StarlynnCare

California · Folsom

Cogir of Folsom

RCFE

A Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) is a non-medical residential care home licensed by California CDSS under Health & Safety Code §1560. Residents receive assistance with daily living activities such as bathing, dressing, meals, and medication management in a home-like setting. RCFEs are not hospitals or skilled nursing facilities — they do not provide round-the-clock medical care.

1801 East Natoma Street · Folsom, 95630

Quick facts

Licensed beds66
Memory careYes
Last inspectionFeb 2026
Last citationApr 2026
Operated byWell Ca Wa Tenant Llc; Cogir Management Usa Inc
Map showing location of Cogir of Folsom

Inspection comparison

Updated May 1, 2026

Compared to 34 California RCFE facilities of similar size, over the last 36 months.

Source: California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division. View raw inspection records →

Peer comparison

Percentile vs 34 similar California CA / rcfe_general / large beds facilities · higher = better

Severity
6th

Weighted citations per bed

Repeats
100th

Repeat deficiencies as share of total

Frequency
39th

Deficiencies per inspection

Tick mark at 50% = peer median

Citation severity over time

↑ worsening

Weighted severity score per month · 24 months

Jun 24peer medianMay 26

Weighted score (24mo)

68

Last citation

Apr 26

Finding distribution

11 total · 36 months

Scope × Severity (CMS A–L)

IsolatedPatternWidespreadJKLG5HID6EFABCSev 4 · IJSev 3Sev 2Sev 1

View inspections & citations

The rules that apply to this facility

California Title 22 requirements for this facility, with the specific regulation and a suggested question for each.Rules this facility has been cited for are shown first.

What must this facility report to the state — and how fast?Cited Aug 202522 CCR §87211 / WIC §15630
  • ImmediateElopement, fire, epidemic outbreak, or poisoningImmediately
  • 2 hoursAbuse with serious bodily injury2-hour phone report + 2-hour written report — to the California Department of Social Services (CDSS), Adult Protective Services, and law enforcement
  • 24 hrsAbuse without serious bodily injuryWithin 24 hours
  • Next dayDeath of a residentPhone by next working day; written within 7 days
  • Next dayInjury requiring medical treatment beyond first aidPhone by next working day; written within 7 days
  • WrittenBankruptcy, foreclosure, eviction, or utility shutoff noticeWritten notice to CDSS and residents — $100/day penalty (max $2,000) for failure

Your enforcement lever:Incidents that aren't reported on time are themselves a separate violation. If you believe a reportable event wasn't filed, you can submit a complaint directly to the California Department of Social Services (CDSS).

What dementia-care training must staff complete?22 CCR §87705 / HSC §1569.625

Because this facility markets dementia or Alzheimer's care, state law mandates higher training standards:

  • 12 hours initial dementia training — 6 hours before a staff member works independently with residents, 6 more within the first 4 weeks.
  • 8 hours annual dementia in-service — required every year thereafter.
  • Administrator CE — the administrator must include 8 hours of dementia-specific continuing education in every 2-year recertification cycle.

Training must cover individualized care plans, behavioral expressions, appropriate supervision, and the facility's dementia care philosophy.

Ask on tour: Ask how dementia training records are kept — families may request documentation.

How many staff must be on duty overnight?22 CCR §87415

Based on 66 licensed beds:

One awake caregiver must be on duty, plus one additional caregiver on call who can respond within 10 minutes.

Violation pattern to watch for:A facility that documents a staff member as "on call" but with that person physically off-site — when the law requires on-premises presence — is in violation of this section.

Ask on tour: Ask the facility to walk you through their overnight staffing plan and confirm whether on-call staff are on premises or off-site.

What health conditions can this facility legally accept or refuse?22 CCR §87612–87615

Restricted — allowed with physician order + care plan

  • Supplemental oxygen
  • Insulin and injectable medications
  • Indwelling or intermittent catheters
  • Colostomy / ileostomy
  • Stage 1 and Stage 2 pressure injuries
  • Wound care (non-complex)
  • Incontinence
  • Contractures

Prohibited — facility must refuse or discharge

  • Stage 3 or Stage 4 pressure injuries
  • Feeding tubes (PEG, NG, or J-tube)
  • Tracheostomies
  • Active MRSA or communicable infections requiring isolation
  • 24-hour skilled nursing needs
  • Total ADL dependence with inability to communicate needs

A hospice waiver (HSC §1569.73) can allow continued care for residents on hospice who would otherwise fall into a prohibited category.

Ask on tour: Ask whether your loved one's specific care needs are restricted or prohibited, and what the facility's process is if needs change after admission.

How does CDSS enforce these rules?22 CCR §87755–87777 / HSC §1569.58
  1. 1Notice of DeficiencyWritten citation with a correction deadline. Facility must submit a Plan of Correction.
  2. 2Civil PenaltyStarts at $50/day for non-serious; $150/day for serious deficiencies — immediately, with no grace period. Repeats escalate to $150 first day + $50/day, then $1,000 first day + $100/day.
  3. 3Suspension of AdmissionsFacility cannot accept new residents until violations are corrected.
  4. 4Temporary Suspension or RevocationEmergency suspension for imminent danger; full revocation after administrative hearing.
  5. 5Exclusion OrderAdministrator and operator can be barred from all CDSS-licensed facilities — not just this one.

See how these rules have been applied to this specific facility:

View state inspection record and citations

Questions to ask on your tour

Based on Cogir of Folsom's state inspection record.

  1. The facility holds a 66-bed license under operator Well Ca Wa Tenant Llc and Cogir Management Usa Inc — can you provide documentation showing the current license is in good standing and has no open deficiencies on file with CDSS?

  2. No CDSS inspection reports appear on file for this facility — can you confirm when the most recent state licensing inspection occurred, and provide families with a copy of the inspection report and any deficiency notices issued?

  3. Zero complaints are on file with CDSS for this facility — can you walk families through your internal complaint resolution process and show documentation of how resident or family concerns are tracked and resolved?

  4. The facility markets memory care services but does not hold a formal memory-care designation in CDSS licensing records — can you provide the written dementia-care program required by Title 22 §87705, including documentation of how the program is implemented for residents with cognitive impairment?

State records

California Dept. of Social Services · Community Care Licensing
License number
345002909
License type
RESIDENTIAL CARE ELDERLY
License status
LICENSED
License expires
Not yet indexed
Licensed beds
66
Operator
Well Ca Wa Tenant Llc; Cogir Management Usa Inc

Inspections & citations

44

reports on file

14

total deficiencies

5

Type A (actual harm)

ComplaintApril 3, 2026· Unsubstantiated
No deficiencies

Inspector: Angela Hood

Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that staff were not providing appropriate care and supervision for a cognitively impaired resident, specifically related to temperature control in the resident's room. The investigation found the air conditioning unit was functioning properly, the resident expressed no concerns about it, and staff confirmed they conduct room checks every two hours, adjust temperature settings upon request, and monitor when residents open windows. No violations were found.

View full inspector notes

the PTAC in R1’s room was functioning and had a temperature range that could be adjusted between 60-86 degrees F. LPA and LTCO attempted to interview R1, who did not express any concerns regarding the PTAC and indicated that it works. Interviews with the Executive Director (ED) and Maintenance Director (MD) indicated that the PTAC in R1’s room had been replaced as well as the filter. MD also indicated that the PTAC temperatures have a specific range to ensure safety of residents operating the units. Allegation: Staff do not provide appropriate care and supervision for a cognitively impaired resident Interviews with staff (S1 and S2) indicated that they provide care and supervision to residents in R1’s wing of the facility. S1 indicated that R1 opens and closes their window throughout the day. S1 and S2 indicated that staff are notified when a resident opens their window. S2 indicated that if a resident wants their window open and it is the appropriate temperature outside, staff will keep it open. S1 and S2 indicated they will adjust the PTAC, if needed, during resident checks or upon request to ensure residents' rooms remain at a comfortable temperature. S1 and S2 indicated that they believe the facility provides good care and supervision to the residents and that they have enough staff per resident to provide monitoring. S1 indicated that staff will provide checks on residents every two (2) hours. S1 and S2 indicated that most residents will be in the common areas throughout the day. ED indicated that the facility has enough staff on schedule to provide care and supervision for the residents. LPA has been receiving monthly schedules from the facility indicating the facility is fully staffed during all shifts. Based on observations made, interviews conducted, and documentation obtained, although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies are being cited. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

ComplaintApril 3, 2026· MixedType A
1 deficiency

Inspector: Angela Hood

Plain-language summary

An investigator looked into complaints about a staff member working under the influence of alcohol and staff falsifying medication records. Interviews with staff members found no evidence supporting these allegations, and the facility was not cited with any violations. The complaint was closed without substantiating the claims.

View full inspector notes

that they have never had any complaints regarding a staff member working under the influence of alcohol. Interviews with S1 and S2 indicated that they have never witnessed staff falsifying documentation regarding medications. S1 indicated that there is a certain way to document medication refusals and explain why. S2 indicated that there are not many medications that are provided during the NOC shift and they ensure all documentation is accurate. S3, S4, and S5 do not handle medication documentation. Based on interviews conducted, although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies are being cited. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

Type ACCR §87465(a)(4)

Regulation

87465 Incidental Medical and Dental Care (a) A plan for incidental medical and dental care shall be developed by each facility (...) by compliance with the following: (4) The licensee shall assist residents with self-administered medications as needed. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:

Inspector finding

Based on medication count and records reviewed, the facility did not ensure that residents (R2, R3, R4, & R5) were receiving medications as prescribed, which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to residents in care.

ComplaintMarch 20, 2026· Unsubstantiated
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.

Plain-language summary

A complaint was investigated that a resident may have been served undercooked hamburger. The facility's executive director and the resident were interviewed, and the resident could not recall being served undercooked food; the complaint could not be substantiated based on the available evidence.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C Interview conducted with Executive Director revealed that hamburger at the facility may be served a certain way but request of the resident. Interview conducted with resident (R1) revealed that R1 cannot recalled being served undercooked hamburger. With the information obtained, the allegations are unsubstantiated. As a result of this investigation, it was determined the allegations are to be (US)Unsubstantiated - A finding that the complaint is Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview and a copy of the report was provided.

ComplaintMarch 19, 2026· Unsubstantiated
No deficiencies

Inspector: Angela Hood

Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.

Plain-language summary

A complaint was investigated about an incident at the facility. The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation, so no violation was found; the facility was fully staffed at the time and had appropriate supervision in place.

