Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

It was also noted that R1 was confused but was able to follow directions and was able to communicate their needs. Per interviews with 2 out of 2 residents stated that staff are responding to their request for assistance. 3 out of 3 staff stated the calls from pendants are received at the front desk, then the front desk will notify staff of the request for assistance. Based on interviews with staff they indicated the response time is within 5 minutes or less . It was reported on or around 12/08/2023 a staff member used profanity in front of R1 and their family. Per interviews with 2 out of 2 staff denied using profanity, Interviews with COO Faye Shen stated that staff denied using profanity but may have been loud. LPA was unable to interview R1 as they are not currently oriented to time and space as they could not answer LPA's questions. Therefore based on the records reviewed and interviews the allegations Staff are not responding to resident's requests in a timely manner and Staff used offensive language in the presence of resident and resident's family are determined to be UNSUBSTANTIATED, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. No deficiencies cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report and confidential names list was provided. Per interviews with staff R1 was sent out to the hospital on 12/10/2023 due to difficulty breathing and weakness and R1 was admitted back to the facility on 12/15/2023 with updated medication. Based on interview with COO Faye stated they never denied R1 back into the facility. Per review no incident report was sent for R1's hospitalization, issue will be cited via case management dated 11/18/2025. Per review of R1's file and based on interviews R1's care plan has not been updated on paper in the 10 years that R1 has resided in the facility. Per review of current rates and the amount R1 is paying for care at a level lower than his stated care needed. Therefore based on records reviewed and interviews the allegations Facility is refusing to take resident back Facility is overcharging resident are determined to be UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report and LIC 811 was provided.

Citations

3 citations recorded*CCLD

What does Type A vs Type B mean?

Type A. Serious citation. Imminent or substantial risk to children. The regulator requires corrective action immediately and may impose a civil penalty.

Type B. Lower-severity citation. Corrective action required, no imminent risk. The regulator monitors compliance on the next visit.

  • 87463(a)Type A

    (a) The pre-admission appraisal, as specified in Section 87457.., shall be updated, in writing as frequently as necessary... This requirement was not met as evidence by there was no appraisal conducted for R1 and therefore facility cannot meet needs that are not identified. This poses an immediate health and safety risks to persons in care.

  • 87464(f)(4)Type A

    (f) Basic services shall at a minimum include:(4) Personal assistance and care as needed by the resident and as indicated in the pre-admission appraisal, with those activities of daily living such as dressing, eating, bathing and assistance with taking prescribed medications... This requirement was not met as evidence by R1 did not have a care plan for fall mitagation which resulted in resident sustaining multiple falls due to neglect. This poses an immediate health and safety risks to persons in care.

  • 87211(a)(1)(D)Type B

    (a) Each licensee shall furnish to the licensing agency ...:(1)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. (D) Any incident which theatens... the welfare, safety or health of any resident... This requirement was not met as evidence by there was no incident report for R1's hospitalization in December 2023. This poses a potential health and safety risks to persons in care.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the November 18, 2025 inspection of WHITTEN HEIGHTS ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE?

This was a complaint inspection of WHITTEN HEIGHTS ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE on November 18, 2025. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to WHITTEN HEIGHTS ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE on November 18, 2025?

No citations were issued during this inspection. The facility was found to be in compliance with all applicable regulations.

What type of inspection was this?

This was a complaint inspection. Complaint inspections are triggered when someone reports a concern about the facility to CCLD.

SourceView on CCLDView original report

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand correct anything the record gets wrong. Free.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CCLD public records. Last updated . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.