Inspection Reports for
MorningStar Senior Living of Pasadena

The complaint alleged that staff manipulate residents and instill fear to obtain things, including financial matters such as stock investments. The investigation included interviews with 11 staff and 11 residents, all of whom denied the allegations. The complaint was found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of evidence.

Interviews with all staff and residents denied the allegations of manipulation and financial abuse. There was no evidence found to corroborate the complaint, and the allegation was determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint alleged improper infection control practices related to COVID-19, including five COVID cases and communal dining without facial coverings or precautions. The investigation found no evidence to substantiate the allegation.

The investigation included interviews with staff, residents, and a public health representative, review of infection control plans and COVID protocols, and a facility tour. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated as staff followed proper infection control measures, including isolation of positive cases, use of PPE, suspension of communal dining, and regular cleaning and testing.

No deficiencies were noted during this visit; however, a Technical Violation was observed. The facility was found to be operating within the limitations of their license with good physical plant conditions, proper infection control, and adequate staffing.

No deficiencies were noted during this visit; however, a technical violation was observed. The facility was found to be in good repair, operating within license limitations, and maintaining proper infection control, safety, and operational standards.

The complaint involved allegations that a resident sustained a severe pressure injury due to staff neglect and that staff were not properly trained. The investigation included review of resident and staff records, interviews with staff and family members, and observation of care practices. The allegations were found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The investigation found no sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. Records and interviews indicated that the resident was under hospice care, staff followed instructions for repositioning every 2-3 hours, and training was provided. The resident's pressure injury was present upon admission and worsened due to health conditions. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included a resident sustaining a severe pressure injury due to staff neglect and staff not being properly trained. The investigation included review of resident and staff records, interviews with staff and family members, and observation of care practices. Hospice staff confirmed proper care was provided. The resident passed away due to Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular disease. No violations were substantiated.

The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to substantiate the allegations. The resident was under hospice care with documented instructions for staff to rotate the resident every 2-3 hours, and staff training and documentation supported compliance. The resident's pressure injury was present upon admission and worsened due to health conditions despite care. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint alleged that staff neglect resulted in a resident sustaining a death and that staff mishandled residents' medications by giving wrong medications and taking medications home. The investigation included interviews with the Executive Director, Wellness Director, staff, residents, and a family member, as well as review of records and observation of medication administration processes. The allegations were found unsubstantiated due to lack of evidence.

The investigation found no corroborative evidence to support the allegations. Interviews with staff, residents, and family members, as well as record reviews, indicated that the resident died a natural death and medications were administered properly and securely. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint involved two allegations: 1) Staff neglect resulted in a resident sustaining a death; 2) Staff mishandled residents' medications. Both allegations were found to be unsubstantiated after interviews and record reviews.

The investigation found no corroborative evidence supporting the allegations. Interviews with staff, residents, and family members, as well as record reviews, indicated that the resident died a natural death and medications were administered properly with no discrepancies found.

The complaint alleged that unqualified staff were administering injections and taking vital signs. The allegations were unsubstantiated after interviews with staff and residents and review of protocols and observations.

The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to substantiate the allegations. Staff and residents denied the claims, and observations showed that med-techs assisted residents with self-injections without administering injections themselves, and only licensed medical professionals recorded and reported vital signs.

The complaint was unsubstantiated. Allegations included unqualified staff administering injections and taking vital signs. Interviews with staff and residents, review of records, and observations did not support the allegations.

The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to substantiate the allegations. Staff and residents denied the claims, and observations showed that med-techs assisted residents with self-injections without administering injections themselves. Vital signs were taken by licensed medical professionals following physician orders and protocols.

The facility was found to be clean, well-maintained, and compliant with regulations. No deficiencies were cited. Safety equipment was functional, staff files and resident files were in order, and infection control plans and liability insurance were current.

The facility was found to be clean, well-maintained, and compliant with regulations. No deficiencies were cited during the inspection. Staff personnel and resident files were reviewed without discrepancies. Safety equipment and emergency plans were in place and functional.

The allegation was that someone signed initials for a med tech who was not present and that the department director was not addressing the issue. Staff interviews and record reviews did not support this claim, and no witnesses were found. The allegation was unsubstantiated.

The investigation found no evidence to support the allegation. Staff denied the claim, records reviewed showed no errors, and no discrepancies were found in the Medication Administration Records. The allegation was determined to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The allegation was that someone signed initials for a med tech who was not present and that the department director did not address this. Staff denied the allegation and stated that each has their own password and cannot sign for another. No witnesses or supporting documents were found. The allegation was unsubstantiated.