View full inspector notes

indicated that the other caregivers on duty at the time of the incident were assisting other residents and the med tech was in the medication room. Interviews with staff indicated that they were not short staffed and there was no lack in care or supervision at the facility. According to the staff schedule, the facility was fully staffed on the date of the incident. R1’s After Visit Summary and Progress Notes indicated that R1 returned to the facility from the hospital on November 19, 2025. There were no injuries reported and R1 had a change in their medication. According to R2’s Behavioral Expression Monitoring Log, R2 had incidents of aggressive behaviors towards other residents on October 27, 2025, October 28, 2025, and October 31, 2025 without injuries. The facility responded to the incidents by conducting a care conference with R2’s responsible party and reassessing them with the update in behaviors, which was signed on October 30, 2025. Between October 30, 2025 and November 12, 2025, the facility was in communication with R2’s physician and their responsible party to ensure they address R2’s changes in behaviors. The facility provided documentation indicating that R2’s physician had made adjustments to medications for behaviors as well as included antibiotics for Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). One medication utilized to reduce behaviors was increased on November 12, 2025 as well as another Urinalysis ordered for monitoring of UTI. Due to the November 16, 2025 incident, the facility immediately implemented one on one care to provide additional care and supervision for R2. The facility provided invoices indicating the dates of service from November 17, 2025-November 23, 2025. Based on interviews conducted and documentation obtained, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies are being cited. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

ComplaintFebruary 19, 2026
No deficiencies

Plain-language summary

A follow-up visit was conducted on May 2, 2026 to address findings from an earlier inspection on February 3, 2026 that resulted in a citation for a violation causing injury or illness to a resident. The facility has been assessed a $500 civil penalty, with an additional penalty under review. The licensing analyst will return to determine if further penalties are warranted.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Angela Hood arrived at the care home today and met with the Executive Director, Liz Cruz, to conduct a case management visit. The purpose of today's visit was to amend reports from a visit conducted on February 3, 2026. The department has determined that, due to the citation issued on February 3, 2026, an immediate civil penalty per Health and Safety Code § 1548 in the amount of $500 will be assessed for a violation that the department determines resulted in the injury or illness of a person in care. An additional civil penalty assessment is under review and a determination is pending. LPA will return on a future date to assess an additional civil penalty if warranted. No additional citations issued. Exit interview conducted. Copy of report provided.

Other visitFebruary 3, 2026· MixedType A
1 deficiency

Inspector: Angela Hood

Plain-language summary

On July 30, 2025, a resident fell after being pushed by another resident and sustained rib fractures and a collapsed lung; the facility had inadequate staffing at the time because the medication technician position was unfilled, leaving only two care staff available to supervise residents despite knowing the other resident had aggressive behaviors. The state substantiated this violation and assessed a $500 civil penalty, with an additional penalty under review. Other allegations about meal participation, bathing, and facility cleanliness were not substantiated based on staff interviews and observations.

View full inspector notes

According to hospital medical records, resident (R1) was admitted to the hospital on July 30, 2025, after reportedly being pushed by another resident (R2) and falling. R1 was diagnosed with right fourth (4 th ) through eighth (8 th ) rib fractures and right hemothorax. R1 was discharged from the hospital on August 1, 2025. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) records indicated that a staff (unknown) informed them that R1 went into R2’s room and R2 pushed R1 out of their room causing the fall. The Unusual Incident/Injury Report LIC624 indicated that the incident occurred at approximately 7:30am and R1 verbalized that they were pushed by R2. R2’s Behavioral Expressions Monitoring Log indicated that, on July 30, 2025, R2 was agitated, anxious, and frustrated by R1 going into their apartment. R1 was found on the floor and had an unwitnessed fall. R1 indicated that R2 pushed them. R1’s Daily Log, dated July 30, 2025, indicated that R2 pushed them down. According to staff schedules and timecards, there were three (3) care staff present at the care home, with no med tech on duty, at the time of the incident on July 30, 2025. Staff interviews indicated that, due to the facility not having a med tech on duty, staff (S2) was responsible for passing medications. Staff interviews indicated that S2 was pulling medications at the time of the incident between R1 and R2 leaving two (2) care staff available to assist residents. Interviews with staff (S3) and S2 indicated that, upon response to R1’s fall, R1 informed them that they were pushed by R2. Staff interviews indicated that the incident between R1 and R2 was unwitnessed. However, staff interviews also indicated that the facility was aware of R2’s aggressive behaviors and did not ensure there were enough staff scheduled based on the care needs of the residents. Based on interviews conducted and documentation obtained, the preponderance of evidence standards have been met. Therefore, the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, deficiency is being cited on the attached 9099-D page. As a result of the resident's serious bodily injury, an immediate civil penalty per Health and Safety Code § 1548 in the amount of $500 was assessed on an LIC809 provided on February 19, 2026 for a violation that the Department determines resulted in the injury or illness of a person in care. An additional civil penalty assessment is under review and a determination is pending. LPA will return on a future date to assess an additional civil penalty if warranted. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report and appeal rights provided. 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 and S5) indicated that the caregivers and med techs on duty will make sure all residents attend mealtimes. Interviews indicated that, if a resident is not present, staff will locate the resident to see if they want to join. If any refusals or a resident is out of the facility, the med tech will document in the resident’s progress notes. R1’s progress notes dated May 1, 2025-July 26, 2025 had no indication of mealtime refusals. Interview with S1 indicated that R1 always appeared clean and showered. Interviews with S1, S4, and S5 indicated that the facility has a shower log that the facility follows. S4 and S5 indicated that they have never witnessed a resident that appeared to need to be bathed. S4 and S5 indicated that, if a resident refuses showers, care staff will attempt several times or may try a change of face so a resident will take their scheduled shower. Staff indicated that they keep a shower log indicating when showers were given. LPA attempted to obtain the shower log for R1. However, according to the Regional Health and Wellness Director, Karen Silva, the facility does not keep shower logs passed 90 days. R1’s progress notes dated May 1, 2025-July 26, 2025 had no indication of shower refusals. LPA observed that the facility has a current shower schedule as well as a skin check shower sheet used when providing showers. On November 25, 2025, December 11, 2025, and December 23, 2025, LPA toured the facility, which included all common areas and five (5) resident rooms. LPA observed the facility to be free of odor, clean, and in good repair. On December 11, 2025, LPA observed housekeeping cleaning in one of the facility hallways. Interview with S1 indicated that they never observed R1’s room to be dirty. S1, S4, and S5 indicated that housekeeping is good at ensuring the facility, including residents’ rooms, are clean. S1, S4, and S5 indicated that, if a resident has an incontinence accident, staff will clean up the resident and housekeeping will clean the floors, if needed. Staff also indicated that any linens or clothing will be laundered. LPA visited the facility on multiple dates between November 25, 2025-January 14, 2026 and observed care staff providing care to residents, residents either waiting for mealtime or eating at mealtimes, and residents appeared clean wearing laundered clothing. The facility was also clean and in good repair. Based on observations made, interviews conducted, and documentation obtained, 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 are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies are being cited. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was provided.

Type ACCR §87464(f)(1)

Regulation

87464 Basic Services (f) Basic services shall at a minimum include: (1) Care and supervision... This requirement is not met as evidenced by:

Inspector finding

Based on documentation reviewed and interviews conducted, the facility did not ensure staff were sufficient in number to provide care and supervision to residents, which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to residents in care.

Other visitDecember 23, 2025· Unsubstantiated
No deficiencies

Inspector: Angela Hood

Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.

Other visitOctober 14, 2025· Unsubstantiated
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation was conducted into allegations that staff did not provide prescribed medications, did not meet a resident's showering needs, did not intervene in a verbal altercation between residents, and spoke inappropriately to a resident. The investigation found no evidence to substantiate the medication allegation—records showed the resident received medications as prescribed—and could not substantiate the other three allegations due to lack of specific information, witness accounts, or corroborating details. All interviewed residents reported feeling safe at the facility and satisfied with care.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C For the allegation of, Facility staff did not provide resident medications at prescribed, the Department conducted file reviews of R1’s medication list, narcotic count record, medication release record, and emergency paper medication administration record. Records revealed that on the medication list effective January 24, 2025, R1 was prescribed PRN Ativan 0.5mg one tablet by mouth twice a day as needed. Then effective February 3, 2025, PRN Ativan 0.5mg was changed to one tablet by mouth three times a day as needed. File review of narcotic count record revealed that after R1’s first dose given on February 1, 2025, there was a remaining of 87 tablets of Ativan 0.5mg and after the last dose given on February 10, 2025, there was a remaining of 68 tablets. From February 1, 2025 to February 2, 2025, R1 received maximum of one tablet per day as needed. From February 3, 2025 to February 10, 2025, R1 did not receive more than three tablets per day, compliance to R1’s physician order of the PRN Ativan. Medication release record revealed it was signed off by R1’s responsible party that Ativan 0.5mg was entrusted to R1’s responsible party with the total count of 68 tablets. Therefore, allegation is unfounded. Based on the information obtained, the Department concluded that the allegations are unfounded. A finding that an allegation is unfounded means that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of the report was provided. 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 LIC 9099-C(1) For the allegation, Facility staff did not ensure that resident's showering needs are being met, the Department conducted several interviews. Interview conducted with resident (R2) revealed that staff does assist R2 with showering. When asked if R2 is having any issues with staff not meeting R2's showering needs, R2 indicate R2 does not think there is any issues. R2 stated R2 cannot remember much but think they are getting all their showers. File review of R2's LIC 602 revealed that R2 has dementia. Interview conducted with resident (R3) revealed that R3 has recently moved in the facility but really likes the staff. R3 denied having any issues regarding showering needs, and expressed that R3 is satisfied at the facility. R3 receives showering twice a week. Interview conducted with resident (R4) revealed that R4 does not need much assistance from staff with showering but likes stand-by assist. R4 does not know if there are any concerns with showering needs. File review of R4'sLIC 602 revealed that R4 does have dementia. Interview conducted with R5 revealed that R5 receives assistance with showering. R5 does not believe there are any issues with staff not meeting resident's showering needs. Due to the lack of information the Department was able to obtain, the allegation is unsubstantiated. The allegation of, Facility staff did not intervene in verbal altercation between residents, the Department conducted extensive interviews. Interview conducted with Health and Wellness Director revealed that when residents are having a verbal altercation, staff are to assist with de-escalating the situation. Staff are to isolate the aggressor to see if they want to do any activities. Interview conducted with Executive Director revealed that the facility is a memory care facility where residents are often having behaviors. If residents are engaged in an altercation, staff should intervene to ensure the health and safety of residents in care. The facility has several corners where if guests or visitors are observing an altercation, they are to report the incident to staff for staff to redirect. Executive Director reported that this alleged incident was not brought to their attention and there was not enough information to investigate further. There were no known witnesses to such an incident. Interview conducted with R2, R3, R4 and R5 reported they feel safe at the facility. Therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated. Please continue on LIC9099-C (2). 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 LIC 9099-C(2). For the allegation of, Facility staff spoke inappropriate to resident, the Department conducted interviews to investigate the following. Interview conducted with Health and Wellness Director revealed that R1 was new at the facility and was very dependent on R1's roommate for social interaction and activities but staff did not speak to R1 in any ill manner. Interview further revealed that staff are to assist and motivate R1 with integrating into the community and ensuring R1 feels comfortable with other residents in care. Interview conducted with R3 revealed that R3 has not witnessed staff speaking to residents inappropriately. Interview conducted with Executive Director revealed that the alleged incident was brought to her attention by a family member but there was no information on what day this occurred, no information on which staff member allegedly spoke inappropriately to R 1 and/or other residents. Due to lack of information available for the Department to investigate, the allegation is unsubstantiated. As a result of this investigation, it was determined the allegations are to be (US)Unsubstantiated - A finding that the complaint is Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview and a copy of the report was provided.

Other visitSeptember 16, 2025
No deficiencies

Plain-language summary

On September 16, 2025, licensing representatives met with facility leadership to discuss recent non-compliance issues, focusing on leadership changes, staff training, resident monitoring, and facility oversight. No new violations were cited in this meeting, and a follow-up meeting was scheduled for three months later to review progress on facility improvements.

