California · La Quinta

Palms at la Quinta, the.

RCFE120 bedsDementia-trained staff(760) 345-5353
Facility · La Quinta
A 120-bed RCFE with 3 citations on file.
Licensed beds
120
Last inspection
Dec 2025
Last citation
Jun 2025
Operated by
Hawthorn Al Opco Gp Llc;integral Senior Living Llc
Snapshot

A large home, reviewed on public record.

Palms at la Quinta, the

© Google Street View

Approximate location
Peer Comparison

Compared to 123 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
43rd%
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
43rd%
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.

FACILITY WATCH · FREE

Palms at la Quinta, the has 3 citations on record. Know the moment anything changes.

New findings, complaint investigations, or status changes — emailed to you free.

Where are you in the process? (optional)

Save for comparison:
The Record

Citation history, plotted month by month.

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

Peer median 1 · dashed
Last citation: JUN 2025. Compared against peer median (dashed).
peer median
JUN 2025
Jul 2024as of Jun 2026

Finding distribution

2 total · 36 months

Scope × Severity (CMS A–L)

Isolated
Pattern
Widespread
Sev 4 · IJ
J
K
L
Sev 3
G2
H
I
Sev 2
D
E
F
Sev 1
A
B
C
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 dementia-care training must staff complete?22 CCR §87705 / HSC §1569.625
+
Plain language

Because a facility markets dementia or Alzheimer's care, state law mandates higher training standards: 12 hours of initial dementia training (6 hours before a staff member works independently with residents, 6 more within the first 4 weeks), 8 hours of annual dementia in-service every year thereafter, and an administrator must include 8 hours of dementia-specific continuing education in every 2-year recertification cycle. Training must cover individualized care plans, behavioral expressions, appropriate supervision, and the facility's dementia care philosophy.

Ask on tour

Can you show me each direct-care staffer's most recent dementia training certificate, and tell me when their next refresher is due?

Tour Prep

Questions to ask before you visit.

A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Palms at la Quinta, the's record and state requirements.

01 /

The facility has 5 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 /

12 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 2025-12-19 resulted in deficiency findings — can you provide the deficiency notice and walk families through the specific corrective actions implemented since that visit?

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

Full Inspection Record

Every inspection visit, verbatim.

6 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.

6
reports on file
3
total deficiencies
2
severe (Type A)
2026-03-19
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Seo Jeon

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found no violations at this facility, which closed in July 2025. The investigator reviewed allegations about dietary care, bathing, blood sugar monitoring, and admission paperwork, but could not find enough evidence to substantiate any of the claims based on available records and staff interviews.

Read raw inspector notes

The LPA’s review of R1’s care plan revealed no requirement for a special diet. Furthermore, blood sugar logs from R1’s 10-day residency showed that their sugar levels gradually dropped. During an interview, Staff #1 (S1) stated they contacted R1’s physician for a dietary re-evaluation a few days after admission. The Department’s investigation did not find enough information to corroborate the allegation that facility failed to meet resident’s dietary needs. Based on records review and interviews conducted, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that facility failed to meet resident’s hygiene needs. Information received indicated that R1 did not receive their first bath until 5 days after R1’s admission. The Department conducted an interview with S1 who stated that the facility did not receive any complaints regarding R1’s hygiene or bathing needs. LPA’s records review revealed that R1 had resided at the facility for only 10 days and was scheduled to receive two (2) shower/bath per week. An attempt to review bathing logs was unsuccessful as the record retention period had expired. Due to the short length of residency and the lack of available records, the Department’s investigation did not provide enough information to corroborate the allegation that facility failed to meet resident’s hygiene needs. This allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that facility failed to meet resident’s medical needs. Information received indicated that the facility staff did not check R1’s blood sugar level once in the morning and another in the evening as required by R1’s care plan. LPA’s review of R1’s blood sugar level logs revealed that staff had consistently checked R1’s blood sugar levels during R1’s residence at the facility. LPA conducted review of R1’s medication record and verified that all medication had been dispensed as ordered. The Department’s investigation did not provide enough information to corroborate the allegation that facility failed to meet resident’s medical needs. Based on records review, this allegation is unsubstantiated. It was alleged that facility failed to provide responsible parties with copies of admission agreement. Information received indicated that R1’s relevant parties did not receive a copy of admission agreement even after making multiple requests. The Department conducted interviews with two (2) staff members, all of whom stated that copies of admission agreements were always given to the responsible persons upon execution of the documents. Staff do not maintain any records for copies provided. The Department’s investigation did not provide enough information to corroborate the allegation that facility failed to provide responsible parties with copies of admission agreement. Based on interviews conducted, 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 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 not conducted as the facility has been closed since 07-03-2025. A copy of this report was sent to the ex-licensee’s last known address via USPS certified mail due to the facility closure.

