring it up to the administrator’s attention for something to be done. The POA stated that after they expressed the concern to the administrator; R1’s shower was moved to a different time of the day, and that seemed to resolve the issue of R1 refusing showers. Record review of the shower schedule that is followed by staff revealed that currently each caregiver has about eight (8) to nine (9) residents per staff. The shower schedule revealed residents have a designated weekday or weekend day (2X per week) for showers. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, based on record review, there is not sufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. Staff locked resident in their room. On the allegation that staff locks resident in their room, it is the concern of the RP that during visits, they have noticed staff locking R1’s door from the outside. R1 is extremely weak and would not be able to open the door from the inside if needed. R1 has fallen a few times because R1 tries to get up on their own when staff do not help. The RP is concerned that staff are locking the resident in their room and do not help with toileting. LPA was unable to interview the Administrator working at the facility during R1’s stay, as the Administrator is no longer employed at the facility. To investigate the allegation LPA Urena conducted a tour of the facility and interviewed the staff and the current Administrator. The Administrator stated that the bedrooms’ doors are kept unlocked from the outside and inside revealed, and they typically keep the rooms’ doors open. The staff, S1, S2, S3, S4, stated that the doors don’t lock from the outside, due to a mechanism in place to prevent door being locked. The LPA toured the facility and inspected six (6) randomly selected rooms’ doorknobs/locks. At the time of the visit, the LPA observed the bedrooms’ doorknobs to have a screw in-place inside and outside the doorknob that prevents the door from being locked from the outside and inside the room. Continues on Pg. 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Pg. 5 Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, based on the interviews, and observation, there is not sufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. Staff do not provide resident clean linens. On the allegation that staff do not provide resident with clean linens; the concern of the RP is about R1 being dirty and malodorous, and the staff do not change R1’s bed linens. The LPA interviewed the POA on 12/03/2024, and the POA stated that staff informed the POA that the linens are changed when the residents get a shower, and at least once a week. To investigate the allegation, on 12/04/2024 LPA Urena interviewed the RSN and current staff. The LPA was unable to interview the staff and the DHS employed at the time of the allegation, due to the staff and the DHS no longer working at the facility at the time the LPA conducted interviews. The RSN stated that the linens are changed as needed and on shower days. The staff interviews revealed that they change linens two times a week and/or on shower days, or as needed. When staff (S1) was asked what happens when residents refuse showers, do they still change the linens? S1 stated that they do change the linens when the residents are out of their room. The LPA asked to see the linen closet for the facility, and it appeared that the facility had an adequate quantity of linens fo

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kelly Dulek arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct an annual continuation visit, as well as a concurrent case management visit. Upon arrival, the LPA met with Interim Administrator Laken Lacy. Entrance interview conducted. This visit and related report serve as the annual continuation, legal non-compliance, and case management - incident visit. The purpose of today’s legal non-compliance visit is to ensure the facility is maintaining substantial compliance as outlined in the Stipulation and Waiver; and Order. The order is effective February 25, 2022 – February 24, 2025. The last legal non-compliance visit took place on 08/01/2023. Upon arrival, LPA met with Interim Administrator and further discussed an incident report that was sent to Community Care Licensing on 09/04/2024, although it was not received and discussed until an unrelated visit at the facility on 10/16/2024. The incident report relates to an allegation made by Resident #1 (R1)'s private companion on 09/03/2024. However, the report referred to an allegation of sexual abuse R1's private companion stated they first observed in March 2024. The facility provided LPA with additional documentation relating to R1, including but not limited to suspected abuse report and medical documentation. R1's family member, who is a medical professional, had R1 tested and no evidence of sexual abuse was found. At the time of the alleged observation/suspicion of abuse, R1 had been diagnosed with a UTI. R1 does have a diagnosis of dementia, so R1 is unable to coherently verbalize any concerns. Interim