California · Hemet

Yorkshire Village.

RCFE100 bedsDementia-trained staff(951) 658-1068
Peer rank
Top 35% of California memory care
See full peer rank →
Facility · Hemet
A 100-bed RCFE with 7 citations on file.
Licensed beds
100
Last inspection
Aug 2026
Last citation
Jul 2026
Operated by
Dorten Enterprises
Snapshot

A large home, reviewed on public record.

Approximate location
Peer Comparison

Compared to 67 California facilities with a similar number of beds.

RCFE · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better performance on inspection record. Source: California Dept. of Social Services · Community Care Licensing.

Severity rank
17th%
Weighted citations per bed.
peer median
0
100
Repeat rank
Not enough repeat citations
among peers to rank.
Repeat deficiencies as share of total.
Frequency rank
79th%
Deficiencies per inspection.
peer median
0
100

Rankings based on 36-month CDSS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.

Save for comparison:
The Record

Citation history, plotted month by month.

7 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.

Peer median 4 · dashed
Last citation: JUL 2026. Compared against peer median (dashed).
peer median
JUL 2026
Sep 2024as of Aug 2026

Finding distribution

9 total · 36 months

Scope × Severity (CMS A–L)

Isolated
Pattern
Widespread
Sev 4 · IJ
J1
K
L
Sev 3
G3
H
I
Sev 2
D5
E
F
Sev 1
A
B
C
2026-08-20
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-08-11
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-08-10
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-08-07
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-08-05
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-08-03
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-08-02
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-29
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-26
Other Visit
CDSS
Type A · 1
2026-07-23
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-23
Complaint Investigation
Substantiated
Type B · 1
2026-07-18
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-15
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-11
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-08
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-08
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2026-07-06
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-05
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-07-02
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-30
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2026-06-27
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-26
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-24
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-24
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2026-06-20
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-19
Other Visit
CDSS
Type B · 1
2026-06-19
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-17
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2026-06-16
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2026-06-13
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-12
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-12
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2026-06-11
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-11
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2026-06-10
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-09
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-08
Other Visit
CDSS
Type A · 1
2026-06-06
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-06-04
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-05-31
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-05-14
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-04-09
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2026-03-17
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
Type A · 1
2026-03-05
Complaint Investigation
CDSS
No findings
2026-03-03
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2025-12-19
Other Visit
CDSS
Type B · 1
2025-12-19
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2025-12-18
Other Visit
CDSS
No findings
2025-11-03
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
2025-09-17
Other Visit
CDSS
Type B · 1
The Rulebook

The rules that apply to this facility.

State requirements with the exact regulation citation, plain-language explanation, and a question to ask on tour. Rules this facility has been cited for appear first.

What must this facility report to the state — and how fast?22 CCR §87211 / WIC §15630
Cited Sep 2025+
Plain language

Elopements, fires, epidemic outbreaks, and poisonings must be reported immediately. Abuse with serious bodily injury requires a 2-hour phone report + 2-hour written report to CDSS, Adult Protective Services, and law enforcement. Abuse without serious bodily injury must be reported within 24 hours. A resident death requires a phone call by the next working day and a written report within 7 days. Injuries requiring medical treatment beyond first aid, and bankruptcy/foreclosure/utility shutoff notices, must also be reported. Incidents not reported on time are a separate violation — families may file a complaint directly with CDSS.

Ask on tour

When was the last incident report filed with CDSS, and may I see your incident log summary for the past 12 months?

Tour Prep

Questions to ask before you visit.

A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Yorkshire Village's record and state requirements.

01 /

The facility has 3 serious citations on file across all inspections — can you provide your corrective-action plan for each cited item, and show families any documentation of remediation steps taken?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

02 /

29 complaints are on file with CDSS — were any substantiated, and what remediation did the facility take in response to substantiated findings?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

03 /

The most recent inspection on 2026-04-09 found deficiencies — can you provide the deficiency notice from that visit and walk families through the corrective actions completed for each cited violation?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

Full Inspection Record

Every inspection visit, verbatim.

50 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Plain-language summaries open first — click into any row for the full citation text.

50
reports on file
7
total deficiencies
3
severe (Type A)
2026-08-20
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Janira Arreola and Seo Jeon conducted an unannounced visit for the purpose of Health and Safety Check Case Management Visit. LPAs met with Business Office Manager, Nicole Kalacas who was informed of the purpose of the visit. During the time of the visit, LPAs conducted a walk through interviews and observations. During the time of the visit no immediate health or safety concerns were observed. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations Title 22. During the visit consultation was provided on emergency procedures and protocols when emergency services need to be contacted for residents on hospice. The Business Office Manger agreed to meet with the management team and provide an update on any changes to the emergency procedure for residents. An exit interview was conducted where this report and Technical Advisory Note were reviewed and provided.

2026-08-11
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Seo Jeon conducted an unannounced visit to the facility for the purpose of conducting a health and safety check and previously observed HVAC repairs needed which were identified during a visit on August 3, 2026. LPA met with Nicole Anguiano, Business Office Manager, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA conducted a tour of Building A and B. Per Anguiano, new HVAC will be installed on August 12, 2026. During the visit, LPA observed additional portable fans were placed for the residents in the affected area of Building A. HVAC system in Building B was repaired already and fully operational. LPA conducted additional tour of Building C. LPA observed room #3 maintained comfortable temperature. LPA confirmed with the resident in room #3 regarding the room temperature. LPA did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns during the facility tour. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to the Business Office Manager.

2026-08-10
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 8/10/2026, Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Valerie Flores made an unannounced visit to the facility for the purpose of conducting a health and safety check and previously observed HVAC repairs needed that were identified during a visit on August 3, 2026. LPA Flores met with Business Office Manager Nicole Anguiano and explained the purpose of the visit. The visit is summarized as follows: LPA Flores conducted a randomly selected tour of resident bedrooms in Building A and Building B. In addition, toured the common areas of Building A and B and did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns. LPA was informed that corporate maintenance is currently on-site assessing the air conditioning unit and possibly conducting the repair themselves. In addition, the facility is still awaiting for an estimate from the HVAC company to determine how much the repairs will be. During the visit, LPA Flores observed that additional portable fans were purchased and implemented in residents bedrooms. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Business Office Manager Nicole Anguiano.

2026-08-07
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Seo Jeon and Janira Arreola conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a health and safety check and follow-up on the HVAC issues identified on August 3, 2026. LPAs met with Nicole Anguiano, Business Office Manager, and informed them of the purpose of the visit. LPAs conducted a tour of the facility and did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns. Anguiano provided documentation that showed their HVAC replacement in Building B. Anguiano informed that the management is waiting for an estimate for HVAC replacement in Building A. The estimated is expected on Monday, August 10, 2026. The management will then order the work to be scheduled. Anguiano agreed to inform The Department for any updates. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Anguiano.

2026-08-05
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Janira Arreola and Seo Jeon conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility. LPAs met with Medication Technician Manager, Bianey Sandoval, who was informed on the purpose of the visit. LPAs conducted a walk through, interviews, and records review. During the time of the visit LPA Arreola delivered and reviewed an amended report with facility staff. During the time of the visit, LPAs conducted a walk through of the facility and measured the temperature of rooms previously identified to not have air flowing from the air conditioning vents. During the time of the visit LPAs observed the thermostats in the hallway by Rooms 1-5 in Building "A" measured 78F and 79F. LPAs also observed facility residents in Building "A" common area were the temperature read 71F. LPAs were provided with documentation on scheduled maintenance on the central air conditioning unit on 08/07/2026. An exit intervie was conducted where this report was reviewed and provided.

2026-08-03
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 08/03/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Valerie Flores and Licensing Program Manager, Carolyn Tuba conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a health and safety check. LPA and LPM met with Executive Director, Teresa Mapilis and informed her the purpose of the visit. During the course of the visit, LPA and LPM consulted with Executive Director to confirm medication prescription for Resident 1 (R1). During an interview on 8/2/2026 it was disclosed to the LPM that R1 was not receiving the correct dosage. During today's visit LPA and LPM obtained documentation and reviewed records that states there will be no changes to R1's prescription per their physician. LPA and LPM consulted with Executive Director what procedures are in place for CCL to request documentation during a visit such as a physician's report when certain staff is not available. Executive Director stated that Medical Technician's are to contact Management such as Executive Director who has access to those documents during the visits conducted. LPA and LPM conducted a tour of random sampling of Building "A", Building "D" and Building "C" and observed no cool air or limited air coming out of the vents in residents rooms. Executive Director provided documentation from a local HVAC company who has made repairs prior to today's visit. (A technical violation was issued). An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Business Office Manager, Nicole Anguiano.

2026-08-02
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On Sunday, 08/02/2026, Licensing Program Manager (LPM), Carolyn Tuba and Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Jacqueline Shaw-Ross conducted an unannounced Case Management- Health Check visit to assess the facility for potential health and safety concerns. LPM/LPA met with Medical Technician, Latoya McVade and explained the purpose of today's visit. During the course of the visit, LPM/LPA toured building A, B, C and D and visited and spoke to random sample of residents. The bedrooms observed were clean and equipped with the required bedding, furnishings, and functional lighting. LPM/LPA also observed the lunch meal service, and residents appeared to be receiving lunch and dinner as scheduled. During the course of the visit Resident #1 (R1) brought up concerns about medication and the air vent and a window in their room. LPM/LPA did further investigation, interviews and observed medication logs and prescription for R1, however at this time did not find any health or safety concerns. Included in this report is an amended LIC809-D page that was issued on a previous visit of July 26, 2026. The reason for the amendment is to correct the section cited from Health and Safety Codes (HSC) to California Code of Regulation (CCR), as well as the description of the deficiency. Signatures were obtained during this visit. An exit interview was conducted with Medical Technician, Aileen Padilla, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided at the conclusion of the visit.