2025-12-19
Annual Compliance Visit
No findings
Inspector · Antonine Richard

Plain-language summary

This facility, which closed on July 3, 2025, was investigated for complaints that staff did not properly clean and sanitize dishes and utensils used for serving residents, and that staff gave medication without washing hands or wearing gloves. The investigation could not be completed because the facility had closed and inspectors could not reach all involved parties or review records. Both complaints were found to be unsubstantiated due to insufficient evidence.

Read raw inspector notes

Allegation #1: Staff did not ensure that the utensils and dishes used for serving residents were properly cleaned and sanitized . The complaint alleged that the utensils and dishes used to serve residents were not adequately cleaned and sanitized. On 03/13/2024, LPA George interviewed and attempted to interview a resident. On 03/18/2024, LPA George interviewed seven staff members #1-7 (S1-S7). Six of them denied ensuring that utensils and dishes were cleaned and sanitized. The kitchen staff stated that the dishes and utensils are cleaned and sanitized. There have been rare occasions when a dish or utensil contained food remnants, and once staff noticed this, they removed and replaced the item. On 12/19/2025, LPA Richard sent an email regarding the complaint allegations, but it was rejected. No records could be reviewed, and no additional information is available. Because the facility closed on 07/03/2025, we were unable to locate all parties involved in the complaint and, therefore, could not conduct a thorough investigation. Based on the follow-up investigation, LPA finds that 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. Report Continued on LIC9099C 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 Allegation #2: The staff did not comply with the infection control requirements. The complaint alleged that facility staff administered medication to residents without washing their hands or wearing gloves. On 03/13/2024, LPA George interviewed and attempted to interview a resident. On 03/18/2024, LPA George interviewed seven Staff members #1-7 (S1-S7), 6 of whom denied not washing or wearing gloves. On 12/19/2025, LPA Richard sent an email to the reporting party, but it was rejected. No records could be reviewed, and no additional information is available. Because the facility closed on 07/03/2025, we were unable to locate all parties involved in the complaint and, therefore, couldn’t conduct a thorough investigation. Based on the follow-up investigation, LPA finds that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur; therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. No deficiencies were cited. This facility closed on July 3, 2025. No further information is available. A copy of this report will be mailed to the last address: 9310 NE Vancouver Mall Dr 200, Vancouver WA 98662

2025-06-27
Complaint Investigation
Mixed
Type A · 1 finding
Inspector · Becky Mann

Plain-language summary

A resident who was legally blind tripped over a case of bottled water left on the floor near their closet on February 16, 2021, and broke their hip; staff were aware the water cases were there but did not move them despite the resident's need for mobility assistance. The facility was found to have failed to provide a safe living environment and was issued a civil penalty of $500. A separate allegation about unsanitary conditions was not substantiated.

Type A22 CCR §87468.1(a)(2)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87468.1(a)(2)

Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the safety of Resident #1(R1). On 2/16/21 R1 fell over a case of water that was left on the floor near the closet, which resulted in a fracture. This is an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care