View full inspector notes

On September 16, 2025 at 3:30 PM, a virtual office meeting was held with Sacramento North Regional Office using Microsoft Teams. Present in the meeting was Community Care Licensing representatives: Regional Manager, Alycia Rayner; Licensing Program Manager (LPM), Maribeth Senty; and Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Cassie Yang. Present in the meeting was Licensee representatives: Senior Vice President of Care and Compliance, Holly McMurray; Senior Vice President Operations Northern CA, Kristina Munoz; Assistant Chief Operating Officer, Justin Stein; National Director of Resident Care, Kimberly Eldridge; Regional of Health and Wellness, Karen Silva; and Legal representative, Joel Goldman. The purpose of today's meeting was to discuss the recent non-compliance at the facility. Topics discussed during this meeting were: Significant leadership changes Continuation of staff training Observation of residents behavior expressions Appropriate oversight at the facility Additionally, a follow-up office meeting will be scheduled in three months to discuss the progress of new facility implementation. A copy of this report was emailed to Senior Vice President of Care and Compliance Holly McMurray, following today's meeting. A signed copy will be returned to the LPA by close of business September 16, 2025. There are no deficiencies issued in this report.

Other visitSeptember 10, 2025
No deficiencies

Plain-language summary

A state licensing analyst visited the facility to review a report the facility had submitted about a sexual incident between two residents. The facility notified law enforcement, the long-term care ombudsman, and the residents' families about what happened, and put one of the residents under one-on-one supervision while that resident awaits medical evaluation. No violations were found.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived at the facility unannounced on to conduct case management visit regarding a SOC 341 received. LPA met with Regional Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. A SOC 341 was submitted by facility regarding a sexual incident between residents, R1 and R2. Additionally, Facility notified law enforcement, long term care ombudsman (LTCO) and residents' responsible parties regarding this incident. Facility has implemented 1 on 1 care and supervision for R1 to ensure the safety of residents in care as R1 is pending further medical evaluation. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted and copy of the report left at facility.

ComplaintSeptember 10, 2025· MixedType B
1 deficiency

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

This was a complaint investigation that found mixed results. Staff failed to update the resident's insurance information in the medical records after a switch from Kaiser Permanente to Mercy Health, which caused the resident to be sent to the wrong medical facility for a leg pain evaluation; however, allegations about a fall during showering, the air conditioning unit being unsafe, and staff failing to seek medical attention or notify family were either unsubstantiated or found to be without basis.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C Allegation: Staff did not update resident's medical records. The department conducted extensive interviews regarding the allegation cited above. An interview conducted with the reporting party revealed that R1 has been switched from Kaiser Permanente to Mercy Health effective January 1, 2025, which the facility was notified and provided with an updated medical card. An interview conducted with the Health and Wellness Director on March 7, 2025, revealed that the resident (R1) was sent out to Kaiser Permanente Roseville for evaluation due to leg pain. The Health and Wellness Director stated a new medical card was provided; however, it was not updated on the chart, therefore, R1 was sent to the wrong medical facility for evaluation. Based on R1’s identification and emergency information, it revealed that R1’s hospital to be taken in an emergency was previously written as “Kaiser Roseville” and then crossed out with new input of “Mercy Folsom”. File review of hospital discharge paperwork and progress notes revealed that R1 was sent out to Kaiser Roseville for evaluation. Based on the information obtained, the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED - A finding that the complaint is Substantiated means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. Please see LIC9099-D. Exit interview conducted, copy of report and appeal rights was provided. 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 LIC9099-C Allegation: Staff did not provide adequate supervision resulting in resident falling. Based on file review of resident’s (R1) progress notes, it revealed that R1 was transported to the emergency room for evaluation due to leg pain. No further indication of a fall. An interview conducted with R1’s responsible party revealed that facility staff have alleged two separate statements that R1 had a fall while in the shower; however, also being informed that R1 did not have any fall in the shower. The interview conducted with Health and Wellness Director on March 7, 2025, revealed that R1 has showering assist getting in and out of the shower, but there is no reporting of R1 sustaining a fall in the shower. As a result of this investigation, LPA finds allegation to be (US)Unsubstantiated - A finding that the complaint is Unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview with administrator . 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 LIC 9099-C Allegation: Facility AC/Heater wall unit is in disrepair and accessible to residents. On February 25, 2025 the Department received the complaint with the allegation cited above. On March 7, 2025, the Department conducted an inspection of the facility's air conditioning unit located at the end of the common area. Based on observation, the air conditioning unit was operating and in good condition. There was no observation of the air conditioning unit being a danger to residents in care. Allegation: Staff did not seek medical attention to resident. Based on file review of the resident’s (R1) progress notes, it revealed that R1 was experiencing pain at approximately 4:30 AM and was given PRN medication. Approximately an hour later, R1 continued to express leg pain which facility then contacted emergency medical services. File review of R1’s hospital discharge paperwork revealed X-rays were taken and found to be normal and discharged at approximately 12:52 PM. Allegation: Staff did not notify resident's responsible party of incident. Based on file review of the resident’s (R1) progress notes documented by medication technical, it revealed that R1 was experiencing pain at approximately 4:30 AM and was given PRN medication was administered. Follow up notes revealed R1 continued to express pain which facility then contacted emergency medical services, and then notified Health and Wellness Director and R1’s responsible party. Based on the information above, the department concluded that the allegations are unfounded. A finding that an allegation is unfounded means that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of the report was provided.

Type BCCR §87506(b)(9)

Regulation

87506 Resident Records (b) Each resident’s record shall contain at least the following information: (9) Name, address and telephone number of physician and dentist to be called in an emergency. This requirement is not met by:

Inspector finding

Based on file review and interview, Licensee did not comply as R1's resident record did not have R1's updated medical physician information which R1 was transported to wrong emergency medical facility which poses a potential risk for resident in care.

ComplaintAugust 19, 2025· SubstantiatedType A
2 deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

This was a complaint investigation at the facility. Inspectors found that a staff member worked at the facility for nearly a year despite having a disqualifying criminal record and never obtaining the required exemption, even though the executive director knew the exemption was needed. Inspectors also found that a medication technician failed to give a resident their prescribed blood flow medication on August 3, 2025, as confirmed by a count of the medication tablets.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C Allegation: Licensee did not ensure staff qualified to assigned duties. The Department conducted a file review which revealed that staff (S1) has been employed with the facility since September 2024 and recently was placed on leave in August 2025. File review of Guardian revealed that S1 required a criminal record exemption in order to work at the facility. A criminal record exemption request was sent to facility on September 21, 2024. Additionally, a letter of case closure was issued on November 18, 2024 due to no response. Live scan was then resubmitted on April 8, 2025 which facility was issued another criminal record exemption request on April 28, 2025 which then a letter for case closure was issued on June 29, 2025 due to no response. Interview revealed that Executive Director was made aware that S1 needed to get the exemption granted in order to work at the facility, but S1 continued to work at the facility until August 2025. The allegation is substantiated as prior to employment or initial presence in the facility, all employees and volunteers subject to a criminal record review shall obtain a California clearance or a criminal record exemption. Allegation: Staff mismanaged residents’ medications. Based on file review of resident (R1) electronic medication administration records (e-MAR), it revealed that R1 was prescribed pentoxifylline 400MG tablets to take one tablet by mouth daily, effective February 11, 2025. File review of R1's July 2025 and August 2025 e-MAR revealed that on Sunday, August 3, 2025, medication technician failed to administered R1 a dose of pentoxifylline as there is no initials observed. Medication audit was conducted with medication technician of R1's pentoxifylline bubble pack and it revealed that the pack contains 30 tablets. Bubble pack was dated, opened on "7/23/25". From July 23, 2025 to date of visit, August 19, 2025, there should have been 28 tablets given if administered as prescribed but based on medication audit, there was only 27 tablets administered, which confirmed the missing initial on August 3, 2025. Based on the information obtained, the allegations are SUBSTANTIATED - A finding that the complaint is Substantiated means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. The following allegation cited above is substantiated, please see LIC9099-D. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report and appeal rights was provided.

Type ACCR §87411(g)(1)

Regulation

87411 Personnel Requirements - General (g) Prior to employment or initial presence in the facility, all employees and volunteers subject to a criminal record review shall: (1) Obtain a California clearance or a criminal record exemption... This requirement is not met as evidenced by:

Inspector finding

Based on file review and interview, Licensee did not comply as S1 has been working at the facility since September 2024 when an exemption request has not been completed, which poses a potential risk for residents in care.

Type BCCR §87465

Regulation

87465 Incidental Medical and Dental Care (a) A plan for incidental medical and dental care shall be developed by each facility. The plan shall encourage routine medical and dental care and provide for assistance... (4) The licensee shall assist residents with self-administered medications as needed. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:

Inspector finding

Based on file review and medication audit, Licensee failed to comply as R1 was not administered one dose of pentoxifylline as prescribed, which poses a potential risk for resident in care.

Other visitAugust 19, 2025
No deficiencies

Plain-language summary

This was a follow-up visit on August 19, 2025, regarding a prior complaint investigation from December 2024 that found staff failed to adequately supervise residents, which resulted in a fatal altercation between two residents. The facility was cited for inadequate supervision and assessed a total civil penalty of $15,000 (with $500 issued in December 2024 and $14,500 issued at this follow-up visit). The facility has the right to appeal this decision.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived on August 19, 2025, to follow up on substantiated allegations resulting from a complaint investigation. Licensing staff met with Facility Representative, Liz Cruz, to discuss the Department’s findings. On December 23, 2024, the Department concluded a complaint investigation substantiating the following allegations: Due to facility staff's lack of care and supervision, resident sustained serious bodily injury, and facility staff's lack of care and supervision resulted in resident's death. The Licensee was cited for California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22, § 87468.2(a)(4) Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities. At the time of the complaint investigation on December 23, 2024, an immediate civil penalty of $500 was issued and the licensee was informed that an additional civil penalty might be assessed based on Health and Safety Code § 1569.49. The Department has concluded an analysis of the following incident and has determined that a civil penalty is warranted for a violation that the Department determines resulted in the death of a resident. This is evidenced by facility staff’s inadequate supervision of residents in care, resulting in a fatal altercation between residents. Please continue 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 LIC 809-C Today, August 19, 2025, the Department will be issuing a civil penalty in the amount of $15,000 per Health and Safety Code §1569.49(e), for a violation that the Department determines to have resulted in the death of a resident. However, since an immediate civil penalty of $500 was previously issued on December 23, 2024, the amount of the civil penalty issued today will be $14,500. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report issued. Appeal rights provided. A signature on this report acknowledges receipt of the appeal rights, found on page two of LIC 421D.

Other visitAugust 19, 2025Type B
1 deficiency

Plain-language summary

During a follow-up visit, inspectors found that a staff member worked at the facility for months without required criminal record clearance, and that another resident missed all routine medications for about 30 days because the facility did not promptly arrange a doctor to refill prescriptions after staff members reported the problem to management. The facility removed the staff member from the schedule and was cited for these deficiencies.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived at the facility to conduct a case management visit regarding deficiencies that LPA observed. LPA met with Interim Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. Today's visit, LPA continued a complaint investigation and discovered that staff (S1) has been working at the facility since September 2024 when S1 did not have a criminal record exemption. LPA was informed that this matter was brought to Executive Director's attention at the beginning of S1's employment and S1 did not know it was a concern as S1 continued to be scheduled for shifts. S1 has since been removed from schedule until exemption is granted. Additionally, based on the investigation regarding resident (R1)'s medication error which was previously cited on August 15, 2025, LPA was informed that staff (S2) had informed Executive Director and Health and Wellness Director that R1's medication is running out and did not have an active primary care physician on file to fill the medications. S2 was informed that Executive Director will resolve the issue; however, LPA was informed this matter was not resolved until August 7, 2025, after R1 had missed all routine medications for approximately 30 days. As a result of the information obtained, deficiencies cited. Please see LIC 809-D. Exit interview and a copy of the report and appeal rights provided.