2026-07-29
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 07/29/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jacqueline Shaw-Ross arrived to the facility unannounced to assess for any health and safety concerns. LPA met with MedTech Manager, Vianey "Nani" Sandoval and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was informed that a scheduled power outage was taking place from 9:00 am to 3:00pm. Upon arrival, LPA observed a large generator positioned between Buildings A and B. Staff reported that residents from Building B, C, and D had temporarily relocated to Building A where the generator was supplying power. During a tour of Building A, LPA observed residents from all buildings gathered in the main activity room. The indoor temperature was observed to be cool and comfortable. Staff reported that temperatures in each building were monitored and documented every 30 minutes. LPA also observed hydration stations with water and cold beverages available to residents. Lunch was also being served and consisted of cold sandwiches, chips, fruit and cold beverages. During the visit, residents were observed actively participating in social activities, including playing games, listening to music, and dancing, and interacting with one another in a positive and engaging environment. During a tour of Building B, LPA observed three residents remaining in their rooms. Staff stated these residents chose to remain in place after verbal consent was obtained from their responsible parties/POAs and family members. Staff were in the process of completing documentation reflecting those decisions. During tours of Buildings C and D, LPA observed the indoor temperatures remained cool. Staff reported that residents from these builds had been temporarily relocated to Building B, with the exception of two residents who elected to remain in Building D. LPA observed staff making routine rounds throughout each building to ensure resident safety, monitor conditions, and remain available to help as needed. At 12:45pm, LPA was informed the power was back on in all buildings and residents were being transported back to their rooms. No health and safety concerns were observed during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Vianey "Nani" Sandoval, Medtech Manager.

2026-07-26
Other Visit
Type A · 1 finding
Type A22 CCR §87309(a)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87309(a)

Based on observations, two laundry rooms located in building "B" (Memory Care) were found unlocked with detergent and bleach, as well as scissors were observed unattended and accessible. This posed an immediate health risk to residents in care.

Read raw inspector notes

On 07/26/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jacqueline Shaw-Ross, conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPA met with Daija Love, Medical Technician and the purpose of the visit was provided. LPA toured all residential buildings located on the facility grounds. During a tour of Building B, LPA observed that the laundry room in the West Hall of Building B was discovered to be unlocked, allowing resident access to cleaning chemicals and other potential hazards. LPA discussed this with the Medtech on duty and re-tested the lock. Upon observation it was discovered that the hole to the latch of the door had been plugged with tissue to prevent it from locking. Medtech stated they believed caregivers may have done this because they did not know the key code. Citation issued. While touring the East Hall Building B, LPA also noticed the laundry room door in that location was cracked open. LPA pulled the handle of the laundry and the door locked. Medtech stated this would be forwarded to management. Also during a tour of Building B, LPA observed crafting scissors inside a resident's bedroom with the bedroom door left wide open. Although the resident is authorized to possess crafting scissors, they were left in an area readily accessible to other residents. This concern was discussed with facility staff and citation issued. During a tour of Building A, LPA observed that several bedrooms in Building A were warm and noted that the air conditioning was not functioning in several bedrooms. Staff reported the air conditioning system was inoperable in select bedrooms and that management will be notified. LPA was unable to obtain a temperature reading; however, bedroom windows were open to promote ventilation. Residents occupying the affected rooms stated they were not experiencing discomfort at the time of the visit. Technical assistance was provided regarding maintaining a comfortable indoor temperature, and the Med Tech reported the issue had been elevated to management and will be scheduled for repair the following day. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report, LIC 809-D, LIC 9102 and the appeal rights were reviewed and provided to Daija Love, Medical Technician.

2026-07-23
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Janira Arreola and Seo Jeon conducted an unannounced case management visit. LPA met with Business Office Manager, Nicole Kalacas who was informed of the purpose of the visit. LPAs conducted a tour, interviews, and records review. LPA conducted a case management visit to conduct a health and safety check. No immediate health or safety issues were observed during the time of the visit. LPA also conducted interviews and records review to follow up on incidents and concerns at the facility. Additional information is being gathered for the case management. No deficiencies were cited at the time of the visit. An exit interview was conducted where this report was reviewed and provided.

2026-07-23
Complaint Investigation
Substantiated
Type B · 1 finding
Inspector · Seo Jeon
Type B22 CCR §87463(a)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87463(a)

Based on records review, staff did not conduct reassessment on Resident #1 after multiple falls occurred in one month in 2025. This posed potential health and safety risks to residents in care.

Read raw inspector notes

R1 had history of falls from December 2024 through July 2025. R1 had total of seven (7) reported falls during that time. R1 was sent to Hospital #1 on March 31, 2025, by R1’s physician’s order for altered mental status and frequent falls. R1 was hospitalized until they were discharged to a skilled nursing facility on April 23, 2025. R1 was sent to Hospital #2 after being found unconscious on August 10, 2025. R1 passed away on August 10, 2025, while under hospice care. The Department’s review of medical records from Hospital #1 revealed that R1 was observed with bruises on left upper hip, right lower hip, and multiple bruises in upper and lower extremities in various stages of healing. R1 was also noted to be confused, not able to follow commands, frequently trying to get out of bed, pulling on IV lines, agitation, yelling and screaming. Those conditions required R1 to be put on soft restraints on upper and lower extremities. R1 remained restrained until they were discharged on April 23, 2025. The Department’s review of records revealed that staff did not conduct reassessment and update care plans after seven (7) recorded falls. Five (5) out of those (7) falls occurred in March 2025. R1’s bruises observed by medical staff at Hospital #1 were consistent with those five (5) falls that occurred in March 2025. Even after those falls, staff did not maintain updated assessments and care plans reflecting R1’s declining condition and increased fall risks. Based on records review, the evidence found during the Department’s investigation met the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this 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. A citation was issued. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was provided, along with a copy of LIC9099-D and Appeal Rights.

2026-07-18
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On Saturday, 07/18/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jacqueline Shaw-Ross conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPA met with Joselynn Martinez, Medical Technician and was informed of the purpose of the visit. Upon arrival, LPA observed residents participating in social activities in the main lobby. LPA conducted a tour of the facility in buildings A, B, C and D, including a random sample of residents' bedrooms across all facility buildings. Based on the observations made during today's visit LPA did not identify any health or safety concerns and no deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Joselynn Martinez, Medical Technician.

2026-07-15
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On Wednesday, 07/15/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jacqueline Shaw-Ross and Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Jacob Garber, conducted an unannounced case management visit to assess the facility for compliance with health and safety requirements. LPA and LPM met with Ashley Richardson, Director of Active Living, who was informed of the purpose of the visit. Upon arrival, residents were observed participating in social activities in the dining area of Building B. Adequate staffing was observed to meet residents' care and supervision needs. A tour of the facility was conducted and a random sample of resident bedrooms throughout the facility was inspected. Based on observations made during today's visit, no immediate health or safety concerns were identified, and no deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed with and provided to Ashley Richardson, Director of Active Living.

2026-07-11
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On Saturday, 07/11/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jacqueline Shaw-Ross conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPA met with Daija Love, Medical Technician and was informed of the purpose of the visit. Upon arrival, LPA observed residents finishing their lunch and having dessert. LPA conducted a tour of the facility including a random sample of residents' bedrooms across all facility buildings. Based on the observations made during the visit LPA did not identify any health or safety concerns and no deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Daija Love, Medical Technician .

2026-07-08
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Seo Jeon conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPA toured all residential buildings and random sample of resident rooms. LPA did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns. No deficiencies were cited at the time of this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Marielle Figueroa, Resident Wellness Coordinator.

2026-07-08
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Seo Jeon
Read raw inspector notes

