Sun City Gardens.
Sun City Gardens is Ranked in the bottom 9% on citation severity among California peers with 9 CDSS citations on record; last inspected May 2026.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
Compared to 54 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
Sun City Gardens has 9 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.
9 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
9 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 Sun City Gardens's record and state requirements.
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.
The March 24, 2026 inspection cited a deficiency related to §87705 or §87706 — can you provide your corrective-action plan for the cited dementia-care requirement, and show any documentation of remediation steps taken?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
18 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.
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
22 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.
2026-05-21Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA),Abdoulaye Zerbo conducted an unannounced visit to the facility for a health an safety check. The LPA met with Executive Director Patricia Russell ,informed her of the purpose of the visit and was granted access. Community Care Licensing (CCL) received a SOC 341 from the facility indicating an alleged physical abuse by Staff 1(S1) toward resident 1 (R1). LPA's case management included interview with staff , obtaining pertinent documentation and conducting a tour of the facility for a health and safety check. No immediate health and safety concerns were observed during today's visit. Executive Director Patricia Russell informed LPA that an internal investigation was conducted and S1 was terminated. Executive Director Patricia was advised that possible visits and phone interviews will be conducted before a decision is rendered. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Executive
2026-03-24Annual Compliance VisitType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
This was a complaint investigation. The allegation that staff overmedicated a resident was not substantiated—medication records were properly documented and matched physician orders. However, the investigation found that the facility did not adequately manage the resident's fall risk: staff were unaware of the resident's high fall risk status, the care plan lacked specific fall prevention strategies, and a hospital bed ordered by hospice was not being used because family kept a regular bed in the room that the facility failed to ensure was removed, resulting in the resident being injured.
“Based on interviews conducted and records review, Licensee did not provide corresponding level of care that R1 was assessed with. This posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
The Department conducted interviews with five (5) staff members, all of whom denied over-medicating R1. All staff members interviewed stated that medication technicians are required to document and sign off after every medication was administered to residents in care, in accordance with physicians’ prescriptions. The Department’s review of medication administration records corroborated the staff members’ statements. The Department obtained and reviewed R1’s medical records. R1’s medical records did not have any diagnosis or assessment of overmedication. The Department attempted to interview R1, but R1 was unable to answer any questions due to their cognitive condition. Based on interviews conducted and records review, the Department’s investigation did not provide enough information to corroborate the allegation. Therefore, the allegation that facility staff overmedicated resident resulting in hospitalization 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. 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 However, R1 resided at an assisted living side of the facility, and R1’s care plan did not include any intervention strategies as it only showed “reminders only” for ambulation and fall risk areas. The Department conducted an interview with resident service director who stated that frequent room checks were done, but R1’s care plan reflected the standard two-hour room checks. The Department conducted a review of R1’s hospice records which required R1’s hospital bed to be set at the lowest position due to R1’s fall risk. R1 was placed under hospice care starting from April 2024. The Department conducted a tour of the facility and observed that R1’s room contained both a regular queen-size bed and a hospital bed. The Department’s interviews with resident care coordinator and Staff #1 (S1) revealed that R1 had used the regular bed provided by R1’s family, rather than the hospital bed provided by R1’s hospice agency. The former resident service director asked R1’s family to remove the regular bed, but the regular bed was not removed. The Department conducted interviews with five (5) staff members, all of whom stated that R1 wandered a lot and required frequent redirection as R1 was confused most of the time. Two (2) out of five (5) staff members interviewed stated that they were not aware of R1’s high fall risk status. Based on the Department’s record review and interviews conducted, the Department determined that R1 required higher level of care than the facility had provided. The Department’s investigation provided enough information to corroborate the allegation that facility staff did not adequately address resident’s fall risk resulting in injuries. This allegation is substantiated . An immediate civil penalty of $500 is being assessed. In accordance with CCR Code Section 87468.2(a)(4), 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. A finding that the complaint is SUBSTANTIATED means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was provided, along with LIC9099D, LIC421IM and Appeal Rights.