Read raw inspector notes

In addition, it was reported that during the incident, R1 tripped over a case of water located near their closet, where R1 was changing. Medical services were contacted and R1 went to local hospital. Medical records revealed that R1 was diagnosed with a left hip fracture. Interviews confirmed that around 9:00 am on February 16, 2021, R1 received a delivery of two cases of bottled water which were taken to R1 room. These cases were observed by staff on date of incident. In addition, at least one staff reported that regarding R1, it was not uncommon for cases of water to be placed in front of closet door in R1 room. Department investigation further revealed that at least four staff entered R1 room on February 16, 2021, following delivery of cases, but the cases were not moved from placement on floor near closet where R1 fell. The cases remained in this area utilized by R1. According to interviews and facility records, R1 was visually impaired (legally blind) and utilized walker for mobility. Records also revealed that R1 required assistance with bathing, dressing (assistance with putting pants on), and toileting (some assistance). R1 Admission agreement includes those basic services such as safe and healthful living environment for all residents…will be provided. The preponderance of evidence found during investigation supports that facility staff did not provide accommodations for a safe and healthful environment for R1. On February 16, 2021, for an unknown period of time, at least one case of water was left near R1 closet. This case created a tripping hazard to R1, who was legally blind. As a result, R1 sustained a fracture as a result of experiencing a fall and tripping over the case of water. The allegation, Licensee did not ensure safe accommodations resulting in R1 sustaining an injury is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. A deficiency is being issued per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. A substantiated finding means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. In addition, this violation posed an immediate Health and Safety risk to resident(s) in care. An Immediate Civil Penalty of $500 is being assessed. The licensee was also informed that a civil penalty may be assessed based on Health and Safety Code § 1569.49. An exit interview was conducted where this report, LIC9099D, LIC421IM, and appeal rights were discussed and provided to the Roland Gandy, Executive Director. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 The allegation that facility is unsanitary. LPAs toured the facility with Roland Gandy, Executive Director. Based on LPAs observations the facility is clean and sanitary. Staff does maintain the facility by keeping up with the cleaning at all times. Based on evidence obtained during the investigation, the above allegations are Unsubstantiated; meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted where this report was discussed, and a copy was provided to Roland Gandy, Executive Director at the conclusion of the visit.

2025-03-26
Annual Compliance Visit
No findings

Plain-language summary

On March 26, 2025, inspectors conducted a routine unannounced annual inspection and found the facility clean and well-maintained, with proper food supplies, clean resident apartments equipped with safety features like grab bars, working smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, and accessible call buttons. Staff records showed current certifications and required training, resident files contained complete medical documentation, and medications and hazardous items were locked and secure. No violations or concerns were identified during the inspection.

Read raw inspector notes

On 03/26/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Debbie Palacios arrived at the facility to conduct an unannounced annual inspection. LPA met with Administrator, Roland Gandy and explained the purpose of the visit. The facility serves residents that reside in assisted living, memory care. The residents range from being aged 60 and over, and 120 are non-ambulatory. The facility has an approved hospice waiver for 18 residents. LPA conducted a tour of the interior and exterior of the facility. The facility was observed to be clean, clutter and odor free. LPA toured the kitchen and observed a 7-day supply of non-perishable and 2-day supply of perishable foods were present. five (5) resident apartments were inspected and observed to be clean and furnished with a bed, chest of drawers, chairs and adequate lighting. The bathrooms were observed to be clean and equipped with grab bars in the shower and near the toilets. The medications and hazardous items were stored in a locked room, and are inaccessible to residents in care. Carbon monoxide & smoke detectors were tested and observed to be operable. Delayed egress devices were operable on all exit doors. Resident call buttons and pendants were tested and observed to be operable. There are no known guns or ammunition on the premises. There are were no bodies of water were observed. Records review: Five (5) resident files were reviewed, and all 5 resident files were observed to have the required documentation such as medical assessments, admission agreements, pre appraisal assessments. Five (5) staff records were reviewed and all files contained the required trainings and valid first aid/CPR certification. LPA reviewed the facility's Fire Drill logs and noted the facility's last fire drill was conducted on 01/23/25 . During today's visit, LPA did not observe any immediate violations or concerns. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was reviewed and provided.

2025-02-10
Complaint Investigation
Substantiated
Citation on file
Inspector · Kathleen Banrasavong

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that the facility failed to adequately prevent and manage serious pressure wounds on a resident's buttocks over several months. The resident had limited ability to reposition independently, received infrequent repositioning assistance from staff, and the facility did not update the care plan or follow up with the doctor after the resident was hospitalized in August 2021 with a bleeding wound; the resident was eventually admitted to the hospital again in December 2021 with stage II and stage III pressure injuries that required wound care to stop bleeding and tunneling. The facility did not obtain updated medical orders or arrange home health services as recommended by the hospital.