R1 did not have any fall incidents while residing at this facility. R1 did not require any assistance with mobility. R1 was once sent out to a hospital in March 2026 per R1’s physician’s order for health condition unrelated to fall incident. LPA conducted interviews with eight (8) residents, all of whom stated they do not require assistance or supervision when they go out in the front yard or back yard. LPA conducted interviews with Staff #1 (S1) and #2 (S2), both of whom stated that R1 liked to walk around the facility. R1 sometimes picked up palm tree seeds from the ground. Staff members tried to redirect R1 whenever R1 had the seeds. Neither S1 nor S2 remembered R1 wearing blood stained shirt. LPA conducted interviews with additional four (4) staff members, all of whom stated they redirected R1 from picking up anything from the ground. All staff members interviewed stated that none of the residents required one-on-one care. LPA’s attempted interview with R1 was unsuccessful due to lack of available information. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff does not ensure resident is being adequately fed. Information received indicated that Resident #1 (R1) lost weight due to inadequate amount of food served. LPA conducted interviews with eight (8) residents, none of whom expressed any concerns about the amount of food served. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom stated all residents have been served with more than enough food. Two (2) out of six (6) staff members interviewed stated that R1 may have lost some weight due to constant wandering around the facility which has large buildings and outdoor areas. LPA’s attempted interview with R1 was unsuccessful due to lack of available information. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff are not safeguarding residents’ personal belongings. Information received indicated that Resident #1 (R1) lost a hat and was observed wearing someone else’s shoes. LPA conducted interviews with Staff #1 (S1) and Staff #2 (S2), both of whom stated that R1 once did not have shoes. R1 told staff that they threw the shoes over the facility fences. Staff could not recover R1’s shoes. R1 came to the facility with only one pair of shoes, so staff provided a donated pair of shoes that were good fit for R1. R1’s hat was found within the facility and returned to R1 by a staff member. LPA conducted interviews with four (4) additional staff members, all of whom stated that residents sometimes lose their belongings due to their cognitive condition, but staff members always try to find rightful owners when anything is found in the facility. Continued on LIC9099-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 LPA conducted interviews with eight (8) residents. Seven (7) residents interviewed stated that they have not lost anything in the facility. LPA’s attempted interview with R1 was unsuccessful due to lack of available information. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff does not ensure resident has adequate toiletries. Information indicated that Resident #1 (R1) did not have any toiletries in their room. LPA conducted interviews with eight (8) residents, all of whom stated that they have all necessary toiletries in their rooms. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom confirmed the statements from the residents interviewed. LPA conducted a tour of the facility and observed that all rooms had necessary toiletries. LPA’s attempted interview with R1 was unsuccessful due to lack of available information. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff does not ensure residents are provided activities. Information received indicated that there were no available resident activities. LPA conducted interviews with eight (8) residents, all of whom stated that staff provide daily resident activities. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom confirmed the statements from the residents interviewed. LPA toured the facility and observed a large calendar of daily activities posted on the wall in each building. LPA also observed several residents participating in activities provided by activities coordinators. LPA’s attempted interview with R1 was unsuccessful due to lack of available information. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff does not ensure resident’s furniture is in good repair. Information received indicated that Resident #1 had broken furniture in their room. LPA conducted a tour of the facility and observed R1’s room had one (1) dresser that had one (1) missing handle out of two (2) in one (1) of four (4) drawers. The drawer was still functioning because it still had one (1) handle. LPA also observed a nightstand with a drawer that had one (1) handle with missing screw. The handle was hanging on the drawer by one screw, but the drawer was still functioning. LPA conducted an interview with Staff #1 (S1) who stated that the missing drawer handle was never reported. S1 stated that maintenance personnel could have fixed the problem within the same day if reported. LPA conducted interviews with five (5) additional staff members, all of whom confirmed the statement from S1. Continued on LIC9099-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 LPA’s attempted interview with R1 was unsuccessful due to lack of available information. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was provided.

2026-07-06
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · Janira Arreola
Read raw inspector notes

LPA interviewed RP, who stated she requested discharge paperwork from the facility on 06/15/2026 and again around 06/20/2026. RP alleged as of 07/02/2026, RP had not received documentation needed to verify R1's discharge date. LPA interviewed (3) staff members who stated RP was provided with requested discharge records such as a medications list and a refund check. (3) staff stated the facility had no record of a request for additional records prior to RP's email dated 06/29/2026. Email correspondence was reviewed and revealed facility staff responded on 06/29/2026 requesting clarification regarding the records being requested. (1) of (3) Staff stated that on 07/01/2026, following a telephone call from a county representative on behalf of RP, clarification was provided to facility staff on what records RP was requesting. (1) Facility staff stated additional information was provided to the county representative for relay to RP on how to request records with R1’s discharge date. Based on interviews and records reviewed, the allegation is Unsubstantiated . Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided.

2026-07-05
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 07/05/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jacqueline Shaw-Ross conducted an unannounced Case Management- Health Check visit to assess the facility for potential health and safety concerns. LPA met with Aileen Padilla, Lead Medical Technician, and explained the purpose of the visit. During the course of the visit, LPA toured a random sample of resident bedrooms. The bedrooms observed were clean and equipped with the required bedding, furnishings, and functional lighting. LPA also observed the lunch meal service, and residents appeared to be receiving lunch as scheduled. No immediate health and safety concerns were observed during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted with Aileen Padilla, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided at the conclusion of the visit.

2026-07-02
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 7/2/2026, Licensing Program Analyst's (LPA's) Valerie Flores and Seo Jeon conducted an unannounced visit to the facility for the purpose of assessing any potential health and safety concerns. LPA Flores and Jeon met with Business Office Manager Nicole Anguiano and explained the purpose of the visit. The visit is summarized as follows: During the visit, LPA's toured a random sampling of resident bedrooms. Residents bedrooms were observe to be equipped with the required bedding, furniture, and functional lighting. LPA's observed lunch services being provided to the residents. No immediate health and safety concerns were observed. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Business Office Manager, Nicole Anguiano.

2026-06-30
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Abdoulaye Zerbo
Read raw inspector notes

S1 clarified that procedures differ for non hospice residents. Concerning the reported change in condition observed on 08 29 25, S1 explained that staff contacted R1’s physician for further instruction but did not receive a return call until 08- 31 -25. When R1’s physician contacted the facility staff on 08-31-25, they instructed the facility to contact 911 for R1 to be transported for further evaluation. On 06-09-26, LPA Zerbo attempted to interview R1; however, R1 did not respond to questions and was unable to provide any information regarding the allegation. LPA also attempted to contact R1’s physician but was unable to obtain an interview. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided Business Office Manager Nicole Kalacas.

2026-06-27
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 06/27/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Aziz Faizi conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPA met with Manager on Duty Bianey Sandoval and was informed of the purpose of the visit. LPA conducted a tour of the facility including a random sample of residents' bedrooms across all facility buildings. LPA also observed residents having meal and snacks. Based on the observations made during the visit LPA did not identify any health or safety concerns and no deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Manager on Duty Bianey Sandoval.

2026-06-26
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Seo Jeon and Janira Arreola conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. Community Care Licensing staff toured all residential buildings and did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns. No deficiencies were cited at the time of this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Nicole Anguiano, business office manager.

2026-06-24
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 06/24/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Janette Romero conducted an unannounced case management visit to assess for any health and safety concerns. Upon arrival, LPA met with Medication Technician Gloria Sanchez and explained the purpose of the visit. Business Office Manager (BOM) Nicole Kalacas Anguiano was notified of the purpose of LPA's visit. LPA and Director of Active Living, Ashley Richardson toured a random sample of resident bedrooms and bathrooms in Buildings A, B, C, and D. LPA toured 8 resident bedrooms in Building A, 8 in Building B, 3 in Building C, and 4 in Building D. Resident bedrooms toured were equipped with the required bedding, furniture, and functional lighting. Call light cords were observed to be within arms reach from each resident's bed and the facility had operating utilities. LPA also observed the residents eating meals and snacks. During today's visit, LPA did not observe any health or safety concerns and no deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to BOM. Note - LPA was off site from approximately 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.

2026-06-24
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Janette Romero
Read raw inspector notes