2026-02-11Other VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
On February 11, 2026, state licensing analysts conducted a routine annual inspection of the facility and found no violations. The inspectors reviewed resident records, toured the building, checked food storage and preparation, verified staff qualifications, and tested fire safety equipment—all of which met state requirements. The facility was operating at proper capacity with adequate staffing and current certifications.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 02/11/2026, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Jacqueline Shaw Ross and Venus Mixon, made an unannounced visit to the facility to conduct an annual review. LPAs were greeted by facility staff and granted entry. Executive Director Patricia Russell arrived shortly, and the purpose of the visit was explained. A tour of the facility was conducted inside and out. Resident record review began- A total of six (6) client records were reviewed that included admission agreements, medical assessments and TB test results, consent forms, identification and emergency information, appraisal needs and service plans, centrally stored medication/destruction records, safeguard for personal property/valuables, and personal rights notification. This facility is meeting documentation requirements. Physical Plant and Safety of Environment/Operational Requirements- LPAs toured the facility inside and outside. The facility is maintained at a comfortable temperature for the clients. Lighting is sufficient for safety and comfort. Water temperature was logged and tested within regulations. Laundry facilities and a locked cabinet is present for storing laundry soap and other chemicals in a closet. All outdoor and indoor passageways are free of obstruction. A locked area is provided for medications and sharp objects. LPAs verified there is a telephone working at this location. Food Service- Food supply was observed and meets the requirement of one week supply of nonperishable and 2 day supply of perishables food on hand. A menu is posted, foods are dated to assure safety. Food prep areas are clean and organized. Review of Employee Records- LPAs reviewed employee records that included employee record for first aid certification, fingerprint clearance, personnel/job application, health screening and TB test results, criminal record statement, employee rights, training verification. CPR and requirements have been met. Cont'd on LIC 809C.... 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 facility employs an appropriate number of staff to maintain cleanliness and meet the needs of the clients in care. The Administrator's certification is current. LPAs made observation throughout the inspection process to assess if the facility remains in conformity with the State Fire Marshall regulations. The facility has not exceeded its capacity limitation and the structure remains unchanged according to the approved floor plan. Smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors were tested and found to be operational. Fire extinguishers are tested annually and were replaced on 02/05/2026. The facility is conducting emergency disaster drills and met regulations and was logged. The last disaster drill was conducted on 02/05/2026. Based on the information received during this visit today, there are no deficiency that is being cited per Title 22, Division 6 of The California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Executive Director, Patricia Russell.
2025-11-08Complaint InvestigationSubstantiatedType A · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint about the memory care unit's condition was investigated on October 31, 2023, and inspectors found that a door was broken and standing open continuously; staff confirmed the door had been broken for some time and they were working to repair it. The allegation that the facility was in disrepair was substantiated, and a citation was issued.
“Based on LPAs observation, memory care residents' door were locked even if the resident is inside. This poses an immediately health and safety and personal rights risk to the residents in care”
“Based on LPA observation the licensee did not ensure that the door of Memory care was in good repair. This poses a potential health and safety risk to the residents in care”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
(continued from LIC 9099) Regarding the allegation that Facility is in disrepair, it was alleged that Door at Memory Care in Bldg. 200 was broken and wide open 24/7. LPA Goodrich's physical plant tour on 10/31/23 revealed that the door was broken and had been broken for a while during LPA's visit. LPA Goodrich's interview with three (3) other staff also confirmed that the door was broken but they are trying to fix it. Based on the information gathered during this and prior visit, these allegation are deemed substantiated at this time. Citation issued. Appeal rights explained and given. Exit interview conducted. Copy of this report issued.
2025-06-07Annual Compliance VisitType A · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
This was a follow-up inspection investigating complaints about staff communication, resident hydration, incontinence care, showering, and laundry services. Investigators found no evidence that staff spoke inappropriately, failed to provide water, or neglected incontinence care—all residents and staff interviewed reported these services were provided appropriately. However, investigators confirmed that showering and laundry services were not happening on schedule, which the facility attributed to staffing shortages: one caregiver per floor was responsible for 18 to 27 residents each during shifts.
“residents, licenssee did not ensure that the facility has enough staff to perforn care and supervision to residents, this poses an immediate health and safety and personal rights risk to the residents in care.”
