§ StarlynnCare · Original analysis
Research
Original analysis of state inspection records — chain scorecards, repeat-citation patterns, cost vs quality, geographic equity, and inspection seasonality across licensed memory care facilities. All findings are derived from the public dataset we publish under a documented methodology.
Featured report
Long-form investigations built from the dataset.
Analyses
Standalone findings from the inspection record.
- California· May 2026In California memory care, price is no guarantee of qualityPearson r = 0.27 between county-median monthly cost and citation severity across 484 California memory care facilities — essentially flat. The most expensive county is not the worst-cited county.r = 0.27 price–severity correlationRead →
- California· May 2026What inspectors actually cite at California memory care facilitiesOf 7,748 California memory care deficiencies on record, only 6% fall under the dementia-specific statutes. The dominant harm category in inspector narratives is staffing inadequacy.1,069 staffing-inadequacy mentionsRead →
- California· May 2026High-income California ZIPs do not have better memory care recordsZIP-level household income explains almost none of the variation in CA memory care deficiency rates (r = 0.23). Several of the highest-income ZIPs rank among the worst-cited.r = 0.23 income–deficiency correlationRead →
- California· May 2026California memory care citations cluster in fall — and almost never on weekendsAugust carries the highest single-month citation count, fall is the highest-citation season, and weekends see almost no inspections — meaning many facilities go unobserved Saturday through Sunday.692 citations in August aloneRead →
Methodology and source data: How we rate facilities → · Dataset overview →