A review of an Unusual Incident/Injury Report dated 10/19/2023 documented that R1 had a history of choking incidents. On 05/15/2023, R1’s diet was changed from regular to puree. On 08/27/2023, R1 was hospitalized following a choking incident, and on 09/05/2023, their diet was changed from puree to mechanical soft. On 09/26/2023, R1 experienced another choking incident and was assessed by paramedics but was not transported to the hospital. R1’s physician was notified and ordered a barium swallow test with the earliest availability being on 11/30/2023. On 10/18/2023, R1 choked while eating dinner but was able to cough up the food lodged in their throat. Emergency services were activated, and R1 was transported to the hospital for observation. R1 was discharged back to the facility on 10/19/2023 with a diagnosis of esophageal foreign body. Following the hospitalization, facility staff requested that R1’s physician change R1’s diet back to puree. R1’s physician was interviewed and reported that R1 was capable of eating independently and had been prescribed a soft diet. A review of a law enforcement incident report noted that S1 reported that at approximately 3:00 p.m. R1 was in the dining room and observed eating and interacting with staff. R1’s caregiver, Staff 2 (S2), later transported R1 to their room. Once back at the room, S2 noticed R1 unresponsive and immediately informed S1. Emergency services was contacted via 9-1-1. Interviews with facility staff were conducted and the following was reported. S1 reported that on 10/27/2023, R1 appeared to be at baseline. Later that day, S2 informed S1 that R1 was unresponsive. S1 responded to R1’s bedroom and observed R1 slumped over with their dentures slightly displaced. S1 denied serving R1 solid food and reported that their duties primarily involved medication management and documentation. S1 further reported that they did not observe any food particles around R1’s mouth. A review of a law enforcement incident report noted S2 stated to law enforcement that S2 gave R1 a snack at 3:00 p.m. At around 3:20 p.m., S2 observed R1 slumped in their wheelchair and appeared to be sleeping. S2 moved R1 to into their bedroom and asked if they (meaning R1) needed assistance lying on the bed. It was at this time, that S2 observed R1 unresponsive and immediately called S1 for help. 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 A review of R1’s death certificate dated 11/07/2023 documented R1 passed away at the facility on 10/27/2023. The immediate cause of death is listed as cardiac arrest, with underlying causes of coronary artery disease and hypertension. A review of paramedic records did not reveal any findings of food particles or other evidence indicating that R1 passed away as a result of choking. During an interview, R1’s physician reported that an autopsy was not performed. Therefore, it could not be conclusively determined whether aspiration or choking contributed to R1’s death. Regarding the allegation, “Staff are covering up violations at the facility” it was alleged that staff moved R1 to their bedroom following an incident and S3 instructed staff to say R1 passed away in their bedroom which was incorrect. A review of video footage and interviews were conducted. The incident in question is the same incident noted above. During interviews the Department was given conflicting information on whether R1 had partially eaten their snack or had not eaten the snack provided at around 3pm. Interviews with various staff also revealed conflicting information regarding why R1 was moved from the common area. Multiple staff initially indicated they believed R1 to be sleeping and this is the reason for taking R1 to their bedroom. While a subsequent interview revealed a staff reported that R1 was taken to their bedroom to maintain their dignity and avoid other residents from seeing R1 in distress. S3 was interviewed and reported that on 10/27/2023, S3 was in a meeting when they received a call from S1 requesting their presence regarding an incident with R1. S1 directed S3 to R1’s room where R1 was observed unresponsive. Attempts to conduct a subsequent interview with S3 were not successful. S1 reported S3 never instructed staff to move R1 to their room. The allegations are unsubstantiated due to the evidence not meeting the preponderance of evidence standard. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report and Confidential Names list (LIC 811) was reviewed and provided to BOM. Note - LPA was off site from approximately 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. 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 Interviews with facility staff were conducted and the following was reported. S2 reported that on 10/27/2023, they observed R1 in a wheelchair in the living room with their head slightly bowed. S2 reported that this did not initially appear concerning because R1 would occasionally fall asleep in their wheelchair while watching television. S2 reported placing a soft-food snack next to R1 and observed no signs of distress. At approximately 3:00 p.m., S2 checked on R1 again and observed that R1 appeared abnormal, with partially open watery eyes and drooling from the mouth. S2 called R1’s name but did not receive a response. S2 reported the snack had not been eaten and that they did not observe any food particles around or coming from R1’s mouth. A review of video footage was obtained. The video revealed S1 reported that at 3:02 p.m., they observed R1 interacting and speaking with S1’s son in the dining area. S2 provided R1 with a snack and R1 was eating their snack. S2 then reportedly observed R1 slumped and their snack was half eaten. S2 believed R1 was sleeping and wheeled to R1 to their bedroom to assist transferring them to bed. S2 then observed R1 to be unresponsive and contacted S1 for assistance. S1 observed R1 drooling from their mouth and reported the incident to their immediate supervisor, Staff 3 (S3). S3 checked R1’s pulse and emergency services were activated. S2 reported to local law enforcement that at approximately 3:00 p.m., staff served snacks to the residents. S2 observed what appeared to be R1 sleeping in their wheelchair in the living room and left a snack for them on the side. At approximately 3:20 p.m. S2 observed R1 slumping and wheeled them to their bedroom. S2 called R1 by their name and asked them if they wanted to lie down. However, R1 did not respond or move. S2 described lowering their torso and tilting their head to observe R1’s face and observed that R1 appeared pale, with halfway open eyes, and purple lips. S2 then ran to S1 to report R1’s state of condition. Responding ambulance personnel reported R1 was sitting in a wheelchair inside their bedroom upon their arrival. Ambulance personnel laid R1 on the floor and were presented with a Do-Not-Resuscitate order therefore life saving measures were not performed and they declared a time of death. The ambulance personnel are asked if they noticed anything by local law enforcement, to which the response was “No”. The coroner’s office is contacted by local law enforcement. The coroner’s office asks if there is any trauma, injuries, vomit, or anything suspicious to indicate R1 choked on anything, to which local law enforcement responds, “No”. Local law enforcement is advised the coroner’s office will not be responding to the facility.

2026-06-20
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 06/20/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jacqueline Shaw-Ross arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct a Case Management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPA met with Medical Technician, Daija Love, and the purpose of the visit was explained. Ms.Love contacted Executive Director (E.D.), Teresa Mapilis by telephone to inform of the visit. E.D. was unable to attend the visit. LPA toured all four buildings inside and outside and requested copies of pertinent records via email. During today's visit, no deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Medical Technician Daija Love.

2026-06-19
Other Visit
Type B · 1 finding
Inspector · Abdoulaye Zerbo
Type B22 CCR §87224(a)(4)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87224(a)(4)

Based on interviews and record reviews, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above. Licensee did not follow the eviction procedure, which posed a potential health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care.

Read raw inspector notes

Yorkshire Village staff acknowledged that the resident had eloped twice and stated they told the hospital they needed time to coordinate an in-person assessment. Facility staff reported the hospital misinterpreted this as a refusal. Yorkshire Village staff reported that they never went to the hospital to completed a reassessment with the receiving facility. Interview with receiving facility reported that their assessment of the resident was completed at the hospital on 03/25/2026 however, the receiving facility denied Yorkshire Village staff conducted the assessment jointly with them. Based on LPA’s observations, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be substantiated. Deficiencies are cited according to the California Code of Regulations Title 22. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report, the 9099-D and the appeal rights were provided.

2026-06-19
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Seo Jeon Abdoulaye Zerbo and Janira Arreola conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. Community Care Licensing staff toured all residential buildings and did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns. No deficiencies were cited at the time of this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Nicole Anguiano, business office manager.

2026-06-17
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Valerie Flores
Read raw inspector notes

(Continuation from LIC9099) S1 continued towards R1’s private bathroom where R1 was observed to be lying on the floor, flat on their back. S1 reportedly contacted S2 for additional assistance. Upon S2’s arrival, R1 was assessed and staff deemed it necessary to contact emergency personnel and R1’s responsible person. Interviews conducted with staff report that R1 did not sustain any visible bruising and were observed to have a minor lump to the back of the head. Interviews conducted with R1’s responsible person confirmed that they were contacted by facility staff to where staff informed R1’s responsible person that R1 was being transported to the hospital as R1 experienced an unwitnessed fall. R1’s responsible person provided photos to the Department of R1’s face. Photos received can be described as a 6-inch bruise on the left side of R1’s face. Interviews conducted with the (8) eight staff and Resident #2 (R2) report that R1 was not observed to have bruising until after R1 returned from the hospital after the fall incident. Records review conducted of R1’s Needs and Service Plan does not indicate R1 to be a fall risk. A review conducted of the facility’s Unusual Incident Reports did not reveal additional falls sustained by R1. A review conducted of R1 medication list revealed that R1 was receiving medication that would make R1 susceptible to bruising. Therefore, the allegations of resident sustained multiple unexplained bruises while in care is deemed unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated at this time. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Business Office Manager Nicole Anguiano.

2026-06-16
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Seo Jeon
Read raw inspector notes

LPA conducted interviews with five (5) staff members, all of whom stated that any hospital beds can be adjusted quickly when providing care to the residents. Staff members then adjust the bed height back to normal when they are done with the residents. Staff members interviewed denied experiencing or witnessing any residents’ fall because of bed height. LPA conducted an interview with S2 who denied lowering R2’s or any residents’ beds to avoid being questioned by paramedics. LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents, none of whom expressed any concerns regarding height of their beds. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. LPA’s attempted interview with R2 was unsuccessful because R2 was no longer a resident of the facility and lacked available contact information. LPA's attempted records review regarding R2's fall was unsuccessful due to lack of available records. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was provided.

2026-06-13
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 06/13/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Aziz Faizi conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPA toured all residential buildings and did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns. No deficiencies were cited at the time of this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Zouri Holmes, Medication Technician.

2026-06-12
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Regional Manager Reyna Lacey and Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Seo Jeon conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. Community Care Licensing staff toured all residential buildings and did not observe any immediate health and safety concerns. No deficiencies were cited at the time of this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Nicole Anguiano, business office manager.

2026-06-12
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Seo Jeon
Read raw inspector notes

CW denied witnessing S1 breaking R1’s arm, nor did they witness any staff member having a physical altercation with any resident in care. CW did not know the last name of S1. LPA’s subsequent interview with CW did not reveal any additional information about injuries caused by S1 to any residents in care. LPA’s records review revealed that R1 passed away on November 21, 2022. LPA conducted an interview with business office manager (BOM), who stated that S1 was never employed by the facility, past or present. LPA’s records review confirmed BOM’s statement regarding S1. LPA conducted interviews with five (5) staff members, all of whom denied knowing S1 as their coworker. LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents, none of whom experienced rough handling or physical altercation by staff. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that facility did not report unusual incident to CCL. The complaint report did not contain any relevant information. LPA conducted an interview with a confidential witness (CW) for additional information, but CW did not provide any relevant information. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom stated that any unusual incidents are reported to medication technicians who then report to the management. The management then reports to the Department and keeps the incident reports for their record keeping. LPA observed past incident reports provided by business office manager (BOM) and confirmed the statements from the staff members interviewed. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that facility does not have enough food for residents’ daily nutritious needs resulting in weight loss. Information received indicated that the facility regularly runs out of food, and residents are losing weight due to missed meals. LPA conducted five (5) unannounced tours of the facility within a span of 7 days and observed that the facility had sufficient supplies of food for residents in care. LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents, none of whom experienced missing any of the three (3) daily meals. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom denied the facility running out of food for residents. One (1) of the six (6) staff members interviewed stated that they have never witnessed the facility running out of food in the past 14 years. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. Continued on LIC9099-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 It was alleged that staff do not assist residents with incontinence needs. Information received indicated that Resident #1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5) were frequently observed in urine-soaked briefs. LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents, all of whom expressed their satisfaction with staff assistance. Of the 5 residents named, only 1 could be interviewed and that resident could not provide information. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom stated that all residents receive two (2) hour room checks or more often if requested or necessary. LPA conducted tours of the facility but did not observe any concerns of neglect in incontinence care. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that facility and residents bathroom has mold. Information received indicated that three (3) residents’ bathrooms had black mold. LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents, all of whom denied witnessing mold in their bathrooms. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. LPA conducted interview with six (6) staff members, all of whom denied witnessing mold in residents’ or common bathrooms. LPA conducted tour of the facility and inspected all residents’ and common bathrooms but did not observe a substance that could be mold in any bathrooms. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff do not shower residents. Information received indicated that Resident #6 (R6) did not receive a shower for four (4) days. LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents, all of whom stated that they have received two (2) showers per week, and staff have not missed any. LPA’s interviews with six (6) staff members confirmed the statements from the residents interviewed. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents but were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. LPA’s attempted interview with R6 was unsuccessful due to lack of contact information. Request for shower logs was unsuccessful. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff do not change residents clothing. Information received indicated that residents wore the same clothing for days. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom stated that staff assist residents with clothing change every day, but most residents receive assistance with clothing change multiple times throughout the day after each mealtime. Continued on LIC9099-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 LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents. Eight (8) residents interviewed stated that they did not need assistance with clothing change. Six (6) residents interviewed stated that staff have assisted with clothing change every day. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. LPA’s observation during the resident interviews did not reveal any concerns regarding residents’ clothing change. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that facility does not have enough needed supplies to meet the residents needs. Information received indicated that the facility did not have enough incontinent, shower, or bedding supplies to meet the residents’ needs. LPA conducted interviews with 14 residents, none of whom experienced shortage of supplies for their needs. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, none of whom experienced shortage of supplies in the facility. LPA toured the facility and observed cleaning and incontinent supplies. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that staff do not safeguard resident's personal property. Information received indicated that staff members use Resident #3’s (R3) shower supplies for other residents. LPA conducted interviews with six (6) staff members, all of whom stated that every resident has their own shower supplies stored in a container. LPA’s interviews with 14 residents and facility tour confirmed the statements from the staff members interviewed. During the tour LPA observed shower supplies in each room for each resident. LPA’s attempted interviews with seven (7) additional residents were unsuccessful due to their cognitive condition. The evidence found during the investigation did not meet the preponderance of evidence standard therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was provided.

