Complaint·December 23, 2025

Staff interviews revealed that Staff 1 (S1) Staff 2 (S2) were aware of the rodent infestation within the facility. S1 required help from S2 and an Outside Source 1 (OS1) to help set up pest control appointments. According to staff, there were independent contractors hired to come and set up rodent traps as well as fix and install patchwork to prevent access of rodents in the facility. Resident Interviews revealed that Resident 1 (R1) had witnessed several occurrences of rodents scurrying around; specifically near the bathroom and on the outside near the garage and patio. R1 also reported hearing rodents in the walls. Outside Source Interviews revealed that OS1 helped facility staff to set up appointments for a pest control company to come and set down rodent traps and patch holes in the attic. OS1 confirmed that the initial pest control company was too expensive for the services they offered and instead decided to hire independent contractors at a later date to take care of the rodent issues. LPA observations revealed that there were several spots inside of the garage and around the premises that had pockets of rodent droppings and a urine smell. LPA acquired photographic evidence of the observations. Coincidentally on the day of the visit from licensing, while the LPA was present, the aforementioned independent contractor visited the facility and provided assistance and advice on the pest control issue. Based on relevant interviews and records review, the preponderance of evidence has been met that alleged violation(s) occurred and are therefore substantiated.  Deficiencies are cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 (refer to the attached LIC 9099-D).  A Plan of Correction was jointly developed with the licensee. An exit interview was conducted with Licensee, to whom a copy of this report, the LIC811 Confidential Names List, and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided. Staff interviews revealed that Staff 2 (S2) often provides meals to residents and ensures that there is always a side of fruit or vegetables available to residents. S2 also stated that residents can get fruit like bananas, apples, or oranges if they want a snack in-between meals. Resident interviews revealed that Resident 1 (R1) was able to provide many examples of recent meals that included a side of vegetables or fruit for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. R1 thought the portions should be bigger but acknowledged they have access to fruits and vegetables as snacks. Records review revealed menus in the facility are not up to date or contain any indicators of when they were last updated. The menus consisted of planned meals for one week. The menus that were provided did indicate an appropriate amount of variety of the foods offered and included fruits and vegetables. LPA observations revealed there were a large and diverse amount of fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables in the fridge/freezer. Fruits were accessible to residents and could be provided upon request. Leftover meals in the refrigerator included vegetables. LPA Observations corroborated resident and staff interviews. Based on interviews, direct LPA observations and records review, a preponderance of evidence does not exist to prove that the alleged violation occurred, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Licensee, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 03/22) were provided.