Crestavilla.
Crestavilla is Ranked in the top 36% of California memory care with 4 CDSS citations on record; last inspected May 2026.

A large home, reviewed on public record.
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.
among peers to rank.
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
Crestavilla has 4 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)
Citation history, plotted month by month.
4 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
4 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
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.
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?”
Questions to ask before you visit.
A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Crestavilla's record and state requirements.
The facility holds license 306006198 and has zero deficiencies and zero complaints on file with CDSS — can you provide documentation of your most recent state inspection report and confirm when the next routine inspection is scheduled?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Crestavilla is licensed for 250 beds but is not formally designated as a memory care facility in CDSS records — do you accept residents with dementia diagnoses, and if so, under what regulatory framework do you provide specialized dementia care?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
No inspection reports appear in the CDSS Transparency API for this facility — can you provide copies of any state licensing visits or surveys conducted since the facility opened, and explain why no reports are publicly available?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
9 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.
2026-05-27Complaint InvestigationSubstantiatedType B · 1 finding
“This requirement was not met as evidenced by the Carbon monoxide alarm in R1’s room went off 53 times from November 6, 2025, to November 19, 2025, and the facility staff took no action. This poses a potential health, safety and personal rights risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
R1 moved into the facility on November 18, 2023. On October 22, 2025, R1’s responsible party began staying with R1 at the facility after a medical procedure. R1’s responsible party reported that they heard an alarm go off in R1’s room frequently without staff responding to the alarm. All resident rooms at the facility have smoke detectors/carbon monoxide detectors. R1’s responsible party reported that staff did not come to the room to investigate the cause but assured her the room was safe. R1 reported that they had heard the alarm go off in their room on a few occasions and called the front desk, which resulted in the alarm being silenced but no one coming to the room to check on anything. R1’s responsible party purchased two portable Carbon monoxide (CO) detectors as a precaution. On November 19, 2025, the two portable CO detectors began to alarm and R1’s responsible party called 911. Orange County Fire Authority responded and found R1’s room had no measurable CO. Facility staff ordered a technician to find the cause of the CO and the fire department advised not to re-enter the room until a professional technician advised it was safe. No cause for the CO alarm was found, and no action was taken at that time. On November 23, 2025, CO detectors began to alarm, and the room alarm went off. R1’s responsible party called 911. The Orange County Fire Authority responded to the call. A review of the incident report from Orange County Fire Authority shows CO was detected in R1’s room with readings from 8 to 220 parts per million (ppm). The California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) and Cal/OSHA enforce a Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for carbon monoxide (CO) of 50 parts per million (ppm) as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) in any enclosed space. First responders stayed at the facility until readings went to zero. R1 and their responsible party had already vacated the room when the alarms went off. During the incident the Facilities Director reported that they would shut down the pool pump which may have been causing the CO issue. A review of records for the fire safety alarm system show that gas (CO) was detected 53 times from November 6, 2025, to November 19, 2025. The Facilities Director reported that when the first alarm went off on November 6, 2025, they assumed the CO sensor was faulty and had the sensor replaced on November 8, 2025. The Facilities Director was unable to explain why they failed to further investigate the cause of the CO alarm to continue to go off or to take further action to prevent possible life-threatening injury from CO exposure. 2 of 2 staff interviewed who had worked at the front desk reported that when the alarm company called about R1’s room alarm going off because of gas, they were instructed to tell them it was because of a faulty sensor. Both staff members verified that the alarm company called on multiple occasions to report to the facility that the gas alarm in R1’s room was going off. The Administrator reported that the Facilities Director oversaw the alarm system and was unaware that the CO alarm had been sounding regularly after the CO sensor was replaced. 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 Administrator reported that had they known they would have relocated R1 to a safe environment until it was confirmed the sensor was faulty or the source of the CO identified. The pool heating system pump was found to be the cause of the CO. The pool was closed until the heating system vent was relocated to a safe area where it doesn’t pose a threat to residents. During the course During the course of the investigation, the Department obtained sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation, staff did not address a carbon monoxide hazard in a timely manner See LIC9099D for cited deficiencies per Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report and appeal rights were discussed with and provided to facility representative.
2026-03-18Other VisitType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
An inspection found that the facility violated state regulations. The facility was cited for these deficiencies and received a copy of the report along with information about how to appeal.
