complaint·October 1, 2025

Interviews with ED and BOM revealed that Resident #1 (R1) resided in the building but was an “Independent Living” resident residing in an independent living apartment which is not part of the facility license. The resident did not receive services from the Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) component of the facility. A review of R1’s Residency and Service Agreement dated 07/08/2025 specified in the contract that the agreement did not entitle the resident to receive services in the RCFE component of The Village at Sherman Oaks and that the contract was not a Continuing Care or RCFE Contract. A review of the facility roster also did not reflect R1 as a resident of the licensed portion of the facility. Based on the information obtained, R1 did not reside in the licensed portion of the facility and did not receive any elements of care or supervision from the licensee. Therefore, the allegations of facility staff did not conduct a proper medical assessment of R1, staff did not provide R1 with a copy of admissions agreement, staff overcharged R1, and staff coerced R1 to sign documents are deemed UNFOUNDED at this time. A finding of unfounded means that the allegation is either false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report was provided.