“Based on LPAs record review and interviews, licensee did not ensure that the facility has sufficient staffing to provide the necessary services, this poses an immediate health and safety risk to the residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
(continued from LIC 9099-A) Regarding the allegation that Staff spoke inappropriately to resident, it was alleged that S1 threatened Resident #1 (R1). LPA's interview with four (4) staff today revealed that R1's first language was not English and could be misconstrued as aggressive but that was S1's normal voice. Four (4) out of four (4) staff interviewed stated that they did not witness R1 threatening or spoke inappropriately to any resident. LPA's interview with seven (7) residents or more than 10% of current census revealed that seven (7) out of seven (7) residents did not experience or witness R1 threatening any resident. Regarding the allegation that Staff do not ensure that residents are hydrated, it was alleged that Resident #1 (R1) was screaming and needed water. LPA's record review revealed that R1 was admitted at the facility on 04/10/24 and passed away on 05/24/24. LPA's interview with four (4) staff today revealed that they always make sure that all residents have access to and provide drinking water to all residents. LPA's interview with seven (7) residents today or more than 10% of the current census revealed that seven (7) out of seven (7) residents stated that they do not have issues with drinking water and were provided by the staff all the time. Regarding the allegation that Staff did not ensure that residents' incontinence needs were met, it was alleged that R1 was screaming due to being soaked wet for a long period of time. LPA attempted to interview the staff that may have witnessed the incident but the staff no longer works here. LPA's interview with five (5) incontinent residents today between 11:30 AM to 1:30 PM revealed that five (5) out of five (5) residents were being changed regularly three (3) to four (4) times a day. Based on the information gathered during this visit and prior visit, these allegations are deemed unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted. Copy of this report issued. 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 (continued from LIC 9099) Regarding the allegation that Staff do not ensure that residents' showering needs are met, it was alleged that residents are not getting showers as scheduled. LPA Shaw Ross' interview with three (3) staff on 05/28/25 and LPA's interview today between 11:30 AM to 1:30 PM with four (4) staff revealed that five (5) out seven (7) staff stated that due to lack of staff, they were unable to perform their duties as they should because each staff was attending to twenty three (23) to twenty six (26) residents during their shift. LPA's record review today between 9:45 AM to 11:30 AM revealed that one (1) caregiver is assigned to each floor at the Assisted Living (AL) section with a current census of forty-five (45) residents at twenty-seven (27) residents on the second floor and eighteen (18) residents on the first floor. LPA Shaw Ross' interview with three (3) residents on 05/28/24 and LPA's interview today with seven (7) residents or more than 10% of current census revealed that four (4) out of ten (10) residents interviewed stated that staff were unable to do their showers on schedule. Regarding the allegation that Staff do not ensure that residents are provided laundry services, it was alleged that residents were not getting their clothes laundered. LPA Shaw Ross' interview with three (3) staff on 05/28/25 and LPA's interview today between 11:30 AM to 1:30 PM with four (4) staff revealed that five (5) out seven (7) staff stated that due to lack of staff, they were unable to perform their duties as they should because each staff was attending to twenty three (23) to twenty six (26) residents during their shift. LPA's record review today between 9:45 AM to 11:30 AM revealed that one (1) caregiver is assigned to each floor at the Assisted Living (AL) section with a current census of forty-five (45) residents at twenty-seven (27) residents on the second floor and eighteen (18) residents on the first floor. LPA Shaw Ross' interview with three (3) residents on 05/28/24 and LPA's interview today with seven (7) residents or more than 10% of current census revealed that five (5) out of ten (10) residents interviewed stated that staff were unable to do their laundry as scheduled. Based on the information gathered during this and prior visit, these allegations are deemed substantiated at this time. Citation issued. Appeal rights discussed and given. Exit interview conducted. Copy of this report issued.