The investigation found no evidence to support the allegation. Medication Administration Records were reviewed with no errors observed, and staff denied the allegation. The complaint was determined to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint was unsubstantiated based on interviews with residents and staff, review of logs, and public health guidelines. There was no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations occurred.

The investigation found that staff followed quarantine protocols requiring 5 days quarantine and negative test results before returning to work, with clearance letters required. Dining room protocols during outbreaks included limited seating, social distancing, and sanitization. There was insufficient evidence to prove the allegations, so they were unsubstantiated.

The complaint alleged noncompliance with Covid-19 regulations by requiring staff to return to work 3-5 days after testing positive and opening the dining room during a Covid outbreak. The investigation included interviews with residents and staff, review of logs and health orders, and found the allegations unsubstantiated.

The investigation found that although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there was not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations occurred, resulting in the allegations being unsubstantiated. Interviews and record reviews showed the facility followed Covid-19 protocols including quarantine periods, clearance letters for staff, and dining room restrictions during outbreaks.

The complaint involved allegations that staff could not adequately care for a resident due to aggressive behaviors and that the resident assaulted other residents. The resident was hospitalized following an incident involving aggression. Interviews and record reviews indicated behaviors consistent with the resident's diagnosis and sufficient staff response. The allegations were unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The investigation found that although the resident exhibited aggressive behaviors consistent with their medical diagnosis, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. Staff were able to provide care and there was sufficient staffing and supervision. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included inadequate care due to resident needing higher level of care and resident assaulting others. Evidence showed resident behaviors were consistent with medical diagnosis and incidents were managed appropriately without lack of supervision or staffing.

The investigation found that although the resident exhibited aggressive behaviors consistent with their medical diagnosis, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. Staff were able to provide care and there was sufficient staffing and supervision. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint involved allegations that staff failed to prevent a resident from assaulting another resident and that staff handled a resident roughly. The investigation found no conclusive evidence to substantiate these allegations, and the complaint was determined to be unsubstantiated.

The investigation included interviews with staff, residents, and a family member, review of records, and a tour of the memory care unit. The allegations were found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence, with staff stating they intervened appropriately and residents and family members reporting attentive and caring staff.

The complaint involved allegations that staff failed to prevent a resident from assaulting another and that staff handled a resident roughly. The allegations were unsubstantiated after interviews with staff, residents, a family member, and review of records.

The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to substantiate the allegations. Staff were observed to intervene appropriately, use redirection techniques, and handle residents carefully without force or causing injury. Residents and family members reported positive feedback about staff attentiveness and care.

The complaint involved allegations that staff were not providing residents with services paid for, not providing admissions agreements, and not responding to call buttons. After interviews with staff and residents and review of relevant documents and observations, the allegations were found to be unsubstantiated.

The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to substantiate the allegations. Staff and residents interviewed denied the allegations, and document reviews showed no discrepancies. Therefore, all allegations were unsubstantiated.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included staff not providing paid services, not providing admissions agreements, and not responding to call buttons. Interviews with staff and residents, document reviews, and observations did not support the allegations.

The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to substantiate the allegations. Staff and residents interviewed denied the allegations, and document reviews and observations showed no discrepancies. Therefore, all allegations were unsubstantiated.

No deficiencies were cited during the inspection. Staff and resident files were reviewed with no discrepancies found, and the facility's infection control plan and liability insurance were verified.

No deficiencies were cited during the inspection. Reviews of staff personnel files, resident files, and facility infection control plan found no discrepancies. Liability insurance was current.

The facility was observed to be clean, well-maintained, and compliant with safety and health standards. No deficiencies were cited during this visit. Observations included proper food handling, adequate supplies, safe water temperatures, locked medication carts, and functional safety equipment.

The facility was observed to be clean, well-maintained, and properly equipped with sufficient supplies and safety measures. No deficiencies were cited during this visit.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included residents sustaining injury, being left in soiled diapers, lack of proper meal and medication assistance, unsupervised resident leaving, unkempt and malodorous facility, and delayed response to pendant calls. Interviews with staff and residents, review of records, and observations did not support these allegations.