2026-06-11
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 6/11/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Valerie Flores conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility for the purpose of delivering an amended version of an original report for complaint control number 18-AS-20260528162825. LPA Flores met with Medication Technician Lead Aileen Padilla and explained the purpose of the visit. A deficiency was issued for complaint control number 18-AS-20260528162825. LPA Flores did not issue any additional deficiencies during the time of visit An exit interview was conducted was conducted with Medication Technician Lead Aileen Padilla and a copy of this report was provided to Business Office Manager Nicole Anguiano.

2026-06-11
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Abdoulaye Zerbo
2026-06-10
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 06/10/2026, Regional Manager Reyna Lacey and Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Janette Romero, Janira Arreola, Valerie Flores, Seo Jeon, Abdoulaye Zerbo conducted an unannounced case management visit to the facility to assess for any health or safety concerns. Community Care Licensing staff toured the facility and obtained copies of records. During today's visit, no deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Medication Technician Manager, Bianey Sandoval. *This is an amended version of the original report to correct the end time of the visit to 6:30 p.m.

2026-06-09
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Seo Jeon, Janira Arreola, Janette Romero, Valerie Flores, and Abdoulaye Zerbo conducted an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct a Plan of Correction (POC) Visit. The purpose of this report is to document the POC previously agreed upon. LPAs met with Business Office Manager Nicole Kalacas Anguiano who was informed of the purpose of the visit. Administrator Teresa Mapilis was also informed of the purpose of the visit. LPAs toured the facility, conducted interviews, and obtained copies of records. During a case management visit conducted on 06/08/2026, the facility was cited for California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22, regulation section 87468.1(a)(3) after LPAs observed four (4) residents in geriatric chairs with a tray table, and interviews conducted revealed none of the residents had the capacity to release the tray tables to exit the geriatric chairs. During the development of the plan of correction created on 06/08/2026, Business Office Manager Nicole Kalacas Anguiano agreed on behalf of the licensee to discontinue using geriatric chairs in the facility immediately and conduct a staff in service. During today's case management visit, LPAs observed two (2) additional residents in geriatric chairs with tray tables attached and both residents were also unable to release the tray tables to exit the geriatric chairs. Facility staff was unable to produce physician's orders for the geriatric chairs during the time of the visit. As a result, the POC has not been met and civil penalties will be assessed for failure to correct the deficiency. The POC shall include immediate discontinuation of the use of a geriatric chairs unless licensee obtains an exception granted by the Department along with a physician's order. The POC shall also include an in-service personal rights training for all staff conducted by outside source to be completed within 30 days and submission of verification that the training was completed. Per Administrator Mapilis, an exit interview was conducted with Medication Technician (MT) Ligaya Carter who was advised that civil penalties would continue to accrue until the plan of correction is met. During the exit interview, a copy of this report LIC 809-D, LIC 421FC, and Appeal Rights were reviewed and provided to MT Carter and emailed to Administrator Mapilis. Note - LPAs were off site from 4:10 p.m to 5:45 p.m.

2026-06-08
Other Visit
Type A · 1 finding
Type A22 CCR §87468.1(a)(3)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87468.1(a)(3)

Based on observations, Residents 1, 2, 3, & 4 did not know how to release themselves from geriatric chair. This posed immediate personal rights risk to residents in care.

Read raw inspector notes

Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Seo Jeon and Janira Arreola made an unannounced case management visit to assess for any health and safety concerns. LPAs met with Business Office Manager (BOM) Nicole Anguiano who was informed of the purpose of the visit. LPAs toured the facility and did not observe any health or safety concerns. LPAs also conducted interviews with resident and staff members. LPAs observed four (4) residents in geriatric chairs during the facility tour. LPAs conducted interviews with those four (4) residents and observed that none of the four (4) residents knew how to release themselves out of their geriatric chairs. A citation was issued. One (1) deficiency was issued during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report, LIC809-D and Appeal Rights were reviewed and provided.

2026-06-06
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 6/6/2026, Licensing Program Analyst's (LPA's) Valerie Flores and Janira Arreola arrived unannounced to the facility for the purpose of conducting a health and safety visit. Upon arrival, LPA's met with Medication Technician Manager Bianey Sandoval and explained the purpose of the visit. The visit is summarized as followed: LPA's conducted a random sample of resident bedroom tours of building A, B, C, and D. LPA's conducted tours of (15) fifteen bedrooms in building A and Building B. In addition, LPA's conducted tours of (3) three bedrooms in Building C and Building D. Resident bedrooms that were toured were confirmed to be equipped with the required bedding, furniture, and functional lighting. LPA's observed pull cords that were easily reachable to residents. LPA's verified that the signal system was in operating-use; when activated, the pull cord sends a loud alarm that can be heard in all parts of the building. Random private and non-private bathrooms were observed to be sanitary and in good repair. During the tour, LPA's observed motion sensors in selected resident bedrooms. LPA also verified that all exit doors are equipped with operating alarms. LPA confirmed utilities where fully functioning and facility maintained running water. The facility prepares all meals in Building A. During the time of visit, LPA's observe residents being provided breakfast and lunch. Meals were observed to meet residents nutritional needs. The facility maintained a comfortable temperature for the residents measuring at 71-72 degrees Fahrenheit in Buildings A, B, C, and D. LPA's did not observe any health or safety concerns. No deficiencies were cited during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to Medication Technician Manager, Bianey Sandoval.

2026-06-04
Other Visit
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 06/04/2026, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Janette Romero and Seo Jeon made an unannounced case management visit to assess for any health or safety concerns. LPAs met with Business Office Manager (BOM) Nicole Kalacas Anguiano who was informed of the purpose of the visit. Administrator Teresa Mapilis was also notified of the purpose of the visit. LPAs toured the facility and did not observe any health or safety concerns. No deficiencies were cited during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided to BOM Kalacas Anguiano.

2026-05-31
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On 05/31/2026 at 01:55 PM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Aziz Faizi arrived unannounced to the facility to conduct a case management / Health and Safety concern visit. LPA was greeted and granted entry by Medication Technician Ligaya Carter , who was informed of the purpose of the visit. Licensee/Administrator Teresa Mapilis arrived to the facility at a later time and was also informed of the purpose of the visit. LPA conducted an inside and outside tour of the facility including the kitchen. LPA also interviewed residents and staff, reviewed pertinent facility documents, including verification the of the administrator"s valid certificate. LPA oberved that the facility has sufficient staffing levels to meet the needs of the residents. The facility is equipped with adequate number of of call light systems throughout the facility rooms and common areas also functioning properly. LPA also verified that all exit doors are equipped with proper operational alarms and secured with keypad codes to ensure residents do not exit the facility unlawfully. No Health and Safety issues were observed, and no citations were issued during this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and this report was reviewed and a copy was provided to Medication Technician Ligaya Carter.