2025-05-18Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found no violation regarding allegations that staff failed to clean the resident's room, assist with personal hygiene, dispense medications correctly, or refill medications on time. Staff interviews confirmed they regularly assisted the resident with cleaning, grooming, and tooth brushing; nail care was handled by a podiatrist or salon as appropriate, and medication records showed all prescriptions were given as directed with no missed doses. The facility used a non-contracted pharmacy where the family was responsible for requesting refills, and records confirmed the resident did not miss any medications during the relevant period.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
(continued from LIC 9099) Regarding the allegation that Staff did not ensure resident’s room was adequately cleaned, it was alleged that R1's room had urine multiple urine stains. LPA's interview with two (2) Memory Care staff today who were here when R1 was still at the facility revealed that they regularly do a light cleaning on everyone's room and the housekeeper do general cleaning of everyone's room once a week. LPA's interview with housekeeping staff yesterday 05/17/25, revealed that they shampoo R1's room whenever requested by the former Resident Service Director (RSD) but denied that it had urine stains. LPA's interview with six (6) Assisted Living (AL) residents revealed six (6) out of six (6) residents state that their room are being cleaned regularly by staff and do general cleaning once a week. Regarding the allegation that Staff did not assist resident with personal hygiene care, it was alleged that staff did not make sure that R1's hands were clean and did not file R1's nails and staff also did not wash R1's face or help brush R1's teeth. LPA's interview with two (2) Memory Care staff today who were here when R1 was still at the facility revealed that during their shift (AM) they regularly assist R1 getting up to bed, clean, brush teeth, shower during schedule days and dress and groom before breakfast every day. They stated however that cutting and filing nails were not part of their duty as it may hurt R1 so they had to bring R1 to a podiatrist or a salon. Further, when R1 was admitted to Hospice care, the hospice staff were doing R1's bathing and grooming, including but not limited to nail trimming and filing, shaving, etc., LPA’s record review of hospice notes confirmed that the hospice staff were assisting on R1's ADLs. Regarding the allegation that Staff did not dispense resident’s medication as prescribed, it was alleged that R1 was being over medicated because staff were dispensing medications as directed by an old doctor’s order and not the newest order. LPA's record review revealed that since R1 started on Hospice services, it was the hospice staff checking and reconciling R1's medication and due to R1's condition medication orders changed faster than usual. Further review revealed that all the medications administered to R1 from the period August 2024 up to the time of R1's passing on October 2024 were given as prescribed. (continued on LIC 9099-C-2) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 (continued from LIC 9099-C) Regarding the allegation that Staff did not refill resident's medication in a timely manner, it was alleged that R1 ran out of heart medication but staff did not inform RP until one week later. LPA's record review revealed that R1 was using facility non-contracted pharmacy, in which the family member and/or responsible party are the ones responsible for contacting the pharmacy for refills. Further review also revealed that R1 did not miss any regularly prescribed medication from July 2024 until the time of R1's passing on October 2024. Based on the information gathered during this and prior visit, these allegations are deemed unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted. Copy of this report issued.
2025-05-17Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint was investigated about a resident's care and guardianship at the facility. The investigation found that the facility had worked with county agencies to arrange a public guardian for the resident, and that a temporary public guardian was appointed by the court in May 2024; during the visit, the resident appeared clean and well-cared-for. No violation was found.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
(continued from LIC 9099) LPA Goodrich's interview with former Resident Care Director (RSD) on 08/22/23 and Executive Director on 09/11/23 revealed that they have contacted and worked with APS and other agency to have R1 appointed a Public Guardian but nothing happened. The facility contacted and located R1's family member and eventually had a family member as a responsible party for medical and financial matters for R1 on 01/18/2024. During this visit, LPA observed that R1 now resides at the facility's memory care unit and observed to be neat, clean and stated that staff are taking good care of R1. Further review also revealed that on 05/21/24, R1 was appointed a temporary public guardian from Riverside County Public Guardian office by the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside Based on the information gathered during this and prior visit, there is insufficient evidence to prove the allegation and therefore deemed unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted. Copy of this report issued.
2025-04-30Complaint InvestigationType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
An unannounced inspection found that staff were providing care outside the scope of their authorized duties. No immediate health or safety concerns were observed during the tour. One violation was issued related to staff scope of practice.