Type BCCR §87405(d)(2)

Regulation

87405 Administrator - Qualifications and Duties (d) The administrator shall have the qualifications specified in Sections 87405... (2) Knowledge of and ability to conform to the applicable laws, rules and regulations. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:

Inspector finding

Based on interviews, Licensee did not comply to the section cited above as Executive Director knowingly failed to comply with criminal record regulations as well as failure to assist resident to ensure medications are given as prescribed, which poses a potential risk for residents in care.

ComplaintAugust 19, 2025· Substantiated
Citation on file

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Substantiated — CDSS found a violation and issued a citation. Full citation details are on file with the state.

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that a resident did not receive their prescribed blood circulation medication on August 3, 2025—the medication technician failed to administer the dose as ordered by the doctor. The facility's medication records confirmed one dose was missing during the period reviewed. No citation was issued because the facility had already been cited for a similar medication administration failure just days earlier.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C Allegation: Staff did not ensure that resident was administered their medications as instructed by their physician. Based on file review of resident (R1) electronic medication administration records (e-MAR), it revealed that R1 was prescribed pentoxifylline 400MG tablets to take one tablet by mouth daily, effective February 11, 2025. File review of R1's July 2025 and August 2025 e-MAR revealed that on Sunday, August 3, 2025, medication technician failed to administered R1 a dose of pentoxifylline as there is no initials observed. Medication audit was conducted with medication technician of R1's pentoxifylline bubble pack and it revealed that the pack contains 30 tablets. Bubble pack was dated, opened on "7/23/25". From July 23, 2025 to date of visit, August 19, 2025, there should have been 28 tablets given if administered as prescribed but based on medication audit, there was only 27 tablets administered, which confirmed the missing initial on August 3, 2025. Based on the information obtained, the allegations are SUBSTANTIATED - A finding that the complaint is Substantiated means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. The following allegations cited above are substantiated, but no deficiency will be as LPA substantiated the similar allegation for Complaint #59-AS-20250623112243 on August 19, 2025. Exit interview conducted, copy of report and appeal rights was provided.

ComplaintAugust 15, 2025· Substantiated
Citation on file

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Substantiated — CDSS found a violation and issued a citation. Full citation details are on file with the state.

Plain-language summary

During a fire drill on May 30, 2025, staff lost track of a resident and failed to conduct a required head count; the resident was found outside on the ground after 5:00 PM and was taken to the hospital with a body temperature of 102.4°F, heat exposure, dehydration, and acute kidney injury. The investigation confirmed that a caregiver admitted to losing track of the resident and did not realize he was missing until close to dinner time. The state substantiated the complaint and assessed a $500 civil penalty for the resident's injury due to staff neglect.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099 C On May 30, 2025, at approximately 5:53 PM, emergency medical services was contacted when staff (S1) found resident (R1) outside on the ground in the courtyard of the facility, R1 was then transported to Mercy Hospital of Folsom Emergency Room for evaluation. According to hospital paperwo rk, it revealed R1 was admitted with temperature of 39.1* C (converting to 102.4* F) and "hot to the touch". R1 was discharged at approximately 9:25 PM on May 30, 2025 with reasons for visit to be "heat exposure" due t o " the patient had a heat exposure incident related to his care home losing track of him during a fire drill" and discharge diagnosis of heat exposure, dementia, dehydration, and acute kidney injury. Statements gathered on June 4, 2025, it revealed a fire drill was conducted at approximately 3:00 PM on May 30, 2025, where all emergency exits where released opened. It was revealed that part of the fire drill protocol is for caregivers to conduct a head count on their assigned residents to ensure all residents are accounted for at the end. Additionally, caregivers are to conduct hourly observations on the residents. Interview conducted with staff (S2) revealed that as a caregiver, S2 is responsible for conducting a head count of the residents, checking to see if the residents are wet and need to be changed, giving the residents showers, participating in activities, transporting the residents to their meals, and getting the residents up for the day or getting them ready to go to bed. Interview indicated a resident head count after the fire drill was not conducted. S2 admitted to losing track of R1 and did not realized R1 was missing until close to dinner time. Staff (S3) then located R1 outside after 5:00 PM. Based on information obtained, the Department finds the allegation 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. An immediate civil penalty in the amount of $500.00 assessed for R1 sustaining injury and/or illness due to staff's neglect. As a result of the resident’s injury, the violation warrants a civil penalty assessment based on Health and Safety Code 1569.49. At this time, the civil penalty assessment is under review. LPA will return at a future date to assess an additional civil penalty if warranted. Deficiencies cited on the attached LIC 9099-D. An exit interview was conducted, a copy of the report and appeal rights provided.

Other visitAugust 15, 2025Type A
1 deficiency

Plain-language summary

A state licensing analyst visited the facility on an unannounced basis to investigate an incident report about a medication error involving a resident who had not received any medications for over 30 days because the facility had not ensured an active primary care physician was in place to prescribe refills. The facility said the problem was discovered and has since been fixed—the resident now has a primary care physician and medications have been refilled. The visit resulted in cited deficiencies.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a case management visit regarding an incident report the Department received. LPA met with Regional Vice President of Operation and Interim Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. On August 7, 2025, the Department received an incident report regarding a medication error for R1. The incident report revealed that on August 7, 2025, it was discovered by Regional Director of Health and Wellness that R1 has missed all his medications for more than 30 days since R1 does not have an active primary care physician to prescribe refills. LPA and Regional Director of Health and Wellness discussed over the phone that the medication error was brought to the community's attention but it was not addressed until Regional Director of Health and Wellness was informed. Regional Director of Health and Wellness informed LPA that it has since been resolved, R1 now has a primary care physician who has since prescribed refills for medications. As a result of today's visit, deficiencies cited. Please see LIC 809-D. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report and appeal rights was provided.

Type ACCR §87465(a)(4)

Regulation

87465 Incidental Medical and Dental Care (a) A plan for incidental medical and dental care shall be developed by each facility... (4) The licensee shall assist residents with self-administered medications as needed. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:

Inspector finding

Based on file review, Licensee did not comply as incident report revealed R1 did not receive medications for more than 30 days which poses an immediate health and safety in care.

ComplaintAugust 15, 2025Type B
1 deficiency

Plain-language summary

The state conducted an unannounced visit to investigate multiple incident reports submitted by the facility, including incidents where residents were aggressive toward each other, one resident was transported for evaluation, residents got into physical altercations, and one resident became weak and unresponsive. The inspector also identified 12 additional incidents that should have been reported to the state but were not. Violations were cited; details are available in the facility's licensing file.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct a case management visit regarding multiple incident reports that was submitted to the Department earlier this month. LPA met with Regional Vice President of Operation and Interim Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. On the incident report submitted on August 1, 2025, it revealed the incident regarding R1 being aggressive towards other residents in care occurred on July 19, 2025. On the incident report submitted on August 1, 2025, it revealed the incident regarding R2 being transported for evaluation occurred on July 23, 2025. On the incident report submitted on August 7, 2025, it revealed the incident regarding R3 trying to get in R4's bed occurred on June 26, 2025. On the incident report submitted on August 10, 2025, it revealed the incident regarding R5 touching R6's food which R6 then hit R5 in the face, triggering R7 to push R6 down on the floor occurred on June 10, 2025. On the incident report submitted on August 11, 2025, it revealed the incident regarding R8 becoming weak and unable to respond occurred on June 30, 2025. LPA observed an additional 12 other reports submitted to the Department that was reported outside of reporting requirement. Deficiencies cited. Please see LIC 809-D. Exit interview conducted. A copy of report and appeal rights provided.

Type BCCR §87211(a)(1)(D)

Regulation

87211 Reporting Requirements (a) Each licensee shall furnish to the licensing agency such reports (1) A written report shall be submitted to the licensing agency and to the person responsible for the resident within seven days of the occurrence ...(D) Any incident which threatens the welfare, safety or health of any resident... This requirmenet is …

Inspector finding

Based on file review, Licensee did not comply as LPA received approximately 17 incident reports that exceed the seven days timeframe, which poses a potential risk for residnets in care.

Other visitJune 30, 2025
No deficiencies

Plain-language summary

An inspector visited the facility unannounced on May 2, 2026, to conduct the required annual inspection and found six active COVID-19 cases at the time of the visit. The inspector and facility leadership discussed staffing and COVID-19 protocols, and the inspector will return on another day to complete the full walkthrough of the facility.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a required annual inspection utilizing the care tool. LPA met with Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. Prior to entering facility, LPA wore a N-95 mask due to reports of COVID-19 outbreak. Today's inspection, LPA and Executive Director discussed the six active cases at the facility. LPA will return at a later day to complete walk-through inspection. Additionally, LPA and Executive Director discussed staffing and COVID-19 protocols. Exit interview and a copy was provided.

InspectionJune 30, 2025
No deficiencies

Plain-language summary

A licensing analyst conducted a routine annual inspection of the facility and found no violations or health and safety concerns. The inspector toured all areas including bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchen, and medication room, and confirmed the facility was clean, well-maintained, properly stocked with food, and had appropriate activities for residents. Staff records and resident files were reviewed and found to be complete.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived at the facility to conduct a case management annual continuation visit, utilizing the inspection tool. LPA met with Executive Director (ED), Deborah Taylor and explained the purpose of the visit. During today's inspection, LPA and ED conducted a tour of the interior of the facility to ensure the health and safety of residents in care. Areas toured included but not limited to: residents bedrooms, bathrooms, dining area, kitchen, activity rooms, medication room and the common areas. LPA observed residents bedrooms to have the required furnishing. LPA observed residents showers to have nonskid strips present. LPA observed facility temperature to be at a comfortable temperature of 74*F. LPA observed access to the kitchen to be locked with pin code entry. Kitchen was observed to be clean and free of pest. LPA observed ample supply of perishable and nonperishable foods available for residents in care. LPA observed exits to be free of obstructions. LPA observed activities available in the common areas for resident social interactions. LPA observed medication room to be occupied with medication technicians, assisting residents in care. In areas toured, LPA observed facility to be clean and in good repair. No immediate health, safety and/or personal rights violations was observed. File review was conducted for five resident records and five personnel records. LPA observed the required documents signed and completed on file. At this time, LPA is requesting a copy of facility liability insurance to be emailed to LPA by Friday, August 8, 2025. CARE tool was completed and no deficiencies was cited. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report was provided.

Other visitMay 29, 2025
No deficiencies

Plain-language summary

On May 29, 2025, the state held a non-compliance conference with the facility to address issues from the facility's previous inspection history. The facility agreed to a plan to fix these problems and implement new procedures to improve compliance. Because the facility has shown improvement and committed to these changes, no citations were issued at this meeting.