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

Read raw inspector notes

A review of home health services records was conducted. An assessment document dated 08/23/2021 revealed the reason for the assessment was for discharge from agency. The certification period was from 06/25/2021 to 08/23/2021 and the date the assessment was completed was on 08/19/2021. Under the Integumentary status heading, the question on whether R1 had at least one unhealed pressure ulcer at State II or higher or designated as unstageable was entered as no. The assessment allows the user to enter the number of unhealed pressure ulcers at each stage and nothing was entered. Further, the number of current Stage I pressure ulcers was listed as zero. A note reads “Patient has no pressure ulcers or no stageable pressure ulcers.” The discharge da te is listed as 08/19/2021. R1 was interviewed where it was revealed R1 was unable to reposition in bed. R1 had a call button where they could call for staff assistance. Interview revealed R1 would be repositioned in bed one time in the morning and sometimes when staff would come to change R1. It was further revealed caregivers would clean R1’s sores put medication on them. The interview revealed R1 was not repositioned frequently. The facility was not able to provide documentation to show how frequently R1 was repositioned by staff. Hospital records were reviewed. The Patient Education & Visit Summary revealed R1 was seen on 08/27/2021 for bleeding from the coccyx. Discharge notes read follow up with Primary Care Provider (PCP) is needed. Staff interview revealed that a review of hospital discharge paperwork is usually done along with contact with PCP for wound assessment. According to information revealed in the interview, it did not look like the review and contact with PCP was done. A staff interview revealed a new care plan is developed when pressure injuries are documented. Based on interviews, the facility did not obtain an updated Physician’s Report nor did they update R1’s care plan. Facility Charting Notes revealed seven (7) notes relevant to this investigation. On 08/27/2021, it noted R1 had just returned from the hospital with a dressing in place on the buttocks. On 09/01/2021, it noted the wound on the buttocks did not have a dressing when changing R1. Brief had blood on it. Staff changed and repositioned R1 and left pendent within reach. Staff would continue to monitor. On 09/15/2021 at 1:53am, it was noted that staff responded to a pendant call and found R1 sitting on the floor. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Staff noted R1 had been feeling pain on her buttock due to bedsore and had tried to roll on their side but ended up rolling off the bed. On the same day of, 09/15/2021 at 5:38PM, there is another note where staff note the bruising again and indicated R1 had been given pain medication. It was further noted, R1’s buttocks area cleaned and dry, barrier cream applied, bandage replaced and resident was repositioned frequently during the shift. On the charting note dated 10/27/2021, it reads “resident has open bleeding bed sores”. There are no additional notes until 11/26/2021. The charting note dated 11/26/2021, indicates the dressing for R1’s buttocks was not changed during the caregiver’s shift and R1 did not remember if it was done during the AM shift. The caregiver noted R1 was already in bed and would not allow the caregiver to change it. The caregiver further noted they would notify the AM nurse to change the dressing in the AM. On the charting note dated 12/18/2021, R1 was sent to the hospital around 7am due to excessive bleeding from the coccyx wound. It was further noted on the same day, R1 was admitted to the hospital and wound care was being provided to stop the bleeding and tunneling of the wound. According to a staff interview, staff reported they faxed R1’s Primary Care Physician (PCP) on 12/14/2021 to request R1 receive Home Health Services regarding “Stage II” pressure injuries to the right and left buttocks. According to staff during the, the PCP informed the facility that R1 would need to be seen in-person first. The in-person appointment never took place because records show that R1 was sent to the hospital on 12/18/2021. A review of the Physician Fax and Visit document dated 12/14/2021 corroborated this information. The response from physician was dated 12/15/2021 and indicated R1 needed to be seen for an office visit first. A review of hospital records was reviewed. They revealed that R1 was admitted to the hospital on 12/18/2021. The diagnosis was decubitus ulcer of buttock. The Photographic Wound Documentation Form dated 12/18/2021, in the emergency department, revealed the wounds were present on admission on the buttocks, bilateral. It was identified as pressure injuries with a diagnosis of decubitus ulcer. The Photographic Wound Documentation Form dated 12/19/2021 indicated, the pressure injuries, present on admission, were staged at Stage III on the right and Stage II on the left. 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 History and Physical/Admission Notes dated 12/18/2021 read Chief Complaint is R1 was brought in by facility with complaint of coccyx pain that is bleeding. R1 denied trauma and states it happened while in the bathroom. The section titled History of Present Illness read R1 presents with buttock decubitus ulcers that have been bleeding, ER staff concerned that R1 may not be getting optimal care at R1’s current facility. Emergency/Urgent Care record dated 12/18/2021 indicated the Medical Decision Making section noted they were unable to arrange for safe discharge with home health given concerns for neglect. Wound Care notes dated 12/19/2021 revealed right buttock stage III was sized at 2x2.5x.1 cm and left buttock stage II was sized at 4x2x.1 cm. Based on interviews and records review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Based on records review and interviews, there was no information found to show that any attempts were made by facility staff to arrange for medical care and follow up with the PCP, as recommended in the discharge notes from 08/27/2021 until 12/14/2021. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was discussed and provided along with copies of the LIC811, LIC9099D and appeal rights. In addition, an immediate civil penalty of $500 is being assessed. The LIC 421 was also reviewed, provided along with appeal rights. In accordance with H&S Code Section 1569.49(e), the determination of additional civil penalties for a violation that resulted in a serious injury to the resident, is pending and under review by the Department.