“Ensuring that injections are met as evidenced by: LPA received report(s) Med Techs were administering insulin injections to three (3) residents and do not maintain a skilled professional license. This poses a potential health and safety risk to the clients in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Yolanda Delgado is conducting an unannounced case management visit on this date to check on the health, safety, and welfare of clients in care. LPA learned that forty-four (44) clients reside in Assisted Living and fifteen (15) clients reside in Memory Care at this facility. There are seven (7) staff on duty currently for the areas. During this visit LPA obtained information through interviews, facility staff are providing care outside of their scope. LPA conducted interviews with individuals who had knowledge of this information. In addition, LPA toured the facility and found no immediate H&S concerns present during today’s visit. Based on the information obtained today, one (1) deficiency is being issued per Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, Article 11, Section 87629(a)(1) of the California Code of Regulations. This report, LIC809D and Appeal Rights was reviewed with Georgianna Mendez, and copy provided at the time of exit.
2025-04-29Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint was investigated about bruises found on a resident. Hospice nurses and facility staff were interviewed, but no one could identify what caused the bruises or who was responsible, so the allegation could not be substantiated.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
The LPA reviewed hospice notes dated from September 29, 2023, to February 27, 2024, and found that hospice nurses consistently educated caregivers and medical technicians during each visit to the facility. The topics covered included repositioning techniques, aspiration precautions, and R1's feeding position. LPA interviewed two (2) hospice nurses who observed R1’s bruises. Both nurses confirmed the bruises were likely from someone’s hand, but neither nurse was able to tell what or who caused the bruises. Both nurses asked the facility caregivers about R1’s bruises at the time of the discovery, but none of the caregivers had any knowledge of events or incidents that could explain R1’s bruises. Based on LPA’s record reviews and staff interviews, the investigation did not reveal corroborating evidence to determine the cause or source of R1’s bruises. Therefore, the allegation is determined to be Unsubstantiated . A finding of Unsubstantiated indicates that while the allegation may have occurred or been valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to conclusively prove that the alleged violation took place. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report was provided.
2025-04-24Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that a resident developed pressure injuries while at the facility. An investigation found no evidence to support this claim — staff interviews and medical records showed no pressure injuries occurred during the resident's time there.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On December 10, 2023, R1 was sent to the hospital due to an urgent health condition and did not return to the facility afterward. According to records, R1 remained at a skilled nursing facility until March 15, 2024. A Resident Move Out form dated April 24, 2024, confirmed R1 never returned to Sun City Gardens and officially moved out on May 2, 2024. Interviews with two staff members who provided care to R1 revealed R1 was non-ambulatory and R1 was able to stand up and walk. In addition, a Pre-placement appraisal dated June 7, 2023, indicated R1 required use of a walker and or wheelchair. Staff frequently reminded R1 to use a wheelchair due to R1’s tendency to move around without it, but neither staff member recalled R1 having pressure injuries during their time at the facility. Information obtained during this investigation did not corroborate the alleged allegation of R1 sustaining pressure injuries while in care. Based on record reviews and staff interviews, 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.
2025-04-12Complaint InvestigationSubstantiatedType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found bed bugs and mice in multiple resident rooms at the facility. Inspectors observed dead bed bugs in closets of two rooms and confirmed the problem through resident interviews and pest control records showing repeated treatments from October 2024 through March 2025, with live bed bug activity still found as recently as February 2025. The facility has an ongoing contract with a pest control company and must provide proof that all pests have been eliminated from the entire building.