View full inspector notes

On May 29, 2025, a Non-Compliance Conference was held at the Sacramento North Regional Office located at 9835 Goethe Road Suite 100, Sacramento CA 95827. Present were in the office meeting were: Licensing representatives - Regional Manager, Alycia Rayner, Licensing Program Manager, Maribeth Senty, and Licensing Program Analyst, Cassie Yang. Facility Representatives - Senior Vice President of Operations, Phil Altman, Regional Vice President of Operations, Lyndee Whaley, Executive Director, Deborah Taylor, Health and Wellness Director , Shayla Hill, and Legal Counsel, Payam Saljoughian. A non-compliance plan was developed with the licensee on today's date as it relates to previous compliance history. The licensee was in agreement with the drafted non-compliance plan. Due to the improvement of the compliance and new procedure implementation at the facility, no citations are issued as a result of today's meeting. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report was provided.

ComplaintMay 2, 2025
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

This was a complaint investigation into two allegations: that a resident was left unattended and hospitalized, and that staff were not meeting residents' needs. The facility's records showed residents are checked every two hours, the resident in question was evaluated at a hospital for an acute kidney condition (likely related to heart and blood vessel disease, not neglect), and staff had received training on mechanical lifts and transfer procedures—the Department found both allegations to be unfounded.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C Allegation: Staff left resident unattended for an extended period of time resulting in hospitalization. File review of R1's medication order on March 13, 2024, it revealed R1 has a previous medical history of hypertension and CKD (chronic kidney disease) stage G3b/A1. Incident report submitted for R1 revealed R1 was sent to the hospital for evaluation due to discoloration around mouth and high temperature. File review of R1's hospital discharge document, it revealed R1 was treated fro acute kidney injury. Document stated the cause of injury may be due to "heart and blood vessel disease". Based on information gathered from R1's physician report it revealed R1 has a primary diagnosis of dementia and secondary diagnosis of atrial fibrillation. Interview conducted with Health and Wellness Director revealed residents in care are checked during rounds every two hours. Health and Wellness Director denied any observation of sunburns on R1. Therefore, allegation is unfounded. Allegation: Staff are not meeting residents needs The Department conducted extensive file reviews for the following allegation. File review of R2's care plan conducted on February 22, 2024 revealed R2 is a "one to two" person assist with transfer. File review of R2's care plan conducted on June 13, 2024 revealed R2's level of care has changed which R2 is now a two person assist with mechanical lift. Interview with Health and Wellness Director revealed hospice agency has trained fcaility staff how to use mechanical lift. For new staff, Health and Wellness Director then train staff through demonstration. File review of staff training revealed training was completed by Health and Wellness Director and Suncrest Hospice regarding Safe Transfer with Hoyer Lift, with approximately 17 staff present in attendance. Therefore, allegation is unfounded. Based on information obtained, the following allegations of: Staff left resident unattended for an extended period of time resulting in hospitalization, and Staff are not meeting residents needs, are UNFOUNDED. Unfounded meaning that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was provided.

ComplaintMarch 12, 2025
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that staff do respond promptly to resident calls for assistance (with a median response time of about one minute for falls detected by cameras), residents' toileting and incontinence needs are being met, medical attention was provided appropriately when residents became ill, and staff received proper training in medication administration. All allegations in the complaint were found to be unfounded.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C (1) Allegation: Staff do not respond to resident calls for assistance. The Department conducted interviews and file review regarding the allegation. Based on interview conducted with R1 on March 22, 2024, it revealed R1 likes the staff at the facility. R1 stated staff are helpful and responds to calls as needed. R1 stated R1 has a slight cognitive impairment but is sharp for the most part. Interview conducted with Executive Director on April 3, 2024 revealed the call system is an alert at the front receptionist desk, which indicates which room is in need for assistance which receptionist then call caregivers to the room. Executive Director stated there is no systematic program that collects data of the alerts trigger by room cord plugs. Executive Director stated all rooms are installed with fall detection camera which will record videos of each fall, and alert the facility via telephone. File review of standard report of March 2024 call response data provided by room camera system revealed there was a total of 14 falls detected, the median time to respond was one minute and 14 seconds with the average time to respond to be one minute and 43 seconds. File review further revealed time to respond less than five minutes was the total of 92.31%. Interview conducted with Executive Director on February 5, 2025 revealed when a call for assistance is activated from a room, it will create a ring which cannot be deactivated until staff go to the resident room to turn it off when they respond. The allegation above is unfounded. Allegation: Staff do not meet resident toileting needs. Based on LPA's observation to seven bedrooms on April 3, 2024 and five bedrooms on June 21, 2024, there was no indication of incontinence mal odor. Interview conducted with R1 on March 22, 2024 revealed R1 does not have any issues with staff not fulfilling resident toileting needs. Interview conducted with R2 revealed R2 is happy and does not have any current issue regarding incontinence care. Interview conducted with Health and Wellcare Director revealed that she does not have any issues with staff not assisting residents with toileting and/or incontinence care. Health and Wellcare Director stated residents in care are changed and/or assisted with toileting needs before bed. Night (NOC) shift are not to disturb residents while they are sleeping to check their depends unless residents wake up in the middle of the night, and notify staff for a change. Health and Wellcare Director stated when morning shift starts it is usually when residents are waking up for the day which will require toileting/incontinence assistance. Residents may have had a bowel movement in their sleep at night but it does not mean residents were neglected. The allegation is unfounded. Please continue on LIC 9099-C (2) 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 LIC 9099-C (2) Allegation: Staff did not seek medical attention for resident in a timely manner. Incident in question indicated that on February 26, 2024 during night shift, staff failed to seek medical attention for R1. Based on file review, it revealed on February 17, 2024 at approximately 9:10 p.m, R1 was vomiting after given PRN medication. Hospital documents revealed R1 was admitted to Mercy Hospital of Folsom for vomiting on February 17, 2024. File review of incident report submitted on February 28, 2024 revealed on February 25, 2024 at approximately 11 a.m, R1 informed staff R1 had an episode of emesis, and was transported to Mercy Hospital of Folsom for evaluation. During time of the faxed incident report, R1 has not been discharged from the hospital to the community. File review of R1's hospital documents confirmed R1 was admitted to the hospital on February 25, 2024. File review of submitted incident report revealed on March 11, 2024, R1 had an episode of emesis and was transported to Mercy Hospital of Folsom for evaluation. Hospital documents confirmed R1 was admitted to the emergency room on March 11, 2024. Therefore, the allegation is unfounded. Allegation: Staff are not properly training to meet resident needs. The Department conducted file review of medication training. File review revealed S1 was hired as an employee in August 2022, then scheduled for training to be a medication technician starting February 21, 2024. S1 completed the mandated training of 8 hours of instruction on February 23, 2024 and completed 16 hours of hands-on shadowing training on February 27, 2024. S2 was hired as an employee in December 2023, and completed the mandated medication administration training of 8 hours of instruction on January 1, 2024 and completed 16 hours of hands-on shadowing training on February 27, 2024. S3 was hired as an employee in December 2023, and completed the mandated medication administration training of 8 hours of instruction in February 2024 and completed 16 hours of hands-on shadowing training on December 31, 2024. Therefore, the allegation is unfounded. Based on information obtained through file review and interviews, the allegations listed above are UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was left at the facility.

ComplaintFebruary 5, 2025· MixedType B
1 deficiency

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

This complaint investigation found that a resident prescribed seizure medication twice daily received only one dose on multiple dates between January and April 2024, with no documented reasons for the missed doses on most occasions. The facility also investigated allegations that staff dropped a resident during a transfer and falsified records, but inspectors found insufficient evidence to substantiate those claims, though staff did document the incident as a "guided fall" and the resident sustained a minor skin tear.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C Allegation: Resident not receiving medication. The Department conducted extensive file reviews. Based on R1's e-MAR Order Administration Tracking report type of "Recorded As Given", it revealed that Levetiracetam 500 mg was prescribed to be taken one tablet by mouth, twice daily for seizure management. File review revealed on the date of 2nd, 5th, 6th, 14th, 17th, and 22nd of January 2024, only one Levetiracetam tablet was administered for the day. File review of Order Administration Tracking report type of "Recorded As Drug Not Available" "Recorded As Drug Not Given" and "Recorded As OTHER", LPA did not observe any reasoning documented as to why resident did not receive medication. File review revealed on the date of 9th, 20th, and 29th of February 2024, only one Levetiracetam tablet was administered for the day. File review of Order Administration Tracking report type of "Recorded As Drug Not Available" "Recorded As Drug Not Given" and "Recorded As OTHER", LPA observed only February 9th, 2024 to have a reasoning of " GIVE ON TIME" but no reasoning documented for February 20th and 29th, 2024. File review revealed on the date of 2nd of March 2024, no Levetiracetam tablet was administered for the day. File review of Order Administration Tracking report type of "Recorded As Drug Not Available" "Recorded As Drug Not Given" and "Recorded As OTHER", LPA did not observe any reasoning documented as to why resident did not receive medication. File review revealed on the date of 21st, 25th, and 26th of April 2024, one Levetiracetam tablet was administered for the day. File review of Order Administration Tracking report type of "Recorded As Drug Not Available" "Recorded As Drug Not Given" and "Recorded As OTHER", LPA observed "AWAITING REFILLS" and "waiting delivery" to be documented for April 25th and April 26th but no reasoning documented for April 21st. Due to this information obtained, the Department finds the allegations 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. Deficiencies cited on the attached LIC 9099-D. An exit interview was conducted, a copy of the report and appeal rights provided to Executive Director. 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 LIC 9099-C Allegation: Staff dropped resident during transfer. Based on interview conducted with R1 revealed R1 needed transferring assistance from the commode to a chair when R1 felt weak. R1 stated R1 was then dropped onto the floor. R1 stated it was a male staff assisting R1 with transfer. File review of R1's LIC 602 Physician Report revealed R1 has dementia. Interview conducted with S1 revealed that S1 was working on call in the night shift and assisted R1 with S2. R1 reported R1 felt weak so S1 and S2 provided R1 with a "guided fall" onto the floor to rest until R1 had the strength to stand. File review of the guided fall internal report revealed that R1 sustained a minor skin tear which first aid was administered. The following allegation is unsubstantiated as R1 is unable to recall the story in multiple settings. Allegation: Staff falsified resident records. File review of the guided fall internal report revealed S1 and S2 assisted in R1's transfer. Interview conducted with S1 revealed R1 is a two person assist with transfer. The night of the incident S1 was assisting R1 with S2. Interview conducted with R1 revealed R1 does not recall who assisted R1 but does recalled S1 to be in the room. Interview conducted with S2 revealed that S2 does not recalled being in the room with S1 to transfer R1. File review revealed no unusual incident report was submitted to Licensing as the incident was a "guided fall" and R1 did not need medical services. The following allegation is unsubstantiated. Based on information obtained, the following allegations are unsubstantiated meaning that 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 are UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of this was report was provided to Executive Director..

Type BCCR §87465(a)(4)

Regulation

87465 Incidental Medical and Dental Care (a) ... The plan shall encourage routine medical and dental care and provide for assistance in obtaining such care, by compliance with the following: (4) The licensee shall assist residents with self-administered medications as needed. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:

Inspector finding

Based on file review, Licensee did not comply to the section cited above as R1 was not administered medications as prescribed, which posed a potential health and safety risk for residents in care.