2026-05-14
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Read raw inspector notes

On May 14, 2026 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Tremayne Barra arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct the Required Annual Inspection and met with Nicole Anguiano, Business Office Manager. LPA was later joined by Executive Director, Teresa Mapilis. The facility file review was conducted at the Regional Office and additional records were requested and reviewed on site. The facility is licensed for 100 Elderly Adults and is currently operating at a capacity of 96 Elderly Adults. LPA toured the facility along with Nicole Anguiano and made observations pertaining to the annual visit. LPA inspected the facility inside and outside, there were no obstructions or debris to the indoor or outdoor passageways at the time of this visit. There were no bodies of water currently on the premises. The facility is a multi building made up of four (4) seperate buildings. Building A and B are for memory care residents while building C and D consists of Assisted Living Waiver residents. Physical Plant: The facility phone number is (951) 658-1068 and it is operable. Observed a sampling of the residents’ bedrooms, and each was equipped with required furniture as per Title 22. Inspected facility bathrooms, and the hot water temperature tested within regulations. Bathrooms were clean, and appliances were operating appropriately. The facility is equipped with operating smoke detectors, carbon monoxide alarms, and fire extinguishers. Observed required postings; "If you See Something, Say Something,” "Personal Rights," and PUB 475. Cleaning supplies and sharp items were kept locked and inaccessible to the residents in care. Resident files are kept electronically. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Food Service : Food prep areas are clean and organized. Food supply meets the requirement of one (1) week supply of nonperishable and two (2) day supply of perishables. Emergency food and water supply is present. There is a location for sharps in the kitchen that is locked and inaccessible to residents in care. Client Records/Incident Reports/Clients Rights Information: LPA reviewed client records. Eight (8) records were reviewed. LPA reviewed for identification and emergency information, admission agreement, medical assessment, and TB test results, needs and service plans, placement, functional assessment, centrally stored medication/destruction records, safeguard for personal property/valuables, and personal rights notification. Personnel Records/Training/ Staffing/ Administration : LPA reviewed employee records. Six (6) records were reviewed. LPA reviewed employee records for first aid certification, criminal record clearance or an exemption, health screening and TB test results, employee rights, training verification, and current administrative organization. Teresa Mapilis, Administrator’s certificate expiration date was 12/30/2026. Medications : Were locked and inaccessible to residents in care, and there were sufficient medications currently for residents. Overall the facility is clean, furniture is present and clean. Facility cooling system and other appliances were operable currently. Disaster preparedness : LPA reviewed the facility's emergency and disaster plan as well as disaster training binder. LPA observed the last fire drill met the department standards, and was conducted by the Office Manager. Infection Control: LPA observed the hand washing stations in the facility restrooms. LPA observed PPE equipment and cleaning supplies to do regular cleaning of the facility. LPA reviewed the facility's infection control plan and found all required infection control measures. No deficiencies were observed or cited per Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations at this time. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was discussed and given to Administrator, Teresa Mapilis.

2026-04-09
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · Abdoulaye Zerbo

Plain-language summary

An investigation looked into complaints that staff were not responding to changes in residents' conditions, leaving residents in wet clothing, and refusing to provide documents to an ombudsman. Interviews with staff and residents showed that changes in condition are reported to the medical technician who contacts families, and that residents are changed every 2 hours or as needed—findings that did not support the complaints. The allegations were found to be unsubstantiated.

Facility Watch · Premium

Monitor this facility.

We'll notify you if anything changes.

Official inspection and license-record changes for Yorkshire Village, plus news, public reviews, and complaint mentions across the web — usually within a day of appearing online. Nothing is swept under the rug.

  • Official inspection and license-record alerts (included)
  • Broader web mentions: news, enforcement, lawsuits, closures
  • Public review and complaint mentions online
  • Source-linked alerts, usually within a day

$9/month or $59/year · Cancel anytime

Payment is processed by Stripe. Monitoring is activated within one business day. Web and review mentions are best-effort from what we can find publicly. Cancel anytime from your billing link.

Read full citation text
Read raw inspector notes

It was alleged Facility staff are not addressing a change in the residents condition. Concerns were raised about staff members not addressing changes in condition. Interviews with multiple staff members revealed that changes in condition are reported to the medical technician, who will call paramedics in case of serious injuries. However, a confidential witness stated they were not informed of the resident's change in condition. Additional information indicated that the medical technician calls families and responsible parties whenever there is an incident or a change in condition. It was alleged that Facility staff left residents in urine-soaked clothing for an extended period of time. Concerns were made about staff not attending residents briefs in a timely manner. LPA interviewed multiple staff and residents, and information obtained revealed residents are being changed every 2 hours or sooner depending on the residents’ needs. Interviews obtained from 2 of 3 residents corroborated that residents are not left alone in their urine. It was alleged that Facility staff impeding on third party's investigation. Concerns were raised about facility staff refused to provide requested documentation to the Ombudsman. LPA conducted interviews with facility staff, and they do not recall documents requested by the Ombudsman. LPA attempted to contact the confidential witness for additional information but did not receive any information. Based on observations, interviews, and records review, the allegations listed above are unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means that although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Executive Director Teressa Mapilis

2026-03-17
Complaint Investigation
Type A · 1 finding

Plain-language summary

A resident who had a documented risk of wandering off the property eloped from the facility twice within a week in March 2026—once for about two hours before being found in nearby brush by law enforcement. The facility had alarm systems on exit doors and updated the care plan to include close supervision and monitoring after the first elopement, but did not provide adequate staffing during the second incident on March 17th. The facility was cited for inadequate supervision.

Read full citation text (1)
Type A22 CCR §87463(j)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87463(j)

This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Observing staff schedule and interview with Executive Director. Staff was unable to redirect or prevent unnoticed elopement of R1. R1 Went unnoticed for over 2 hours.

Read raw inspector notes

On March 17, 2026, Licensee Program Analyst (LPA), Tremayne Barra made an unannounced case management incident visit. LPA was greeted and granted entry by facility staff. Executive Director, Teresa Mapilis met with LPA shortly after LPAs arrival. Teresa was informed of the purpose of the visit. Information received was pertaining to an elopement of Resident #1 (R1). During the investigation process LPA conducted interviews, record reviews, and made observations pertaining to the elopement. During the visit, LPA conducted an interview with Executive Director Mapilis, and obtained copies of pertinent records. Per Mapilis, camera footage shows Resident #1 eloped from the facility through the back door on 3/10/26 on or around 7:45PM unsupervised. Caregiver #1 (C1) noticed at or around 10PM that R1 was missing from the facility. Law enforcement was notified. R1 was found in the brush in the field owned by the facility on or around 11:20PM by law enforcement. Incident occurred again on 3/17/26. R1 eloped from the facility on or around 10:30PM. Caregiver #2 (C2) noticed R1 was missing from the facility. Notified law enforcement on or around 1:10AM. R1 was found in nearby brush in the field near the facility. The facility has 24/7 alarms on exit doors. Needs and service plan was updated on 3/11/2026. Plan states that frequent supervision and redirection would be given due to wondering on or off of the facility property. Exits would be monitored due to elopement risk. Facility did not provide sufficient staffing and supervision during 3/17/2026 incident per code 87463(J). R1 left the facility unnoticed for on or about 2 hours. As a result, the facility will be cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report, LIC 809-D, Confidential Names list (LIC 811), and Appeal Rights were reviewed and provided to Executive Director Mapilis.

2026-03-05
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Inspector · Armando Perez

Plain-language summary

This complaint investigation looked into allegations that the facility failed to meet a resident's hygiene, dental, and reassessment needs. Inspectors found no violations: the resident frequently refused bathing despite staff's repeated encouragement efforts, the facility completed six dental treatments including oral surgery in December 2024, and medical reassessments were conducted on multiple dates with documentation provided to the resident's family. The complaint was dismissed.

Read full citation text
Read raw inspector notes

An interview with Additional Witness 1 (AW1) revealed that during a family visit with R1, relatives reported to AW1 that R1’s appearance and hygiene were poor. AW1 stated staff were informed that R1 had been refusing to bathe and staff were only able to encourage proper hygiene practices, but could not force R1 to comply. Interview with Executive Director Teresa Mipilis revealed that R1 began to refuse showers despite multiple attempts by various caregiver encouragement. ED reported that R1’s Responsible Party (RP) was notified verbally of the refusals and they acknowledged R1’s decline. ED noted that RP was informed that R1 was not maintaining hygiene and becoming increasingly withdrawn. An interview with Staff 1 (S1) revealed that R1 frequently refused assistance with showering or bathing, often insisting they could do it themselves or declining bathing entirely. S1 reported that each refusal prompts three separate attempts by staff to encourage R1 to maintain their hygiene. Interview with Staff 2 (S2) revealed that R1 refused to shave and did not allow staff to trim their beard for over two months. S2 reported that R1’s RP was informed of the ongoing hygiene refusals and acknowledged the concern. Interviews with three out of three residents corroborated that they receive sufficient hygiene assistance from facility staff. R2 added that they appreciate being allowed to bathe independently and upon request, assistance from staff. A review of records obtained revealed chart notes from 2023 through 2025 documented multiple instances in which R1 refused Activities of Daily Living (ADL’s) on various dates and times. Additionally, documents obtained revealed R1’s assessments and care plans were updated over time to gradually increase the level of staff assistance provided for hygiene care. A review of Title 22 under the California Code of Regulation was conducted, information obtained under Personal Rights revealed that Section 87468.2(a)(6) references the residents right to make choices concerning their daily lives at the facility. For the allegation that staff did not meet a resident’s dental needs, it was alleged that on December 10, 2024, the facility received an order for oral surgery for R1 and subsequently failed to ensure that R1 was sent to the scheduled dental procedure. An interview with AW1 revealed they were informed the facility had an in-house dentist. AW1 was unsure how many times R1 had been seen, due to staff not providing updates. An interview with Staff 3 (S3) revealed they assisted R1 with dental appointments and confirmed that R1 received seven dental treatments, including an oral surgery completed on December 10, 2024. A review of R1’s records showed documented dental treatments on the following dates: 10/20/2023, 03/27/2024, 05/29/2024, 08/17/2024, 11/20/2024, and 12/10/2024. Continued on LIC 9099-C. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 For the allegation that staff did not conduct a reassessment for a resident, it was alleged that R1 experienced a cognitive decline and the facility failed to complete appropriate reassessments in response to the change in condition. An interview with AW1 revealed concern regarding R1’s declining cognitive behaviors and noted that AW1 frequently requested that the facility perform a reassessment. AW1 added that the reassessment was necessary to obtain additional support services, such as home health. AW1 stated they were unaware whether reassessments had been completed, because the facility did not provide updates. An interview with the Executive Director confirmed that multiple reassessments and care plans for R1 was completed. An interview with Staff 4 (S4) further noted the facility conducted reassessments and provided updated care plans to RP, obtaining digital signatures acknowledging receipt on multiple care plans. A review of records showed that medical reassessments for R1 were completed on 7/26/2023, 9/20/2023, 3/27/2024, 11/6/2024, and 12/30/2024. Based on interviews, research, and record review, the allegations that facility staff did not meet a resident's hygiene needs, staff did not meet a resident's dental needs, and staff did not conduct a reassessment for a resident is unfounded. A finding that the allegation is unfounded meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. Therefore, this complaint is dismissed. An exit interview was conducted. A copy of this report was provided to Executive Director Teresa Mapilis.