“LPA observed room 251 had dead bedbugs inside the closet by the baseboards and room 275 had evidence of dead insects behind the drawer and by the closet doors. Some residents corroborated the allegation and staff stated they have been addressing the pest issue which poses a potential health and safety risk to persons in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
(continued from 9099) LPA interviewed six (6) staff and four (4) of six (6) staff stated they were aware of the pest issue and those staff stated that the facility has addressed the pest issue since. LPA interviewed eight (8) residents and five (5) of eight (8) residents were able to corroborate the allegations. LPA took tour of common areas in building 100, 200, and 300 and rooms 251, 252, 253, 255, 270, 275, 278, 134, 119 and 381. During the tour of the rooms, LPA observed and took pictures of dead bed bugs or insects in the base boards in the closets of room 251 and room 275. LPA did not observed any living bedbugs, insects, mice or other pests in any other rooms or areas inspected by LPA The facility has ongoing contract with Orkin Pest control and LPA reviewed and obtained copies of service reports dated 10/28/2024 (treatment of bed bugs room 251), 11/01/2024 (treatment of bedbugs room 251),11/06/2024 (inspection of room 251 (treatment for mice upstairs building 200 and 300), 11/14/2024 (treatment for mice, rooms 251, 275 for bedbugs), 12/04/2024 (inspection for bed bugs, rooms 251, 272), 12/18/2024 (treatment for bedbugs, rooms 251, 252, 255) 01/17/2025 (treated room 251 for bed bugs-found no living ones), 1/29/2025 (Inspection only), 01/22/2025 (follow-up treatment for bed bugs, rooms 251,253, 255, 314,316, 381, 385, 387, 389, 388, 378, 339, 333, 328, 312, 310, 308), 01/24/2025 (inspection, removal of trapped mice and recommendations) 02/06/2024 (K9 inspection of rooms 251, 252, 253, 254. Live activity found in units 252, 253, 254), 02/28/2025 (first day of heat treatment for bed bugs and termites for rooms 251, 252, 253, 255, 254, 256 and the lower 6 units under those on second day of treatment), 03/26/2025 (invoice for termite heat). The treatment is ongoing and facility will be required to provide proof that the all the pest have been eradicated from the entire facility. There is sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1), are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Business Manager Barbara Guzman.
2025-02-19Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that staff failed to replace a burned-out light bulb in a resident's room, but the investigation found no evidence to support this claim—the bulb was working, facility records showed no requests for replacement, and staff documentation indicated the resident frequently unplugs the lamp themselves, after which housekeeping plugs it back in.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
(Continued from Page 1) It was not advised if Resident #1 notified staff that a replacement was needed. LPA attempted to interview R#1, but due to R1’s cognitive ability, LPA was unable to verify resident was a reliable historian of record. During a visit to the facility, LPA observed a bedside lamp that was unplugged. The lamp was plugged in and had a working light bulb. LPA checked the other light sources, and they were all in working condition. LPA conducted a review of service requests and there were no requests to replace a light bulb in the resident’s room. Documentation did state that Resident #1 will often unplug their personal lamp and housekeeping will plug the lamp back in. Based on interviews and facility records, the allegation that staff did not replace a light bulb in a resident’s room is Unsubstantiated. Although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted with Joey Collado, ED and a copy of this report along with LIC811- Confidential Names list was provided.
2025-01-16Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
An unannounced annual inspection found that the facility meets state requirements for resident records, staffing, food safety, emergency preparedness, and fire safety, with no violations cited. The inspector reviewed six resident files and seven employee records, toured the building, and verified that smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, and fire extinguishers are in working order; the facility is currently undergoing bedroom and bathroom renovations. The administrator's certification expired in November 2024 and is pending renewal in the state database.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Yolanda Delgado arrived unannounced to conduct an annual inspection. Upon arrival LPA was greeted by facility staff and granted entry. LPA began inspection with introduction, visit purpose and provided the facility with LPA identification and business card. Resident record review began- Six (6) records were reviewed. LPA reviewed for admission agreement, medical assessment and TB test results, consent forms, identification and emergency information, appraisal needs and service plans, centrally stored medication/destruction records, safeguard for personal property/valuables, and personal rights notification. This facility is meeting documentation requirements. Physical Plant and Safety of Environment/Operational Requirements- LPA toured the facility inside and outside. The facility is maintained at a comfortable temperature for the clients. Lighting is sufficient for safety and comfort. Water temperature measured 112.0 degrees F. Laundry facilities and a locked cabinet is present for storing laundry soap and other chemicals in a closet. All outdoor and indoor passageways are free of obstruction. A locked area is provided for medications and sharp objects. LPA verified there is a telephone working at this location. Food Service- Food supply meets the requirement of one week supply of nonperishable and 2 day supply of perishables food on hand. A menu is posted, foods are dated to assure safety. Food prep areas are clean and organized. LPA began review of employee records- Seven (7) records were reviewed. LPA reviewed employee record for first aid certification, fingerprint clearance, personnel/job application, health screening and TB test results, criminal record statement, employee rights, training verification. CPR and requirements have been met. (Continued on next page) 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 (Continued from Page 1) The facility employs enough staff to maintain cleanliness and meet the needs of the clients in care. Administrator certification has been renewed, expired in November 2024 and is pending in the database. LPA made observation throughout the inspection process to assess if the facility remains in conformity with the State Fire Marshall regulations. The facility has not exceeded its capacity limitation and the structure remains unchanged according to the approved floor plan. Smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors were tested and found to be operational. Fire extinguishers are tested or replaced annually and were last done so on 03/24/2024. The facility is conducting emergency disaster drills. The last disaster drill was conducted on 12/15/2024. Resident bedrooms flooring, bathrooms and common areas are being renovated; there was construction observed. LPA allocated time to prepare this report for delivery. Based on the information received during this visit today, there are no deficiency that is being cited per Title 22, Division 6 of The California Code of Regulations. This report was reviewed with and a copy provided to the facility representative at the time of the exit interview. *LPA was away from the facility from 12:15-1:15 PM.