ComplaintFebruary 5, 2025
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

This was a complaint investigation that looked into three allegations: whether staff failed to provide showers, failed to keep residents clean, and failed to provide transportation. The facility provided documentation showing residents received scheduled showers twice weekly, staff assisted residents with cleaning after meals and offered garment covers during eating, and transportation was available through family pickup, facility staff, or third-party services when arranged in advance. All allegations were found to be unfounded.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C(1) Allegation: Staff did not provide showers to residents in care Based on file review conducted for the facility shower sign off sheet for March 2024, it revealed residents in care was provided showers. Shower sign off sheet revealed R1 was showered total of nine (9) times on the following days in the month of March 2024: 2nd, 9th, 12th, 16th, 21st, twice on 22nd, 24th, and 27th. Shower sign off sheet revealed R2 was showered eight (8) times on the following days in the month of March 2024: 3rd, 4th, 6th, 10th, 13th, 17th, 21st, and 27th. Interview conducted with Executive Director on February 5, 2025 revealed since change of Executive Director, documentation has changed where facility will document on shower logs if there was any refusal and/or exceptions. Residents in care organized in scheduled showering schedules twice a week. The following allegation is unfounded. Allegation: Staff did not ensure residents were kept clean Based on interview conducted with Co-Reporting Party, it revealed Co-Reporting Party has observed residents in care having a dirty shirt on while eating or food on their faces. Co-Party Reporting stated that staff should utilize a bib for residents who are messy eaters. Interview conducted with Executive Director on April 3, 2024 revealed that there are a few residents in care who has mobility limitations with self-feeding. Executive Director stated facility cannot enforce residents in care to wear bibs. Executive Director stated after meals, staff assist with wiping food off resident’s clothing and may ask the residents if they want to change, but residents still have the rights to decline. Based on LPA's observation on April 3, 2024, facility staff were observed to be assisting residents in care with cleaning after meal. Interview conducted with Executive Director on February 5, 2025 revealed that facility are providing independent eaters with garment covers during meal times. The following allegation is unfounded. Please continue on LIC 9099-C(2). 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 LIC 9099-C (2) Allegation: Staff did not provide transportation services to residents in care. Based on interview conducted with Executive Director on April 3, 2024, it revealed that the facility bus is utilizing for extracurricular activities such as city tours. Executive Director explained that the registration tag on the bus has expired therefore the bus cannot be utilized at this time. Executive Director stated that if residents in care needs transportation to medical and/or dental appointments family members are to pick up the resident from the facility to the appointment. If family members are unable to, facility staff can assist residents to an appointment when notified in advance and at an additional charge. Interview conducted with Executive Director and Health and Wellness Director on February 5, 2024 revealed that the facility bus is currently in the shop, but if residents in care are in need for transportation services, facility will provide third party transportation such as Heart of Gold. If family is unable to escort the residents then facility will schedule additional staff for escorting when notified in advance and with additional charge for the staffing. The allegation is unfounded. Based on information obtained through interviews, file review and observation, the allegations listed above are UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was left at the facility.

ComplaintFebruary 5, 2025· Substantiated
Citation on file

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Substantiated — CDSS found a violation and issued a citation. Full citation details are on file with the state.

Plain-language summary

This was a complaint investigation into medication management. Inspectors found that a resident prescribed an anti-seizure medication (Levetiracetam) was given the morning dose but missed the evening dose on two separate days in April 2024 because the facility was waiting for medication refills and delivery, and records showed inconsistencies about when doses were actually given. The facility had already been cited for similar medication management issues in a prior complaint, so no additional citation was issued for this incident.

View full inspector notes

Allegation: Staff are mismanaging resident medication. Based on file review, it revealed R1 was prescribed Levetiracetam 500 mg tablet to be given one tablet by mouth, twice a day, effective date April 3, 2024. File review of R1's e-MAR, it revealed on April 25, 2024, one Levetiracetam tablet was administered at 9 a.m but not at 5 p.m as facility was "waiting refills". On April 26, 2024 at 9 a.m, it was recorded one Levetiracetam was administered, but then at 5 p.m Levetiracetam was not administered due to "waiting for delivery". Interview conducted with Health and Wellness Director revealed she was not working at the facility during this time in question and cannot explained why one dose was recorded as administered at 9 a.m on April 26, 2024 when it was pending on delivery as stated at 5 p.m. The Department finds the allegations 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. Although the allegation was found to be substantiated, deficiency is not cited as LPA has cited facility for similar allegation in complaint control # 59-AS-20240610163326. An exit interview was conducted, a copy of the report and appeal rights provided to Executive Director.

Other visitJanuary 13, 2025
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

A state licensing analyst made an unannounced visit to review staff training records from 2023 and 2024. The facility was asked to provide documentation for two staff members by the end of the day. No violations were found.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit. LPA met with Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. Today's visit, LPA is requesting a copy of S1 and S2's 2023 and 2024 Training documents. Please provide to LPA the following documents by end of day via email. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview.

ComplaintDecember 23, 2024· SubstantiatedType A
1 deficiency

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that on January 12, 2024, a resident was pushed and slammed into a door by another resident during an altercation; staff did not follow the facility's protocol to intervene and separate the residents. The injured resident was taken to the hospital, returned to the facility the next day, then returned to the hospital after becoming ill, and died three days later from complications including a spinal fracture and infection. The facility was cited for failing to ensure the resident's safety and a $500 civil penalty was assessed.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C (1) Note: There has been a change of Executive Director and Health and Wellness Director since the incident. On January 12, 2024, at approximately 5:35 PM resident (R1) was sent to the emergency room and was discharged back to the community the following day on January 13, 2024, at approximately 5:30 AM. On January 13, 2024, at approximately 12:55 PM, staff observed R1 vomiting and complaint of neck and shoulder pain. Staff sent R1 back to the hospital. Documents indicated that R1 died at the hospital three days later on January 16, 2024. Corners report documented R1’s cause of death to be “probable sepsis” and “acute spinal fracture of T3 and T4 with epidural hemorrhage and acute osteomyelitis with spinal epidural abscess”. According to statements and interviews conducted, On January 12, 2024, R2 had walked up to the nurse's station and became combative with staff. Staff observed R2 grabbing R1 by the wheelchair and pushing R1 towards the nurse’s station. Staff observed R2 slammed R1 into the nurse’s station door. R2 then pushed R1 down the hallway in their wheelchair. R2 went around the corner with R1 at which time staff heard R1 screaming. Staff came around the corner and observed R1 on the floor. Interviews with staff provided multiple accounts of the incident however, staff present did not attempt to redirect R2 from R1. The Department conducted interviews with staff which regarding the protocol to take when two residents are having an altercation. Staff indicated they are to redirect and distract residents with something they like. Staff stated when two residents are having an altercation, staff are to intervene and separate the two residents as the safety of residents is a priority. Based on the information staff provided regarding the altercation between R2 and R1, staff did not follow facility protocols and failed to ensure R1’s wellbeing and safety. Staff indicated R2 had a history of being aggressive physically and verbally. Documents reviewed revealed on October 23, 2023, at approximately 3:30 PM, R2 told another resident in care (R3) to get out of R2's room and pushed R3 down onto the hallway floor. Please continue LIC 9099-C (2) 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 LIC 9099-C (2) Staff indicated they had expressed concerns to Health and Wellness Director that R2’s medication may need to be adjusted to help with agitation. File review of R2's physician report revealed R2 has dementia, primary diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, and with no secondary diagnosis listed. In section Mental Condition, the physician’s report was marked yes for confused/disoriented, inappropriate behavior, and aggressive behavior. Review of R2's Care Plan Detail signed on January 3, 2024, revealed R2's psychosocial needs stated occasional behavior issues, can become aggressive when R2 wants to leave. Staff are to redirect or let the director know they need assistance. Interview conducted with Health and Wellness Director revealed when two residents are having an altercation, staff are to intervene and redirect. Staff are to try to get the agitated resident to go on a walk by verbal redirecting cues. Interview revealed that an internal investigation was conducted on January 15, 2024, which revealed staff did not follow facility protocols and did not intervene as trained to do so. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, staff failed to follow facility protocols when there is an altercation between residents. Staff’s failure to ensure R1’s safe and wellbeing resulted in R1 sustaining severe injuries from R2’s actions resulting in R1’s death. Due to this information obtained, the Department finds the allegations 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. An immediate civil penalty in the amount of $500.00 assessed for R1 sustaining a serious bodily injury while in care at this facility. As a result of the resident’s injury, the violation warrants a civil penalty assessment based on Health and Safety Code 1569.49. At this time, the civil penalty assessment is under review. LPA will return at a future date to assess an additional civil penalty if warranted. Deficiencies cited on the attached LIC 9099-D. An exit interview was conducted, a copy of the report and appeal rights provided to Executive Director.

Type ACCR §87468.2(a)(4)

Regulation

87468.2 Additional Personal Rights of Residents in Privately Operated Facilities (a) In addition to the rights listed in Section 87468.1, Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities, residents in privately operated residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (4) To care, supervision, and services…

Inspector finding

Based on file review and interviews, Licensee did not comply with the section cited above as staff failed to follow protocol during the incident with R2, which poses an immediate health and safety risk for residents in care.

ComplaintSeptember 26, 2024· SubstantiatedType B
1 deficiency

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that the facility had expired food items stored in the kitchen pantry, including Hollandaise Sauce Mix expired in January 2024 and peanut butter expired in September 2024, at the time of the September 26, 2024 inspection. The facility's incident report indicated they had already disposed of expired salad dressing after discovering it. The allegation that facility staff served expired food to residents was substantiated.

View full inspector notes

LIC 9099-C Allegation: Facility staff served expired food to residents The Department conducted a kitchen inspection, file review and interviews regarding the following allegation. Interview conducted with Executive Director revealed that a photo was circulating around the facility of an expired salad dressing. Executive Director stated the bottle itself did not have an expiration date, only a manufactured date but there may have been some discoloration on the dressing container. File review of the incident report received by the Department on 9/20/2024 revealed "upon inspection of the kitchen we did find the expired salad dressing and properly disposed". Kitchen inspection conducted on 9/26/2024 revealed that in the facility dry pantry storage, Hollandaise Sauce Mix was observed on the shelf with best by date of "JAN2724" indicating January 27, 2024. Inspection further revealed a jar of peanut butter to be on the shelf with best if used by date of "SEP0424" indicating September 4, 2024. Based on observing the following food items, the allegation is substaniated. Based on the information obtained for the allegation, facility staff served expired food to residents , the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED - A finding that the complaint is Substantiated means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. The following allegation cited above is substantiated, please see LIC9099-D. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report and appeal rights was provided.

Type BCCR §87555(a)

Regulation

87555 General Food Service Requirements (a) The total daily diet shall be of the quality...necessary to meet the needs of the residents and shall meet the Recommended Dietary Allowances of the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council. All food shall be selected, stored, prepared and served in a safe and healthful manner. This requi…

Inspector finding

Based on kitchen inspection, Licensee did not comply with the section cited above as LPA observed two items in the pantry that was expired, which poses a potential health, safety, and personal rights violation to the residents in care.

Other visitAugust 13, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

On August 13, 2024, the state held an informal meeting with facility leadership to discuss pending investigations, focusing on staffing concerns. No violations were cited, and the facility agreed to provide proof of staff training on resident rights while the state monitors the facility going forward.