“The facility failed to obtain the city permit prior to relocating and operating the pool and pool heater vent. This poses a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Based on the evidence gathered the preponderance of evidence standard has been met therefore the allegation is substantiated. Deficiencies are being cited per Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulation. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report provided along with appeal rights.
2026-02-25Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
out of 4 staff interviewed and the Executive Director reported they have never taken anything from any resident and have never witnessed any staff member steal anything. 4 out of 4 residents interviewed reported they have never had anything stolen since they moved into the facility. Staff and the Executive Director reported they do not enter resident rooms without resident permission. Room entry is via a key card which tracks when and who enters any residents' room. A review of records shows R1 was the only person to enter their room except for one entry by staff member allowing a visitor for R1 to enter the room, R1 verified this information. A review of incident reports for the facility for 2026 shows no thefts have been reported by the facility. There is no evidence to corroborate the allegation, therefore the allegation is deemed unfounded meaning, that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. The investigation into the allegation, staff steal money from resident, revealed the following. It was reported that staff take money from R1's room when they are not there or when they are asleep. No specific details were provided. R1 could not provide dates and times when cash was taken or the amounts of money that have been taken. R1 reported that they contacted law enforcement who left after a few minutes and they didn't do anything. R1 reported that they did not know who took their cash or when. R1 did not respond when asked if it was possible they spent the money or possibly put in the bank or somewhere else they forgot about. 4 out of 4 staff reported they have never witnessed or taken any money from any resident. 4 out of 4 residents reported they have never had any money taken from them at the facility. None of the evidence gathered supports the allegation. The allegation is deemed unfounded meaning, that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. The investigation into the allegation, staff mishandle residents medication, revealed the following. It was reported that staff take R1's medication and it was witnessed by Resident 2 (R2). R2 denied the report. 4 out of 4 staff reported that they have never taken R1's medication or any residents' medication. A review of records shows R1 handles their own medication. R1 reported that over the years all of their medicaiton has been taken but did not provide any other details. Staff 1 who is authorized to handle resident medication reported that until a resident's medication is handled by the faciltity they do not handle their medication in any way. None of the evidence gathered supports the allegation, therefore the allegation is deemed unfounded meaning, that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. 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 investigation into the allegation, staff open resident’s mail, revealed the following. It was reported that R1 orders items that are mailed and staff open the mail and steal the contents. R1 reported that their mail has never been stolen or opened by anyone. R1 reported that the items they have ordered and that were mailed were stolen later after they were received but not before they received them in the mail. 4 out of 4 staff reported they don't have access to resident's mail and have never stolen or opened anyone's mail. 4 out of 4 residents interviewed reported they have never had an issued with mail being stolen or open. Based on the evidence gathered the allegation, staff open resident’s mail, is deemed unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report provided.
2025-12-30Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced case management visit, the facility was asked about an increase in 911 calls compared to the previous year. The inspector met with leadership, discussed when emergency calls should be made, and confirmed that staff will receive retraining on the facility's procedures—no violations were found. The facility stated that 911 is called only when medically necessary and that resident health and safety is their priority.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Joseph Alejandre made an unannounced visit to conduct a case management visit. The Agency received a report that the facility had an increase in calls for emergency services (calls to 911) as compared to last year. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Myra Aragones and explained the reason for the visit. LPA consulted with the ED regarding PIN 25-06-ASC Calling 9-1-1 In Residential Care Facilities For The Elderly (RCFE) . LPA discussed the PIN with the ED who stated all care staff will be retrained on PIN 25-06-ASC. LPA consulted with ED regarding reporting requirements. The ED reported that the priority of the facility is the health and safety of the residents and reported that 911 is only called when it is required. No deficiencies observed during the visit. No deficiencies are being cited as a result of this visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report provided.