2026-03-03
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · Armando Perez

Plain-language summary

This was a follow-up investigation into a complaint that staff delayed medical care for a resident who was later hospitalized. The facility's records and staff interviews showed that on February 5, 2025, when the resident's doctor ordered lab work and found abnormal results, the facility arranged hospital transport the same day as instructed; the investigation found no evidence that medical attention was delayed.

Read full citation text
Read raw inspector notes

Interview with Additional Witness 1 (AW1) corroborated statements made by ED and reported that R1 would have monthly medical visits at the facility. AW1 added that visits were increased during the month if concerns were addressed. AW1 reported receiving notice of R1’s transfer to the hospital on February 5, 2025. Interviews with 3 of 3 staff members indicated that R1 tended to keep to themselves and did not typically complain about pain or medical concerns. S2 added that R1 often refused medical assistance and did not observe any concerns during interaction with R1. Interview with R1 revealed that R1 could not recall his experience at the facility or the reason for his hospital stay. Through record review, it was revealed that on February 5, 2025, R1’s Primary Care Provider ordered lab work during the assessment and results required further evaluation. For the allegation that staff did not seek timely medical attention for R1, it was reported that facility staff delayed medical intervention. During an interview, ED stated that on February 5, 2025, R1’s PCP contacted the facility and instructed staff to arrange medical transport due to abnormal lab results. ED reported that R1 was transported the same day as directed in a timely manner. An interview with AW1 confirmed that they were informed R1 had been transported to the hospital on February 5, 2025, due to concerning laboratory findings. R1 was unable to recall their experience at the facility or the reason for hospitalization. A review of records obtained revealed that R1 was admitted to Hemet Global Medical on February 5, 2025. Intake notes indicated that R1 reported only back pain at the time and did not express additional discomfort. Additionally, Community Care Licensing Division received a Special Incident Report stating that on February 5, 2025, at approximately 2:30 PM, R1’s physician instructed staff to arrange medical transport. The report further stated that instructions were followed in a timely manner and responsible parties were notified. Based on interviews and record reviews, the allegation that staff neglect resulted in a resident to be hospitalized and staff did not seek timely medical attention for a resident is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted. A copy of this report was provided to ED, Teresa Mipilis.

2025-12-19
Other Visit
Type B · 1 finding

Plain-language summary

On December 19, 2025, inspectors conducted a follow-up visit to address a previous complaint and found that the facility had not updated a resident's care plan after the resident fell to the floor four times between June 1 and June 17, 2024—each time requiring 911 and hospital transport. The facility's records showed only a care plan from March 2024, with no updated plan documenting how staff would prevent future falls. The facility will be cited for this violation.

Read full citation text (1)
Type B22 CCR §87463(b)(1)(C)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87463(b)(1)(C)

LPA also reviewed Unusual Incident/Injury Reports (LIC 624s) reporting R1's unwitnessed incidents occurring on 06/01/2024, 06/13/2024, 06/14/2024, and 06/17/2024 where R1 was reportedly found on the floor inside and outside of the facility. BOM Anguiano reported she was unable to find documentation of an updated reappraisal noting a plan to address R1's change of condition related to the unwitnessed incidents noted above. This poses a potential health/safety risk to residents in care.

Read raw inspector notes

On 12/19/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Janette Romero arrived unannounced to address a deficiency found during a complaint investigation. LPA met with Business Office Manager Nicole Anguiano, Administrator Teresa Mapilis and Wellness Director Marielle Figueroa who were informed of the purpose of the visit. During investigation of complaint control 18-AS-20240619104115, LPA reviewed a Service Plan for Resident 1 (R1) dated 03/19/2024. LPA also reviewed Unusual Incident/Injury Reports (LIC 624s) reporting R1's unwitnessed incidents occurring on 06/01/2024, 06/13/2024, 06/14/2024, and 06/17/2024 where R1 was reportedly found on the floor inside and outside of the facility. The reports documented 911 was called each time, and each time R1 was transported to the hospital for further evaluation. The reports also indicated R1’s responsible party and primary care physician were notified, and LPA confirmed they were submitted to Community Care Licensing timely. BOM Anguiano reported she was unable to find documentation of an updated reappraisal noting a plan to address R1's unwitnessed incidents noted above to prevent future incidents. Per BOM, the only Service Plan for R1 on file is dated 03/19/2024. As a result, the facility will be cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report, LIC 809-D, Confidential Names list (LIC 811), and Appeal Rights were reviewed and provided to Wellness Director Figueroa.

2025-12-19
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Janette Romero

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found no violation of reporting requirements—facility staff reported falls and hospital visits for one resident to the licensing agency as required, and staff stated they did not suspect abuse or neglect that would trigger additional reporting; allegations of an outbreak causing all residents to itch were not substantiated, and the facility had PPE available and no documented illness in June 2024. The complaint about inadequate nutrition based on a single meal of a chili cheese hot dog was not substantiated—the facility's monthly menu showed variety, this item appeared only once, and a consulting dietitian confirmed the facility follows proper nutrition guidelines. The complaint about temperature was incomplete in the provided documents.