View full inspector notes

On 8/13/2024 at 8:30AM, an informal conference was conducted virtual via Microsoft Teams Meeting. The purpose of this informal conference meeting is to discuss the pending open investigations. Present in the meeting is, Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Anthony Perez, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang, and Licensee representatives: - Deborah Taylor, Executive Director for Cogir of Folsom - Lyndee Whaley, Regional VP of Operations for Cogir Senior Living - Phil Altman, Senior VP of Operations for Cogir Senior Living - Kim Eldridge, Regional Director of Health & Wellness for Cogir Senior Living - Holly McMurray, Senior VP of Care & Compliance for Cogir Senior Living The informal conference process was explained during this meeting. Topic discussed: - Staffing concerns At this time, the Department agreed to monitor facility. Additionally, Facility will provide the Department proof of staff training on personal rights of residents. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted. Informal meeting concluded and a copy of report will be emailed. Facility Representative Signature is expected to be signed and returned to LPA by close of business, 8/13/2024.

ComplaintAugust 8, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged the facility denied entry to a hospice worker. The investigation found the facility did not deny entry at the door; instead, after a visit, the facility asked the hospice agency not to send that particular nurse back, and the hospice agency agreed to this request. No violation was found.

View full inspector notes

Allegation: Licensee denied resident's hospice worker entry to the facility The Department conducted extensive interviews. Based on the interview conducted with hospice agency supervisor, it revealed that facility had informed supervisor of potential conflict of interest and asked if hospice nurse will no longer provide services at the facility. Interview revealed that hospice nurse was not denied at the facility to enter. Based on interview conducted with hospice nurse revealed hospice nurse was informed by their supervisor that facility had requested hospice nurse to not return to the facility and hospice agency agreed to comply. Hospice nurse stated they were not denied at the door, the request was asked after a visit. Interview conducted with Executive Director and Health and Wellness Director revealed that the request was made after observations during a visitation and no denial of entry was made. Based on information above, the department concluded that the allegation is unfounded . A finding that an allegation is unfounded means that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report was provided.

Other visitJuly 25, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

During an unannounced visit on July 25, 2024, inspectors reviewed an incident in which a resident choked on meat during lunch and staff successfully dislodged the food from their throat; the resident was evaluated by a doctor and returned to the facility with no changes. The facility notified the resident's family and the primary care physician, and afterward placed the resident on a soft diet to prevent future choking risks. No violations were found.

View full inspector notes

On 7/25/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a case management visit regarding the LIC 624 Unusual Incident/Injury Report the Department received. LPA met with new Executive Director, Deborah Taylor, and Regional Director, Davina Barker, and explained the purpose of the visit. The incident occurred when R1 was eating lunch in the common dining room when S1 observed R1 to be choking. S2 then helped dislodged meat out of R1's throat. R1 was sent out for evaluation. Incident report stated primary care physician was notified. R1 returned to the facility with no changes. LPA and Regional Director discussed and confirmed that R1's responsible party was notified via "voice to voice". It was further discussed that R1 was not on special diet but after the incident, R1 is now on a new order of mechanical soft diet. Facility reported no staffing issues and/or additional concerns. As a result of today's visit, no deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted an a copy of the report provided.

Other visitJuly 25, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

On July 17, 2024, a staff member threatened a resident, saying they would rip call lights out of the wall if the resident did not stop using them; the resident reported feeling afraid to use the call light after this incident. The facility investigated, confirmed the threat through a witness, and immediately suspended and terminated the staff member. The facility reported the incident to the state licensing agency, the ombudsman, and the resident's family.

View full inspector notes

On 7/25/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a case management visit regarding the LIC 624 Unusual Incident/Injury Report the Department received. LPA met with new Executive Director, Deborah Taylor, and explained the purpose of the visit. The incident occurred on 7/17/2024 when R1 reported to staff that S1 had threatened R1 to stop utilizing the call light or else S1 will rip the call lights out of the wall. R1 disclosed R1 is afraid to utilize call light after this incident. Facility conducted an investigation and S2 confirmed the incident had taken place as S2 was a witness of the encounter when S1 stated that if R1 does not stop pulling the call lights, S1 will move R1's bed. Facility has since placed S1 on suspension, and S1 is no longer working at the facility. Facility notified Community Care Licensing, Long Term Care Ombudsman and responsible party of this incident. LPA and Regional Director discussed that S1's last shift was the date of the incident. As a result of the incident of S1 violating CCR Title 22, Section 87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities, please see LIC 809-D. Exit interview conducted an a copy of the report and appeal rights provided.

ComplaintJune 21, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged the facility failed to notify the responsible party of a rent increase. The Department reviewed the facility's files and found the facility provided written notice of a rent increase in March 2024, and the responsible party had signed documents acknowledging the resident's updated care plan and pricing in January 2024. The allegation was unfounded and no violations were cited.

View full inspector notes

Allegation: Facility did not notify responsible person of an increase in monthly rent rates. The Department conducted an extensive file review regarding the allegation above. Based on file review conducted, a letter of Annual Care Level Rate Adjustment Notice was provided to responsible party on October 31, 2023 with effective date of January 1, 2024. File review revealed that care service for Level 1 is $2550, with additional care level at $600. File review additionally revealed a reassessment service plan was conducted on 01/03/2024 by Health and Wellcare Director Nurse where R1's level of care changed from Memory Care 02 to Memory Care 06. Document revealed that responsible party signed the updated service plan on 01/18/2024. File review revealed on 03/08/2024, a letter was addressed to responsible party to inform of annual base rent increase from $4875 to $5216, effective date of 06/01/2024. File review further revealed in Levels of Care Price list, Memory Care Level 2 ranged from 426 to 525. Memory Care Level 6 ranged from 826 to 925. File reviewed revealed in the initial assessment conducted on 06/23/2023, grand total of R1's care was 590. In most updated assessment conducted 01/03/2024, grand total of R1's care was 940. Based on information above, the department concluded that the allegation is unfounded . A finding that an allegation is unfounded means that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview was conducted.

Other visitJune 21, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

This was an unannounced annual inspection on June 21, 2024, where inspectors toured the facility, reviewed resident and staff files, and checked food supplies, temperature, cleanliness, and insurance. The inspectors found the facility in substantial compliance with no violations, observing residents engaged in activities with staff present and the facility clean and well-maintained.

View full inspector notes

On 6/21/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a required annual inspection utilizing the full care tool. LPA met with Executive Director, Davina Barker, and explained the purpose of the visit. Today's census is 22 residents with eight (8) residents on hospice services. Facility is licensed for 66 residents, hospice waiver of 16. Executive Director reported no staffing concerns. LPA was informed there are three care staff and one med tech for AM and PM shift and with two care staff for NOC shift. LPA and Executive Director conducted a tour the interior of the facility to ensure the health and safety of residents in care. Areas toured included but not limited to: five residents bedroom, Tahoe Room, main dining, kitchen, laundry room, activity room and the common areas. LPA observed facility to have 2+ days of perishable and 7+ days of non-perishable foods. LPA observed the facility to be at a comfortable 72* degree. LPA observed facility to have ample supply of linens. LPA observed residents in care to be in the activity room, listening to music with care staff. During today's visit, LPA observed facility to be clean, sanitary and in good repair. File review was conducted for 5 residents and 5 personnel files. LPA observed files to be completed. Inspection tool completed and found facility to be in substantial compliance. No deficiencies cited. LPA observed facility liability insurance to be current and active. Exit interview conducted and a copy of report was provided.

InspectionJune 21, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

A state licensing inspector visited this facility on June 21, 2024, to conduct a required annual inspection. No violations were found during the visit.

View full inspector notes

On 6/21/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived to the facility unannounced to conduct a required annual inspection. LPA met with Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. Today's visit, LPA is conducting an annual inspection today but this report is being generated to clear the Post-Licensing inspection in the system. There are no citations issued on this report. Exit interview. Copy of report provided.

InspectionJune 12, 2024
No deficiencies

Inspector: Cassie Yang

Plain-language summary

Licensing staff conducted an unannounced visit on June 12, 2024, to follow up on a welfare check that law enforcement performed at the facility on June 10, 2024. Staff reported that on June 3, 2024, a resident's legs became weak during a transfer and the resident was lowered to the floor to rest; staff then helped the resident back up, and the resident had a skin tear on the elbow that staff treated with first aid. The facility did not file a formal incident report because staff described it as a "guided" lowering rather than a fall and said no injury occurred, though this incident remains under state review.

View full inspector notes

On 06/12/2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Cassie Yang arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a case management visit regarding an incident report the Department received on 6/11/2024. LPA met with Interim Executive Director and Health Wellcare Director Nurse and explained the purpose of the visit. According to the incident report received, it stated local law enforcement arrived to the facility on 6/10/2024 to conduct a welfare check on R1 due to a recent fall R1 sustained. LPA, Executive Director and Health Wellcare Director Nurse discussed the following incident. LPA was informed by Health Wellcare Director Nurse that on 6/3/2024 R1 had a "guided fall" at approximately 2:40 AM. Health Wellcare Director Nurse informed LPA that in the middle of a transfer between Health Wellcare Director Nurse, S1 and R1, R1's legs became weak and needed to be placed on the floor temporarily to rest before Health Wellcare Director Nurse and S1 assisted R1 back to the commode. After R1 was placed back on the recliner, Health Wellcare Director Nurse provided first aid to R1 as R1's elbow was observed to have a skin tear. When asked for the incident report of the incident, Health Wellcare Director Nurse informed LPA LIC624 was not created and submitted as R1 did not have a fall, it was a guided fall, and no injury was sustained, R1 was not sent to the hospital. LPA was provided a copy of internal incident report. This incident is currently under review, No deficiencies cited today. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was provided.

Other visitMay 25, 2023
No deficiencies

Inspector: Sarena Keosavang

Plain-language summary

This was a routine annual inspection on April 26, 2023, where an inspector toured the facility's living areas, bathrooms, kitchen, and medication room, reviewed five resident files and five staff records, and checked safety systems including fire detectors, alarms, and first aid supplies. The inspector found no violations—medications were properly locked and administered according to doctor's orders, resident files were complete, staff had required training, and the facility maintained adequate food supplies and safe water temperatures.

View full inspector notes

On 04/26/2023 at 9:30 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sarena Keosavang arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct a Required-1 Year Inspection utilizing the CARE Inspection Tool. LPA met with Executive Director (ED), Cassiana Bush, and explained the purpose of the visit. At 9:40 AM, LPA, ED, and Memory Care Director Wendy Middleton toured the interior and exterior of the facility to ensure health and safety of residents in care. Areas toured include but are not limited to: common areas, residents' bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchen, medication room, and courtyard. LPA observed required furniture, and lighting throughout the residents' bedrooms and facility. LPA observed residents' bathrooms to be clean, sanitary, and in good repair. LPA observed food supplies of non-perishables for a minimum of one (1) week and perishable foods for a minimum of two (2) days. The hot water temperature was measured in the bathroom at 105 degrees Fahrenheit. First aid kit was completed. LPA observed fire detectors and carbon monoxide alarms to be operable. The fire extinguishers were last serviced on 03/01/2023. Fire drill is scheduled to be conducted on 05/31/2023. LPA observed medications to be locked and inaccessible to residents in care. At 10:05 AM, LPA reviewed a total of five (5) residents' files. Resident files contain signed admission agreements, physician's reports, appraisals, identification sheets, releases, and resident's rights. Medications are centrally stored, locked, and appear to be given per doctor order. LPA compared medications to those being given for five (5) residents and found no discrepancies. Facility is correctly using the Medication Administration Records (MAR). LPA reviewed a total of five (5) staff record. Staff has training in medications, first aid and CPR, and other various areas of care provision. No deficiencies being cited during today's inspection. Exit interview conducted and report provided.