2025-12-15Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
This was a routine annual inspection of the facility, which houses 164 assisted living residents, 30 memory care residents, and 11 hospice residents across three floors. The inspector observed clean, well-maintained bedrooms and bathrooms; properly stored and labeled medications; secure storage of chemicals; working safety systems including fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, and sprinklers; resident activities and engagement; and adequate food and supplies. No violations were found.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ruth Martinez is conducting this unannounced visit for the purpose of completing an annual required inspection. LPA arrived at the facility and was greeted and granted entry by receptionist. LPA met with Myra Aragones, Executive Director, and LPA explained the nature of the visit. The facility is licensed to operate for (250) non-ambulatory, of which (10) may be bedridden elderly adults ages 60 and above. The facility is approved for (20) hospice residents. Currently the facility has (164) assisted living residents, (30) residents in memory care, and (11) hospice residents. Delayed egress doors for memory care only. This facility consists of two main areas. The assisted living and the memory care unit which are protected by delayed egress exits. The facility is a three-story structure located in a commercial neighborhood. It consists of the following: (211) resident bedrooms, (211) resident bathrooms, med rooms, a conference room, dining rooms, a laundry room, a mailroom, business offices, a commercial kitchen, a movie theater, (3) multi-purpose rooms, (8) storage rooms, (13) public restrooms, courtyard patio area, a salon, an exterior pool (under maintenance at time of visit), an employee lounge, and rooftop with art & crafts room, sun room area and lounge. During the visit, LPA observed the facility's infection control practices. LPA observed screening protocols for visitors, staff, and residents, and sanitizing stations in common areas and restrooms. All mandated inspection control posters were posted including Activities Calendar and Food Menu. LPA Martinez along with the Interim Executive Director toured the physical plant of both the assisted living and the memory care unit. Kitchen was inspected. Perishable and non-perishable food supply was checked and adequately stocked at Continued on LIC809-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 time of visit. Maintenance records were observed in the main kitchen. LPA observed a bistro adjacent to the main dining room where residents can obtain different snacks and beverages selections than in the main dining area. The bistro offers snacks all day so residents may dine when convenient. LPA observed menus and the food offered is varied and healthful. Kitchen was inspected. During the tour LPA observed residents involved in an activity as well as a posted activity schedule including games, exercise, and outings at the facility. LPA inspected that medication is centrally stored in a safe locked location; facility has a medication room on the first floor where med carts are stored when not used. Med carts are used through the floors to pass out medication to residents. LPA observed and inspected medication carts that are used to dispense meds to residents and observed medication was labeled and stored inaccessible to residents in care. A review of the Medication Records Administration (MAR) was observed to be maintained in order and accurately. LPA inspected bedrooms for residents in the memory care unit and in floors 1-3. Resident bedrooms had the required furniture, bed linens and closet/drawer space to accommodate each resident comfortably. Resident bathrooms were checked. Toilets and water faucets worked properly, grab bars were secure, and shower was free of mold/mildew. Several resident bathrooms on each floor were tested for water temperature and water temperature measured between 105.6 to 109.4 Fahrenheit degrees in tested bathrooms. Resident bath towels, toiletries and personal hygiene supplies were adequately stocked. LPA pushed the restroom call button in various resident rooms and response times were within 10 minutes. LPA observed several residents who appeared clean, and happy. LPA observed that toxic chemicals, cleaning solutions and disinfectants are stored locked in a locked in storage closets throughout the facility. LPA toured the memory care unit and observed a kitchen/ dining room as well as posted activity schedule for memory care residents. LPA observed residents in the memory care unit with care staff present. LPA observed the delayed egress exits to be functioning. Carbon monoxide detectors tested and noted to be operational. Fire extinguishers are fully charged and had a service date of September 18. 2025. Smoke detectors and sprinkler system are tested yearly by an outside agency, and LPA was provided with testing documentation, last testing was done February 24-28, 2025. Emergency drills are being conducted monthly on every shift with the last drill conducted on November 19, 2025. LPA observed stairwells have an emergency evacuation chair. Outside grounds have ample shaded seating for residents. LPA observed several courtyards with shaded seating areas for residents’ enjoyment. LPA observed a swimming pool in the outside perimeters of the assisted living side with a fence around it which is under maintenance and it not being used by residents Continued on LIC809-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 until repairs are completed. LPA observed the pool gate that has a self-latching and has a key card pad for access at the gate door for inaccessibility. LPA measured the pool fence was observed to enclose the entire pool area. LPA reviewed 15 resident files and 15 staff files. All resident files contained required documentation including updated physician reports and care plans. Staff files contained required documentation including health screens, first aid, and fingerprint clearance. Based on the observations made during today’s visit, no deficiencies were noted today in the areas inspected per Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. This report was reviewed with the Executive Director, and a copy of this report was provided to the facility.