2025-01-16Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged wrongful eviction and staff retaliation against a resident. The investigation found the complaint was unfounded—the person in question was never a resident of the memory care facility and lived in independent housing at the community instead.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
(Continued from Page 1) During the LPA’s interview with Executive Director and Business Office Director, it was concluded that R#1 has never been a resident in the Assisted Living and Memory Care, R#1 is an Independent Living resident. Based on LPA's observations, records review, and staff interview, this agency has investigated the complaint alleging “wrongful eviction” and "staff are retaliating against resident for complaining" we have found that the complaint was 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 this report was provided to facility representative.
2024-10-21Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that facility staff did not provide adequate supervision to a resident. The investigation found the resident lives in an independent living unit, which is not regulated by the state, so the facility was not responsible for providing the supervision described in the complaint.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
someone up front but if assistance was needed a call would need to be made and the 24/7 staff inside the back building would assist. LPA conducted a records review of the rent roll and facility census, that revealed R1 resides in the independent building. The department does not have jurisdiction over the independent living units of the facility. Therefore the allegation of facility staff did not provide adequate supervision to resident in care is UNFOUNDED at this time. A finding that the complaint is unfounded means the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. A exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report along with LIC811 - confidential names list was provided to Diane Domingo, Administrator.
2024-08-29Complaint InvestigationSubstantiatedType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that a resident's prescribed medication at a 200mg dose was never given as ordered—staff stopped administering a different dosage in October 2023 and did not switch to the prescribed dose, leaving the resident without this medication. Records showed confusion about the medication order and staff confirmed they only administer medications listed on their documentation, but the prescribed dose was never added to those records. This violation has been cited.
“Based on interviews and record review, the Licensee did not comply with the above regulation with resident one (R1). Medications for R1 were not administered as prescribed. This is a potential health and safety risk for R1 and other residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Records review of R1’s MAR revealed a note entered by Staff Two (S2) for R1’s medication with instructions “TAKE 1 CAPSULE BY MOUTH TWICE DAILY **NEED TO CLARIFY ORDER – IS WRITTEN AS 200MG” with a Start Date set at 09/08/2023 with an End Date 09/08/2023. Records review of R1’s Medication Administrator Record (MAR) revealed on 10/13/2023 staff stopped administering the medication with a 500mg dosage to R1 with a written in note “Change of Order”. Records review of R1’s MAR after 10/13/2023 did not have R1’s prescribed medication with a dosage of 200 mg with orders to take twice daily. Interview with Staff Three (S3) revealed staff will only give mediation that is listed on the MAR and the prescribed medication was not given to R1. Based on LPA’s observations, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation(s) is/are found to be substantiated. California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 1), are being cited on the attached LIC 9099 D. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Garcia,
2024-07-17Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that a resident developed pressure injuries and bruises due to neglect, but the investigation found no violation—the resident was admitted to the facility already having these wounds. An exit interview was conducted with facility leadership to close out the investigation.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
receiving additional services from a third party agency. Per the narrative charting dated 7/7/24 reviewed revealed that R1 was admitted to the facility with the wounds, therefore the allegation of due to neglect, resident sustained pressure injuries/bruises is unfounded. A finding that the complaint is unfounded means that the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Executive Director Elizabeth "Diane" Domingo.