ComplaintMay 16, 2023· Unsubstantiated
No deficiencies

Inspector: Lavinia Muscan

Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation looked into five allegations: staff forcing medication into a resident's mouth, staff failing to help a resident into bed, staff listening to residents' conversations without consent, and a non-operational call light system. The department interviewed residents and staff, reviewed records, and visited the facility on two dates; investigators found no evidence supporting any of the allegations, and observed that staff were attentive to residents' care needs, medications were given according to doctor orders, residents' privacy was respected, and the call light system was fully operational with staff responding promptly.

View full inspector notes

Staff shoved a pill into resident’s mouth. The department conducted record review, interviews, and facility observation to investigate this allegation. From the 3 residents and 5 staff interviews conducted, it has been learned that facility was giving medication to all residents per their doctor orders without any issues. Additionally, it has been learned that facility was not forcing any medications to residents against their will. During department inspections on 11/22/22 and 3/1/23, all staff were attending to resident care needs without any problems. From the record review it has been concluded that facility was documenting medication refusals (if applicable) and notified residents responsible parties and doctors as needed. This agency has investigated the above listed allegation(s). Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred therefore, we have found the allegation(s) to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. Staff failed to assist resident into bed. The department conducted record review, interviews, and facility observation to investigate this allegation. From the 3 residents and 5 staff interviews, it has been learned that facility staff was assisting all residents for their ADL care needs per their Needs and Service plan in a timely manner. During department visits on 11/22/22 and 3/1/23 it has been observed that facility staff was attentive to residents’ care needs and all residents appeared to be well groomed and in good care. This agency has investigated the above listed allegation(s). Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred therefore, we have found the allegation(s) to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview was conducted with Memory Care Director and a copy of this report was provided to the facility. The signature of the Memory Care director on these forms acknowledges receipt of these documents. 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 Staff violating resident’s privacy by listening to conversation without consent. During the course of the investigation LPA obtained facility documentation, conducted interviews, and inspected facility grounds. During department visits on 11/22/22 and 3/1/23 it has been observed that residents’ privacy was respected, and no listening devices were observed in residents’ rooms nor was staff being observed around residents’ rooms when family was visiting. Furthermore, no interviews indicated that any residents have any concern with private time with their family members/visitors or experienced any problems in this area. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging staff system was not operational. We have found that the allegation was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Signal system was not operational. During the investigation LPA obtained facility documentation, conducted interviews, and inspected facility grounds. LPA investigated the allegation, "Signal system was not operational." LPA toured the facility on 11/22/22 and 3/1/23 and observed the call light system was fully operational. During tour staff pulled approximately 3 different call lights in resident rooms and caregivers responded in a timely manner. Staff interviews indicate that call lights are answered within minutes even when other care is being provided. The facility was observed to be equipped with operational pull cords in the resident rooms and bathrooms that are used to notify staff. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging staff system was not operational. We have found that the allegation was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview was conducted with Memory Care Director and a copy of this report was provided to the facility. The signature of the Memory Care Director on these forms acknowledges receipt of these documents.

ComplaintMarch 9, 2023
No deficiencies

Inspector: Lavinia Muscan

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that staff did not keep the facility free from bed bugs. An investigation found that when staff discovered bed bugs in a resident's room on December 19, 2022, they immediately showered and moved the resident, washed bedding in hot water, and hired professional pest control services including a certified bed bug dog to treat the room the next day; the facility continues monthly pest control service. The complaint was found to be unfounded because the facility took appropriate steps to address and eliminate the infestation.

View full inspector notes

Staff do not ensure facility is free from bed bugs. An investigation was conducted into the allegation above. Interviews and records reviewed showed that on 12/19/2022, facility staff observed bedbugs in a room at the facility. Upon findings the bedbugs, facility staff showered the resident and relocated the resident in another room. Staff also washed all bedding with hot water and maintenance arrived to bomb the room. The licensee contracted with EcoLab and a Certified Bedbug Dog who came out on 12/20/2022 to assist in irradicating the bedbug infestation. The facility continues to utilize pest control services on a monthly basis. Although the facility did have bedbugs in the facility, the facility took all necessary steps to relocate the resident as well as contact pest control professionals in a timely matter to treat the bedbug room. Based on interviews and document reviews, the facility took steps to ensure the facility was free from bedbugs therefore the allegation is UNFOUNDED. This agency has investigated this complaint. We have found the complaint was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview was conducted with Memory Care Director and a copy of this report was provided to the facility. The signature of the Memory Care Director on these forms acknowledges receipt of these documents.

ComplaintDecember 28, 2022
No deficiencies

Inspector: Lavinia Muscan

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that the facility was following all required COVID-19 quarantine protocols, including separating positive and negative residents into different dining areas, keeping residents isolated in their rooms, and ensuring staff wore masks and received training. A separate complaint about the administrator not being present at the facility was also unfounded, as records showed the administrator was at the facility an adequate number of hours to manage operations.

View full inspector notes

Facility is not following quarantine protocol. On 8/31/2022 LPA Muscan toured the facility. LPA observed all staff present were wearing masks. Covid signs were observed throughout the facility. This facility was monitored by Community Care Licensing as a Covid-19 positive facility. The facility was following all required Covid-19 positive protocols including but not limited to 10 day quarantine period (which may be extended depending on pending test results for all clients and staff.) Additionally, facility utilizes 2 dining rooms for those positive and those negative residents. Further, facility tries to keep residents in their rooms as much as possible. LPA received documentation of COVID protocol trainings by staff. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging the facility is not following Covid-19 protocols. We have found the complaint was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. Administrator is not present at the facility. The administrator stated that she is on the premises more than enough hours to permit adequate attention to the management and administration of the facility. Records reviewed shows Administrator is at the facility an adequate number of hours. Additionally, the administrator stated that she devotes additional hours in the facility to fulfill her responsibilities when the need for such additional hours is needed. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging the administrator is not present at the facility. We have found the complaint was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview was conducted with Administrator and a copy of this report was provided to the facility. The signature of Administrator on these forms acknowledges receipt of these documents.

ComplaintDecember 28, 2022
No deficiencies

Inspector: Lavinia Muscan

Plain-language summary

This was a complaint investigation about a refund dispute. The state determined the alleged issues occurred before the current owner took over the facility, so they do not reflect how this facility operates now, and found no violation.

View full inspector notes

Facility is not issuing a refund. During the investigation it was determined that the alleged allegations were prior to licensure of this facility. These allegations do not apply to the current Licensee. This agency has investigated the complaint. We have found the complaint was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegations are false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview was conducted with Administrator and a copy of this report was provided to the facility. The signature of Administrator on these forms acknowledges receipt of these documents.

Other visitMay 17, 2022
No deficiencies

Inspector: Lavinia Muscan

Plain-language summary

This was an unannounced pre-licensing visit for a change of ownership at a 38-bed facility. The inspector found the building meets licensing requirements, with secured exits, locked medication and kitchen areas, emergency call systems in rooms, and safety features like motion sensors and pull cords throughout.

View full inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPAs) Lavinia Muscan and Kerry Hiratsuka arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct an unannounced pre-licensing visit. This is a change of ownership. LPA conducted COVID-19 Precautionary prescreening, and wore a surgical mask while at facility. LPA was screened by Front Desk. LPA toured with Adebimpe Ekundare Executive Director. This building has 28 shared rooms and 10 private rooms. This facillity has delayed egress on all exit doors that residents can use to get outside as well as the gates for the courtyard that surrounds the back part of the building. There is an outside courtyard in the middle of the building that has no exit to the outside of the property. The doors leading to the courtyard have audio alerts. The courtyard has two water fountains that are placed in a permanent planter box that is roughly 12 inches higher than the ground. The fountains themselves are roughly two feet tall not including the planter box. The fountains are flat on top and are designed so the water does not pool on top and flows off the sides to the ground which is covered with large rocks that are spaced enough to let the water drain without pooling. The fountains do not cause any standing bodies of water. All doors to the rooms have key locks on them and all staff have a master key for the resident rooms. Each room has a motion sensor in the middle of the room, a pull cord for each bed, one for the bathroom, and a call button on the wall. The rooms have a drawer with a lock for the resident's use in the closet. All private rooms have bathrooms with showers and about half of the shared rooms have bathrooms with showers. The rest of the shared rooms have half bathrooms. There are four common full bathrooms; two have only showers and two have only spa tubs. There are two dining areas and two television rooms. There are several smaller activity areas and two sitting areas at the end of two hallways. All maintenance closets are locked. 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 There are several staff offices throughout the building. There's a health station to the left of the entrance to the resident's living area. This has the medication room behind it and the room is locked when no one is in there. The kitchen area is locked. Both dining rooms have small kitchenettes that have an oven and sink. The oven door has a lock and the oven itself has a secured shut off to prevent it from working when not in use. There is a front lobby that has a sitting area and a conference room to the left. This connects to the resident area through a secured door. Several resident rooms were inspected during this visit. LPA waived Comp III because Executive Director has worked at other facilities and the Applicant operates other facilities. . Several topics were discussed. This facility meets licensing requirements. LPA is going to submit this to applications specialist.

ComplaintApril 27, 2022
No deficiencies

Inspector: Bethany Hunter

Plain-language summary

This was a change of ownership application review conducted on April 27, 2022, where the new applicant and administrator were interviewed to confirm they understand California regulations for operating a 66-bed residential care facility for the elderly. The facility currently has 43 residents in care. The applicant and administrator demonstrated understanding of facility operations, admission policies, staffing requirements, emergency preparedness, complaint reporting, and other regulatory requirements.

View full inspector notes

Facility Type: Residential Care Facility for the Elderly Application Type: Change of ownership Capacity: 66 Census (if any clients in care): 43 COMP II Participants: Adebimpe Ekundare Interview Method: Telephone interview On April 27, 2022, applicant/administrator participated in COMP II. Identification of the applicant and administrator was verified through interview questions based on photo ID and other identifying personal information. During COMP II, applicant and administrator confirmed the understanding of the California Code Title 22 Regulations. Signed LIC 809 with copy of photo ID have been obtained. During COMP II, CAB analyst confirmed Applicant/Administrator’s understanding of following areas: 1. Facility operation: License type, client/resident populations, and program 2. Admission Policies 3. Staffing requirements & Training 4. Restricted/Prohibited Health Conditions 5. General provisions 6. Emergency Preparedness 7. Complaints & Reporting 8. Pre-licensing readiness

Federal summary

CMS Care Compare

Not a CMS-certified facility

California RCFEs (residential care facilities for the elderly) are licensed by the state, not by CMS. CMS data only applies to skilled nursing facilities or to CCRCs that operate a licensed SNF wing.

Family reviews

No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience

No published reviews yet. Use the button above to share your experience.

Related in this city

Other memory care options nearby.

← Back to Folsom

Is this listing wrong? Report an issue →
Reports help us maintain accurate facility information. Your report will be reviewed within 1-2 business days.