2025-10-01Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
An investigator looked into a complaint about insects, rodents, or worms at the facility and found no evidence of them during the inspection. The complaint could not be confirmed based on what was observed. An exit interview was conducted with facility staff and they received a copy of the report.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
LPA did not observe any insects, rodents or worms anywhere in the facility. Based on the evidence gathered the allegation is deemed 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. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report provided.
2025-08-28Complaint InvestigationMixedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that staff failed to provide timely medical care for a resident who had skin tears on their forearms. An investigation found that the facility did provide appropriate care—the wounds were cleaned and bandaged daily, a home health nurse confirmed they were healing without infection, and the resident did not report pain—but the facility violated reporting requirements by not notifying the state within the required seven days of the incident. The facility has been cited for this reporting violation.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
The RCC contacted R1's responsible party and primary care physician (PCP). The PCP arranged for a Home Health visit which took place on August 12, 2025. The Home Health notes show both wounds are closed with no sign of infection. The Home Health notes describe the injuries as skin tears. The RCC reported that the injuries were cleaned daily and bandaged daily. LPA interviewed R1, R1 did not recall the incident and reported they did not fall recently. LPA interviewed R2 who reported there was no blood on R1's clothing and there minimal blood on the skin tears. The RCC reported that R1 only required first aid and because no pain was reported and no other injuries were noted it wasn't necessary to call 911. The RCC reported that R1 was not nervous or displaying any signs of distress. Based on the evidence gathered the allegation, staff did not get trimly medical care for resident is deemed unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report provided. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 No evidence was gathered to support the allegation. Therefore the allegation is deemed 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. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report provided. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 a written report to the responsible party concerning R1's injuries. California Code of Regulation (CCR) Title 22, Division 6, 87211(a)(1) states, " A written report shall be submitted to the licensing agency and to the person responsible for the resident within seven days of the occurrence of any of the events specified in (A) through (D) below." R1 received first aid for their injuries on their forearms so this incident qualifies under CCR Title 22, Division 6 87211(a)(1)(D) which states, " Any incident which threatens the welfare, safety or health of any resident". The incident involving R1 took place on August 3, 2025 and the facility did not report the incident in writing until August 12, 2025, 9 days later. A record review of incidents reports submitted to the Agency from the facility for the month of August 2025 show the facility did not report the incident to the Agency. Based on the evidence gathered, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the allegation is substantiated. Deficiencies are being cited per Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report provided along with appeal rights.
2024-12-14Other VisitType A · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
On December 14, 2024, inspectors conducted an unannounced annual inspection of the facility, which houses 164 assisted living residents, 30 in memory care, and 6 hospice residents. The inspection found the physical plant, resident rooms, bathrooms, kitchen, emergency systems, and infection control practices to be in good order, but identified two staffing deficiencies: one staff member lacked required criminal background clearance paperwork, and another staff member's CPR/First Aid certification had expired.