2024-05-22Other VisitType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced visit to investigate an open complaint, inspectors found that a resident with dementia did not have a current physician's report on file—the most recent one was from August 2020, and state rules require these reports to be updated yearly. The facility was cited for this violation and required to submit a plan to correct it. An exit interview was conducted with the Resident Service Director.
“Based on record review and interview, the Licensee did not comply with the above regulation for R1. Records review revealed R1's Dementia diagnosis and their last Physician's Report is dated 08/10/20. This is a potential health and safety risk to R1.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sara Martinez conducted an unannounced visit regarding an open complaint that is currently under investigation. LPA was granted entry and met with Resident Service Director Bituin Garcia during the visit. During LPA's records review of the resident files, it was revealed Resident One (R1) Physician Report on file was last dated on 08/10/2020. LPA requested a Physician's Report 2024. Staff informed LPA an updated Physician's Report was not available for R1 for review. Residents diagnosed with Dementia must have an updated Physician's Report completed annually. A deficiency cited under Title 22 Regulation 87705(c)(5) Care of Persons with Dementia will be issued along with a plan of correction. An exit interview was conducted where a copy of this report, LIC 809-D, and appeal rights was provided to Garcia.
2024-05-01Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2024-04-15Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Plain-language summary
No summary can be written because the inspection report contains no information. The document appears to be incomplete or was submitted without details about what was investigated.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
This page was intended to be blank.
2024-02-07Other VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
This was a routine annual inspection conducted on February 7, 2024, and no violations were found. The inspector reviewed the facility's physical condition, safety equipment, medication storage, activity programs, and staffing records, and found everything in compliance with state regulations. The facility is licensed for 74 residents and was operating at 69 residents at the time of the visit.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On February 07, 2024, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Venus Mixson arrived at the facility unannounced in order to conduct the required annual inspection. LPA Mixson met with Bituin Garcia, introduced self, and stated the purpose of the visit. The File review was conducted in the office and additional forms were requested and reviewed on site. LPA Mixson toured the facility, along with the Administrator, Bituin Garcia, and inspected the inside and outside of the facility. The facility is a two story building located at 28500 Bradley Road, Sun City CA. 92586. The Facility is licensed for 74 Elderly Adults and is operating at a capacity of 69. The facility phone number is (951)679-2391 and it is operable. Physical Plant: The physical plant, is in good condition, neat, and orderly. Outdoor and indoor passageways are free of obstruction at the time of this visit. The Facility has several activity rooms and each has the required furniture; such as tables, chairs, storage space, and sufficient lighting. The building temperatures throughout was per regulations. The activity rooms are equipped with the required items, per Title 22. The hot water temperature was tested in several of the restrooms, in which they each tested within the range required for regulations. The restrooms were equipped with liquid soap and paper towels. LPA Mixson toured the kitchen and staff were preparing evening meal. The facility had activity schedules posted and available for review. The Facility has emergency food and water. LPA Mixson inspected the common areas. The fire extinguisher was in the green and the Facility recently had fire inspection. Carbon monoxide alarms, along with smoke detectors were observed. There was a locked and centralized storage area for medications in the nurses station and it was locked. Medications are contained in bubble packs, and supplied by the Pharmacy. The Facility had a designated area for resident and staff files, and it was locked. Emergency disaster plans, personal rights, and complaint procedures were posted in a prominent area. There was adequate seating in the common areas and sufficient space for activities. LPA Mixson observed monthly activity calendars, a swimming pool gated and locked. LPA Mixson reviewed staff and resident files, and conducted five staff interviews and resident interviews. There were no regulation violations observed during todays visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Bituin Garcia.
2023-07-05Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2 older inspections from 2022 are not shown above.
Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.
Other facilities in Sacramento County.
Other memory care facilities in Sacramento County with similar care offerings.
Free · Full Inspection Record
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.
