Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

OAKS AT PASO ROBLES, THELicense 4058504802 citations on this visit
2 citations recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

LPA review of the facility call system records for resident calls from 4/1/2025 to 5/1/2025 revealed 130 pendant calls and 10 resident bathroom pull cord alerts with response times over 10 minutes; of which 16 were over 20 minutes, 12 were over 30 minutes, and 6 were over 60 minutes. LPA staff interviews revealed there are times that residents have to wait for extended periods of time to receive assistance since staff are helping other residents. Staff also stated in interviews that the call system does not always function properly, sometimes losing Wi-Fi signal and other times they forget to follow through timely completing all the steps of restoring resident pendant and bathroom devices. LPA resident interviews revealed 6 of 7 interviewed residents state they do sometimes wait for extended periods of time for staff to respond. Based on all interviews conducted and record review, at this time the above allegation was found to be substantiated , there is a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. On allegation: Residents are not being provided clean linens. It was alleged that staff are covering the dirty areas of the linens and not providing residents with clean linens. LPA interviews with staff revealed that care staff in the memory care unit are responsible for changing linens 2-3 days each week and more often when soiled. Staff interviews in the assisted living unit revealed housekeepers are responsible for changing sheets once per week and care staff are responsible for changing the linens when soiled. During multiple visits to the facility from 3/17/2025 and 7/8/2025 LPA observed and photographed 7 resident rooms with soiled and stained linens. Additionally LPA noted 6 rooms with stained and soiled mattresses and/or mattress covers. Based on LPA observation, at this time the above allegation was found to be substantiated , there is a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. On allegation: Staff does not keep facility free from odor. It was alleged a resident in memory care, Resident #3 (R3), urinates on the floor of their room, the room smells of urine and staff do not always clean it up. On 5/7/2025 LPA and Administrator toured the facility including R3’s room. LPA noted a very strong smell of urine. Upon inspection of the room at 11:54am LPA and Administrator noted in the south/east corner of the room the laminate floor boards, baseboard, and paint on the walls peeling away from the floor and walls. Administrator stated this is due to the resident urinating in various areas of their room including that corner and there was a plan to repair the flooring, baseboard, and paint. (Continued on LIC9099-C) LPA interviews with staff revealed 5 of 5 staff are not aware of R1 being left in soiled clothing. Staff interviews and record review revealed R1 is incontinent, R1 often refuses staff assistance and staff make multiple attempts to assist R1 when they refuse. During LPA interview with R1, R1 stated staff check on them too frequently and staff do provide assistance with their dressing and incontinence needs. R1 stated they have not been left in soiled clothing by staff. Based on all interviews conducted, LPA observation and record review, at this time the above allegation was found to be unsubstantiated , meaning that the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. On allegation: Call button not accessible to residents. It was alleged that not all residents in the memory care unit have call buttons accessible to them. LPA interview with the Administrator reveal there is an emergency pull cord in every resident bathroom and it is Westmont Living's policy to check the residents more frequently in memory care since as they may not be able to operate a pendant. Administrator also stated if a resident requests a pendant the facility provides that resident one. LPA interview with staff revealed that currently two memory care residents carry a pendant with them and the other residents who do not are checked on more frequently. LPA observed each resident bathroom has an emergency pull cord meeting regulation requirements. Based on all interviews conducted and LPA observation, at this time the above allegation was found to be unsubstantiated , meaning that the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. On allegation: Staff do not meet residents’ needs. It was alleged Resident #2 (R2) has fallen multiple times, pushes their pendant for assistance, and it takes a while for staff to respond. LPA call system record review from 4/1/2025 to 5/1/2025 revealed 24 pendant calls from R2 with a response time over 10 mins. LPA record review of R2’s LIC602 Physician Report dated 3/28/2025 revealed R2’s secondary diagnoses to be falls and gait instability and on page 2 of the LIC602 motor impairment is marked “yes” with the physician comment “unsteady gait”. LPA noted R2’s Service Plan dated 4/29/2025 states R2 needs caregiver standby assistance with mobility using a walker or wheelchair daily, and a comment stating, “the Care Team supports me with safe ambulation, mobility and repositioning.” (Continued on LIC9099-C) During LPA interview with R2, R2 stated they recall falling multiple times in the past, staff have responded quickly to their call using their pendant and staff ensured medical treatment was provided. LPA interview with Person #1 (P1), a family member of R2, revealed they have been notified by the facility of R2’s previous falls and are happy with how the facility has handled each time R2 has fallen. LPA record review revealed Licensing received no incident reports for R1 from when resident move in date in April 2025 to the day of LPA’s initial visit for this complaint on 5/7/2025. Based on all interviews conducted and record review, at this time the above allegation was found to be unsubstantiated , there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted, report signed, and report provided. LPA staff interviews revealed there is not a consistent housekeeper in the memory care unit. During a visit on 7/8/2025 at 10:25am, LPA toured R3’s room to find the room smells strongly of urine, several floorboards in the same corner missing, the baseboard and paint peeling away from the walls, and the resident’s bed was moved, to covering this corner. Based on all interviews conducted and LPA observation, at this time the above allegation was found to be substantiated , there is a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted, deficiencies cited on 9099-D, report, and appeal rights given.

Citations

2 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.

  • 87303(a)Type B

    Maintenance and Operation (a)The facility shall be clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair at all times. Maintenance shall include provision of maintenance services and procedures for the safety and well-being of residents, employees and visitors. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews and record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above when 7 rooms had stained/soiled linens, and when LPA noted R3's room with an odor and in disrepair which poses a potential health, safety, and personal rights risk to clients in care.

  • 87468.2(a)(4)Type B

    (a)... residents in privately operated residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (4)To care, supervision, and services that meet their individual needs and are delivered by staff that are sufficient in numbers, qualifications, and competency to meet their needs. This requirement was not met as evidenced by:Based on interviews and record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above when 6 of 7 residents stated they wait for staff to respond, 130 call response times were

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the July 23, 2025 inspection of OAKS AT PASO ROBLES, THE?

This was a complaint inspection of OAKS AT PASO ROBLES, THE on July 23, 2025. 2 citations were issued: 2 Type B.

Were any citations issued to OAKS AT PASO ROBLES, THE on July 23, 2025?

Yes, 2 citations were issued (0 Type A, 2 Type B). The first citation was for: "Maintenance and Operation (a)The facility shall be clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair at all times. Maintenance s..."

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.