Read full citation text
Read raw inspector notes

Regarding the allegation, “Staff did not meet reporting requirements” it was alleged the facility failed to meet the mandated reporting requirements after a resident suffered a broken leg from a fall in the facility. It was further alleged that a different resident had falls on 06/13, 06/14, 06/16, 06/18 and multiple visits to the emergency room that were also unreported. The residents were identified by their room numbers. The resident identified in the allegation who allegedly had a broken leg was identified as Resident 1 (R1). There were a total of five (5) staff interviewed. One (1) of five (5) staff interviewed was unable to recall any resident breaking their leg in the facility. The remaining four (4) of five (5) staff interviewed reported, R1 never broke their leg in the facility. LPA attempted to conduct an interview with R1 to inquire whether they suffered a broken leg while at the facility. However, R1 was unable to participate in the interview. LPA also made attempts to contact R1’s responsible party but was unsuccessful. LPA reviewed Unusual Incident/Injury Reports (LIC 624s) regarding Resident 2’s (R2) unwitnessed incidents occurring on 06/01/2024, 06/13/2024, 06/14/2024, and 06/17/2024 which were reported to Community Care Licensing (CCL) timely. The reports documented 911 was called each time, and each time R2 was transported to the hospital for further evaluation. The reports also indicated R2’s responsible party and primary care physician were notified. LPA made contact with R2’s responsible party who reported R2 has since passed away. The responsible party reported that facility staff notified them of multiple falls R2 experienced in the facility and was aware R2 was sent to the hospital for evaluation. However, the responsible party was unable to recall exact incident dates and therefore was unable to confirm whether the facility reported every fall to them since R2 exhibited memory loss and RP was not always in the facility. Five (5) of five (5) staff interviewed reported the facility follows mandated reporting requirements and activates emergency services each time a resident has an unwitnessed fall or incident. Five (5) of five (5) staff interviewed added they have never suspected staff abuse or neglect led to the resident incidents and/or falls which include any incidents involving R1 and R2. It was reported that this is why the incidents were reported to CCL but not the Long-Term Care Ombudsman nor Law Enforcement. 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 Mandated reporting requires reports to the local ombudsman, the corresponding licensing agency and local law enforcement when the mandated reporter reasonably suspects physical abuse, abandonment, abduction, isolation, financial abuse or neglect. However, five (5) of five (5) staff interviewed reported they did not reasonably suspect abuse or neglect regarding R2's unwitnessed incidents. BOM Anguiano also reported the facility is not aware of any other incidents involving R2 on the alleged dates. Regarding the allegation, “Staff did not comply with infection control requirements” it was alleged every resident was observed itching and scratching themselves and none of the staff was observed to have personal protective equipment donned such as gloves, masks, etc. A random sampling of 4 residents were interviewed. Two (2) of four (4) residents reported they did not have knowledge or recall the facility having an outbreak where multiple residents were observed to be scratching themselves. The remaining two residents were unable to provide information. Three (3) of three (3) staff interviewed reported the following information. Facility housekeepers are constantly cleaning, disinfecting the facility, and/or following universal precautions. They are unable to recall an incident where every or multiple residents were observed to be itching or scratching themselves. In June 2024, the facility did not experience any sort of outbreak or illness that would cause every resident to itch or scratch. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as gloves, gowns, and masks is made available for staff use but there was no reason to encourage staff/residents to use PPE or isolate in June of 2024. Wellness Director was interviewed and reported that residents are seen by a dermatologist anytime they experience a skin condition. LPA toured the facility and observed PPE including gloves, face masks, gowns and hairnets available in the facility. LPA also observed a sign posted in the facility encouraging the use of masks and hand sanitizer for those experiencing flu like symptoms. 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 Regarding the allegation, “Staff did not provide adequate food service” it was alleged residents were served a meal that was not nutritious. This meal consisted of a chili cheese hot dog on a bun with potato chips and Kool-Aid to drink. It was reported that residents were also given water. LPA reviewed the facility's menu for June 2024 noting on 06/07/2024 a chili cheese dog, zucchini fries, and dessert were on the menu for lunch. However, the chili cheese dog was on the menu only one day out of the month and the menu listed a variety of foods. LPA conducted a witness interview with a dietitian who confirmed reviewing the facility’s menu and providing menu guidelines and consultative services to the facility monthly in the year 2024. A random sampling of 4 residents were interviewed. Two (2) of four (4) residents reported the facility follows their menu, offers a variety of foods and drink options, or they can request alternative food options. The remaining two (2) residents were unable to provide information. Furthermore, it is not a requirement that the menu be posted in the facility. Regarding the allegation, “Staff did not provide a comfortable temperature” it was alleged a resident reported feeling warm and wanted the air to be on resulting in maintenance staff responding to the room to determine the issue. It was further alleged the vent in the resident’s room was observed to be closed, restricting the airflow. BOM Anguiano was interviewed and reported Resident 3 (R3) requests facility staff open and close the vent in their bedroom at various times. Therefore, the vent was closed at R3’s request and not due to facility staff malice or neglect. Administrator Mapilis was interviewed and reported R3 has complained about the temperature in their room and maintenance staff inspected the unit and reported there was nothing wrong with it. As a result, R3 has been offered to move to a different room or have a stand-up fan placed in their room. However, R3 has declined both offers. Mapilis reported that all thermostats are set to meet licensing regulations and maintain a comfortable temperature for all residents. R3 was interviewed and reported they instruct staff when to open and close their vent and staff have never opened or closed their vent without them asking. R3 was unable to recall an incident on 06/07/2024 regarding their vent. LPA toured R3s bedroom and observed all vents to be opened. LPA observed the hallway thermostat reportedly controlling R3s room set to 73-degrees Fahrenheit. 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 Regarding the allegation, “Staff left resident unattended in direct sunlight without hydration” it was alleged a resident was left outside of the building in direct sunlight, unattended with no hydration. No further details were provided including the identification of the resident. BOM denied the allegations and it is believed the resident in question is Resident 4 (R4). R4 enjoys sitting in their wheelchair outside by the front door of the facility. However, R4 is always given a cup of water and facility staff constantly check on them. The Wellness Director reported that residents sitting outside are checked on after 30 minutes and encouraged to come inside. If they want to remain outside, the staff ensure they are appropriately dressed and provide fluids. An additional staff interview reported residents who choose to be outside are checked on at least every fifteen minutes. R4 was unable to participate in an interview. During a visit in September of 2025, this LPA observed R4 sitting in their wheelchair outside of the building, staff checking on R4 and encouraging R4 to drink from a cup that was provided. Regarding the allegation, “Staff did not meet resident’s medical needs” it was alleged a resident had a catheter. No additional details were obtained. The resident was only identified by their gender and the building they resided in. One (1) of five (5) staff interviewed reported they recall a resident with a catheter to reside in the respective building. However, they were unable to identify the resident. The remaining (4) of five (5) staff interviewed identified Resident 5 (R5) as the only resident to fit the description and use a catheter. They reported R5 receives home health assistance to change their catheter and have the capacity to independently empty it. R5 was interviewed and corroborated the information provided by the four (4) staff. LPA reviewed R5’s physician’s report dated 05/28/2024 noting they are ambulatory and do not exhibit memory loss. R5 did not report any issues or concerns with the catheter care. It was also alleged that R1 had a dirty and seeping bandage. Five (5) of five (5) staff interviewed reported that a dirty and seeping bandage never exited on any resident in the facility. The LPA was not able to interview all relevant parties which included a possible witness who may have observed any of the allegations during their visit. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did no

2025-12-18
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · Deborah Lee

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that staff were not addressing a scabies outbreak affecting multiple residents, but the investigation found no evidence of a scabies outbreak at the facility. One resident had a rash from another condition and another had itching caused by anxiety, both of which were evaluated by physicians and treated appropriately; staff demonstrated knowledge of infectious disease protocols and the facility properly reported concerns to health authorities. No violations were found.

Read full citation text
Read raw inspector notes

The investigation revealed the following: Allegation: Staff are not addressing a scabies outbreak. The detail of the complaint alleges that multiple residents were covered in rashes and facility is not addressing the issue. On December 18, 2025, at 10:18am, the Department interviewed Nicole Anguiano (A1) who stated that there have been no reports of residents having a diagnosis of Scabies. However, A1 went on to state that a resident’s (R1) family member had a concern about a rash R1 had. This rash was not a diagnosis of scabies. R1 was diagnosed with another condition for which she was sent to a Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) for care and subsequently returned to the facility. Lastly, A1 stated that Riverside County Public Health department was notified in addition to Community Care Licensing via Incident Report. Lastly, A1 stated that around the time of the complaint (May 2024) another resident (R2) was scratching, however when seen by a physician, the itching was a result of anxiety and not a diagnosis of Scabies; staff were instructed to treat with Neosporin. On December 18, 2025, between 11:45am and 12:30pm, the Department interviewed 5 staff (S1-S5) regarding the allegation. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 denied the allegation stating the facility has never had an outbreak of Scabies since they have been with the company. 5 out of 5 knew the protocol for an infectious disease outbreak. Page 2 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 On December 18, 2025, the Department made several attempts to interview the residents available in the memory care unit, however the Department was unable to interview residents due to their functioning level and their inability to understand the questions asked. On December 18, 2025, the Department reviewed and evaluated the following documents: R1 Unusual Incident Report (UIR) dated 8/6/24 and 11/7/24, Dermatology visit notes (dated: 3/6/24), R1’s lab report (dated: 8/1/24), Physician Communication document (dated: 8/6/24), Medication order (dated: 8/2/24), Wound Care Progress notes (dated: 11/1/24), R1 Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) admission document (dated: 7/25/24); R2 Physician visit and orders (dated: 6/5/24, 5/14/25), and R2 discharge document (dated; 5/22/24). The review of documents reveals there was no outbreak of Scabies as indicated in the complaint. Additionally, the documents revealed that the facility followed protocol and reporting requirements to handle an infectious disease. Based on the information gathered, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation mentioned above; 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. There were no deficiencies cited during today’s visit. Exit interview conducted with Administrator and copy of report provided. Page 3 of 3

2025-11-03
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Mary G Flores

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that staff were rough or yelled at a resident, but the investigation found no evidence of mistreatment. Most residents and all staff interviewed said staff are gentle and do not yell, and the facility's incident report documented that staff spoke loudly during a medical appointment only because the resident has hearing difficulties and was agitated at the time.

Read full citation text
Read raw inspector notes

Interviews with residents revealed 6 out of 8 residents stated staff are gentle and do not yell at residents in care. 2 out of 8 residents were unable to be interviewed due to cognitive skills. Interviews with staff revealed staff have not observed any staff mistreat or been rough to residents in care. Interview with Business Office Manager revealed the day of the allegation staff had taken R1 to a medical appointment. R1 had become agitated during the appointment and as they were leaving staff was guiding R1 to the vehicle by speaking louder due to R1’s listening skills. Staff did not put hands on R1 but put their hand up to avoid being hurt, as R1 was batting their hands due to their agitation. Per staff responsible party was notified via telephone. Documents review revealed in house incident report dated 9/29/23 notes the incident as described by staff above. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview was conducted with Nicole Anguiano and a copy of this report was provided.

2025-09-17
Other Visit
Type B · 1 finding

Plain-language summary

During a follow-up visit on September 17, 2025, inspectors found that the facility failed to report a fire evacuation in Building B that occurred on March 14, 2025—the facility did not notify the licensing agency until three days later, when reporting was required within one business day. The facility's Wellness Director was informed of this deficiency during an exit interview.

Read full citation text (1)
Type B22 CCR §87211(a)(3)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87211(a)(3)

Facility staff did not report fire evacuation in Building B's of the (42) forty-two residents the next working day as required. The facility submitted an incident report of the fire evacuation of Building B's for (42) forty-two residents on 3/17/2025.

Read raw inspector notes

On 09/17/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Valerie Flores conducted an unannounced case management deficiencies visit. LPA met with Wellness Director, Haley Logan, and explained to her the purpose of the visit. Below is a summary of the purpose of visit: During the investigation conducted for complaint number 18-AS-20250317191114, information revealed that the facility had to evacuate residents in Building B due smoke breaking out in Building B on 3/14/2025. The facility staff did not report the incident of the fire evacuation of resident in Building B to Community Care Licensing until 3/17/2025. Per Title 22, section 87211(a)(3), reporting requirements, Fires or explosions which occur in or on the premises shall be reported no later than the next working day to the licensing agency. The licensee did not report to CCL the next working day. Therefore, a deficiency is being issued during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report, 809D, and appeal rights were reviewed and provided to Wellness Director, Haley Logan.

Family reviews

No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience

Related in this city

Other memory care options nearby.

Nearby cities · same county

More options in neighboring cities

Licensed memory care in other cities within this county region — useful when your search radius crosses city limits.

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