Administrator stated that following the allegation, both of R1's private companions were provided coaching on timely mandated reporting. After reviewing all information obtained, should a further visit be warranted, LPA will follow up with the facility. Report Continued on LIC 809-C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 PHYSICAL PLANT: Beginning at 10:51AM, the LPA and the Interim Administrator briefly toured the physical plant areas inside and outside to ensure there are no health and safety hazards and facility is in compliance with Title 22 Regulations. During facility tour, staff were observed engaging with residents in activities. LPA spoke with various residents throughout the facility tour and no concerns were observed nor communicated. Fire extinguishers throughout the community were observed to be fully charged and last serviced 09/19/2024. FOOD SERVICE: LPA observed the facility's commercial kitchen, which was locked and inaccessible to residents in care. Kitchen appeared to be clean and appliances operable. Facility has sufficient supply of both perishable and non-perishable food, along with emergency food and water. The facility has a system for special diets, including a visual board and diet cards to ensure residents' special diets and dietary preferences are recognized. Storage for chemicals is separate from food storage, per regulation. MEDICATION REVIEW: Began at 11:20AM, LPA, Interim Administrator, along with facility nurse, reviewed medications for 3 (three) residents. All 3 (three) of 3 (three) residents' medications reviewed were stored and documented in compliance with regulation at the time of the visit. FILES: Beginning at 12:06PM, the LPA reviewed a selection of 5 (five) staff files for documents including, but not limited to: health screening, TB test results, background clearance, and training records. All staff records reviewed were observed to be complete and in compliance with regulation at this time. The LPA reviewed 5 (five) resident files for but not limited to: physician's report, needs and service appraisals, personal rights. All 5 (five) resident files reviewed contained all required documents. EMERGENCY DISASTER PLAN: LPA reviewed the facility's emergency disaster plan, which was observed to be complete and updated annually as required. The facility conducts emergency disaster drills on each shift quarterly, with the last disaster drill documented on 09/27/2024. No citations issued. Exit interview conducted. A copy of today's report was provided.

staff to use R1's debit card to assist R1 in making online purchases. LPA spoke with R1's financial conservator, who confirmed that R1 does have a debit card in their room at the facility and staff are authorized to assist R1 with expenditures. Conservator indicated that each month R1's debit card is loaded with a specific amount of money that R1 is able to spent throughout the month at their own discretion. Interview with R1 revealed that R1 used their own debit card to purchase music on their phone, which accounts for the alleged "unauthorized charge" that was reported as fraudulent activity. R1 denied the allegation. Therefore, based on interview and record review, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation or that a violation occurred; the allegation "resident was financially abused while in care" is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sandra Urena conducted an unannounced required annual visit. Along with the required annual visit, the purpose of today’s visit was to address two self-reported Incident Reports. The LPA met with Administrator Kendall Mesa and explained the reason for the visit. The LPA, the Administrator and the Family Ambassador toured the physical plant areas inside and outside to ensure there are no health and safety hazards and facility is in compliance with Title 22 Regulations. KITCHEN: Kitchen appliances were in operable condition. The facility has a sufficient supply of perishable and non-perishable food. The dining rooms furniture appeared to be in good condition. BEDROOMS: The LPA observed a random selection of resident rooms, and rooms were furnished appropriately with clean linens, furnishings and sufficient lighting. RESTROOMS: The LPA observed a random selection of resident restrooms. Restrooms were clean, sanitary and in operating condition with grab bars and non-skid surfaces. Restrooms were stocked with soap and paper towels. Hand washing signs promoting good hand hygiene were observed in the common restrooms. COMMON SPACES: Walls and flooring were checked for cleanliness and good condition. Department required postings were found lobby near the restrooms. Fire extinguishers were charged and serviced on 11/03/023. EXTERIOR: The facility has several enclosed courtyards with appropriate outdoor seating for resident use. The swimming pool on the premises was observed to be locked. Due to time constraints, the annual inspection will be completed on a follow-up visit. No deficiencies cited at this time. Exit interview conducted. Signatures obtained.