2024-04-15
Annual Compliance Visit
Type A · 1 finding
Inspector · Javina George

Plain-language summary

This was a routine annual inspection on April 15, 2024, where inspectors found the facility clean and well-maintained, with proper food supplies, working safety equipment, and secure medication storage. All reviewed resident files had required medical documentation and admission agreements; however, only two staff members across the entire facility had current first-aid and CPR certification, which resulted in a citation. The facility administrator was notified of the findings and provided information about correction procedures and appeal rights.

Type A
Verbatim citation text

Based on observation and record review , the licensee did not comply with the section cited above in 5 out of 5 times as there are only two staff that obtained current CPR certification, and they do not work at the facility 24 hours 7 days a week, which poses an immediate health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care. POC Due Date: 04/16/2024 Plan of Correction 1 2 3 4 The licensee agrees to enroll staff in a recognized CPR certification class, in order to be in complaince with the regulation cited above. Proof of correction is to be submitted to the department by 5pm on the due date (4/16/24) indicated.

Read raw inspector notes

On April 15, 2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Javina George arrived at the facility to conduct an unannounced annual inspection. LPA met with Administrator, Roland Gandy and explained the purpose of the inspection. The facility serves residents that reside in assisted living, memory care and independent living. The residents range from being aged 60 and over, and are non-ambulatory. The facility has an approved hospice waiver for 18 residents. Physical plant: during today's visit LPA conducted a tour of the interior and exterior of the facility. The facility was observed to be clean, clutter and odor free. LPA observed a 7-day supply of non-perishable and 2-day supply of perishable foods were present. Six (6) resident apartments were inspected and observed to be clean and furnished with a bed, chest of drawers, chairs and adequate lighting. The bathrooms were observed to be clean and equipped with grab bars in the shower. The medications and hazardous items were stored in a locked area, and are inaccessible to residents in care. The hot water tested in multiple apartments and were found to be within regulatory limits ranging from 105.9-113.5 degrees Fahrenheit. Carbon monoxide & smoke detectors were tested and observed to be operable. Delayed egress devices were operable on all exit doors. Resident call buttons and pendants were tested and observed to be operable. There are no known guns or ammunition on the premises. There are were no bodies of water were observed. Records review: Five (5) resident files were reviewed, and all 5 resident files were observed to have the required documentation such as medical assessments, admission agreements, pre appraisal assessments. Five (5) staff records were reviewed and all #5 contained the required training, however there were only two (2) staff observed to have current first-aid/CPR certification for the entire facility. A citation will be issued in accordance with the California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8). An exit interview was conducted where this report, 809D, LIC9098 proof of corrections form, LIC 811 and appeal rights were discussed with and provided to the Roland Gandy, Executive Director.

9 older inspections from 2021 are not shown above.

Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.

Nearby

Other facilities in Riverside County.

Other memory care facilities in Riverside County with similar care offerings.

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.
Editorial Independence

The memory care site on the family's side: StarlynnCare receives no referral commissions, lead fees, or paid placement from facilities.