“Based on observation and record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above. LPA identified staff #8 (S8) did not have criminal record clearance transfer. Staff did not have an LIC 9162 on file nor transferred on CDSS Guardian. This violation which poses an immediate health, safety, or personal rights risk to persons in care. POC Due Date: 12/16/2024 Plan of Correction 1 2 3 4 Licensee will ensure all staff have criminal clearance transfer prior to working at the facility. Staff #8 (S8) according to CDSS Guardian is not associated to this facility. Licensee will associate staff #8 (S8) by POC due date. Send proof of correction by email to ernand.dabuet@dss.ca.gov”
“Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above. Staff #7 did not have First Aid/CPR certificate on file. This violation which poses a potential health, safety, or personal rights risk to persons in care. POC Due Date: 12/28/2024 Plan of Correction 1 2 3 4 Licensee will ensure all facility staff must have the mandatory First Aid/CPR Training completed. As plan of correction, administrator will send proof of completed First Aid/CPR will be sent to LPA via email: ernand.dabuet@dss.ca.gov before POC due date.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 12/14/24, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ernand Dabuet conducted an unannounced annual required visit using the CARE Inspection Tool. LPA met with Hospitality Director Paola Carrillo who contacted the Executive Director Myra Aragones by telephone. LPA Dabuet explained the purpose of today’s visit. The facility is licensed to operate for (250) non-ambulatory, of which (10) may be bedridden elderly adults ages 60 and above. The facility is approved for (20) hospice residents. Currently the facility has (164) assisted living residents, (30) residents in memory care, and (6) hospice residents. The facility is a three-story structure located in a commercial neighborhood. It consists of the following: (211) resident bedrooms, (211) resident bathrooms, med rooms, a conference room, dining rooms, a laundry room, a mailroom, business offices, a commercial kitchen, a movie theater, (3) multi-purpose rooms, (8) storage rooms, (13) public restrooms, courtyard patio area, a salon, an exterior pool, an employee lounge, and rooftop with art & crafts room, sun room area and lounge. LPA Dabuet and Maintenance Director David Deger toured the physical plant. There were no bodies of water on the premises. All rooms were inspected. Beds and bedding supplies were in good condition, adequate lighting was provided, and storage for the resident's personal belongings was observed. Bed linens, comforters, and bath towels were stocked during the visit. The resident rooms were inspected: #106, #112, #127, #132, #250, #274, #373 and #381. Emergency call buttons were in working condition. Bathrooms were operational with water temperature measured at 105.2 – 110.1 degrees F. A comfortable temperature was maintained in the facility at 70 - 74 degrees F. LPA observed the facility to be furnished at the time of the visit. Storage areas for personal hygiene, cleaning supplies, toxins, and sharps objects were stored and not accessible to residents. The kitchen was inspected, and sufficient perishable and non-perishable food was maintained adequately. (Evaluation Report continues LIC 809-C) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Fire extinguishers were charged, and smoke detectors and carbon monoxide were operable in each resident's room. Disaster Drill/Evacuation Drill/Fire Drill are conducted with records of 10/17/24 being the last drill. Facility fire cleared approved for delayed egress exits. Facility has delayed egress exit doors in memory care all operable condition. During the visit, LPA observed the facility's infection control practices. LPA observed screening protocols for visitors, staff, and residents, and sanitizing stations in common areas and restrooms. All mandated inspection control posters were posted including Activities Calendar and Food Menu. LPA conducted an audit of resident #1-#7 (R1-R7) out of (194) service files, and staff #1-#7 (S1-S7) out of (142) personnel files were complete. A review of the Medication Records Administration (MAR) was observed to be maintained in order and accurately. The facility is current in CCLD annual fees. The administrator certificate for Myra Aragones #7008607740 effective 10/01/2023 - 09/30/2025. The facility has a Liability Insurance Certificate valid with policy # NSC1000498 effective 06/01/24 – 06/01/25. DEFICIENCIES : Criminal Clearance Transfer Association for staff #8. No Criminal Clearance Transfer Request LIC 9162 on file or included on CDSS Guardian Background System as being associated. Staff #7 did not have current CPR/First Aid Certificate on file last CPR expired 10/2024. According to the California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8), the following deficiencies has been observed and citation issued (ref. LIC 809-D). An exit interview conducted with the Myra Aragones, and a copy of the report is provided. Note: *Citations not cleared by the due date will be a $100 fine assessed for each citation until it is cleared. Civil penalties will continue to accrue until Proof of Corrections (POC) are cleared. *
2023-10-06Other VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
An inspector visited the facility as part of a complaint investigation and spoke with a resident to gather information about the complaint. The facility's management was cooperative and granted access. No violations were found during this visit.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Joseph Alejandre conducted an unannounced collateral visit in conjunction with complaint investigation 22-AS-20231004114033 at another licensed facility. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility. LPA met with General Manager Myra Aragones and explained the reason for the visit. During the visit, LPA met with Resident 1 (R1) to gather information pertaining to complaint #22-AS-20231004114033. Resident agreed to speak with LPA. Exit interview conducted with the General Manager and a copy of this report was provided.
4 older inspections from 2022 are not shown above.
Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.
Other facilities in Orange County.
Other memory care facilities in Orange County with similar care offerings.
Free · Facility Watch
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
Other memory care options nearby.
More options in neighboring cities
Licensed memory care in other cities within this county region — useful when your search radius crosses city limits.