The investigation found no preponderance of evidence to substantiate any of the allegations, including resident injuries, improper meal and medication assistance, unsupervised resident leaving, facility cleanliness, malodor, and delayed response to pendant calls. All allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included residents sustaining injury, being left in soiled diapers, lack of proper meal and medication assistance, unsupervised resident leaving, unkempt and malodorous facility, and delayed response to pendant calls. All allegations were denied by staff and residents, and no supporting documentation was found.

All allegations were investigated through staff and resident interviews, record reviews, and observations. The investigation found no substantiated evidence to support any of the allegations, and all interviewed staff and residents denied the claims. The facility was observed to be clean and well-maintained, and care practices were found to be appropriate.

The complaint alleged staff financially abused a resident. The investigation found no sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation. Resident and POA stated the facility does not handle the resident's finances, and the suspected financial loss may have involved a private caregiver.

The investigation included interviews with the administrator, staff, resident, and resident's Power of Attorney, and a review of the resident's file. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence, with indications that the financial issue may have involved a private caregiver and not the facility.

The complaint alleged staff financially abused a resident. The investigation revealed that the resident believed a private caregiver may have been involved, but there was no proof and the facility does not handle the resident's finances. The allegation was unsubstantiated.

The investigation included interviews with the administrator, staff, resident, and resident's Power of Attorney, and a review of the resident's file. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint included allegations that residents sustained injuries while in care, were left in soiled diapers for extended periods, did not receive proper meal or medication assistance, were allowed to leave unsupervised, and that the facility was unkempt, malodorous, and slow to respond to pendant calls. All allegations were investigated and found unsubstantiated due to lack of evidence.

The investigation found no substantiated evidence to support the allegations. Staff and residents interviewed denied the allegations, and the Licensing Program Analyst observed no deficiencies or health and safety concerns during the visit. Therefore, all allegations were unsubstantiated.

The complaint included allegations such as residents sustaining injuries, being left in soiled diapers, improper meal and medication assistance, residents leaving unsupervised, facility being unkempt and malodorous, and pendant calls not answered timely. All allegations were denied by staff and residents, and no evidence was found to substantiate them.

The investigation found no substantiated evidence to support the allegations, as staff and residents denied the claims and no documentation or observations confirmed the complaints. The allegations were therefore deemed unsubstantiated.

No deficiencies were observed during the visit.

No deficiencies were observed during the visit. An exit interview was conducted with the Business Office Manager and a copy of the report was provided.

The complaint alleged that staff were not properly sanitizing the facility. The investigation included interviews with residents and staff, a tour of the facility, and review of documentation related to GI protocols. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

Interviews with staff and residents, as well as observations of the dining room and kitchen, indicated that staff were following GI protocols and properly sanitizing the facility. However, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation, resulting in an unsubstantiated finding.

The complaint alleged that staff were not properly sanitizing the facility. The investigation included interviews with residents and staff, a tour of the facility, and review of documentation. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated.

Interviews with staff and residents, as well as observations of the dining room and kitchen, found that staff were following GI protocols and properly sanitizing the facility. The allegation was determined to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint investigation was triggered by allegations of inadequate supervision leading to falls, improper food storage causing food poisoning, delays in assisting residents, and delays in meal delivery. After thorough investigation including interviews and documentation review, all allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The investigation included interviews with staff and residents, review of documentation, and facility tour. All allegations were found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence, with staff and resident interviews and documentation not corroborating the complaints.

The complaint investigation was triggered by allegations of inadequate supervision leading to falls, improper food storage causing food poisoning, delays in assisting residents, and delays in meal provision. After thorough investigation including interviews with 8 staff and 11 residents, review of records, and observations, all allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The investigation included interviews with staff and residents, review of documentation, and facility tour. All allegations were found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence. Staff supervision, food handling, resident assistance, and meal delivery were found to be adequate based on interviews and observations.

The facility was reminded of timely COVID-19 case reporting requirements, testing protocols for staff, and submission of daily and weekly reports. The facility agreed to improve reporting and requested testing kits from PPHD.

The facility was reminded to submit COVID-19 positive case contact line lists within 24-48 hours and to report all COVID-19 cases and testing results timely. PPHD clarified testing requirements and reporting schedules, and the facility agreed to improve reporting compliance and requested testing kits.

The inspection found no deficiencies during both the initial and continuation visits. Various areas including hot water temperatures, medication records, staff and resident files were reviewed and found compliant.

The annual required visit was completed with no deficiencies observed during both the initial and continuation visits. Various facility areas and records were inspected and found compliant.

No deficiencies were observed during the visit. The facility was found to be operating within compliance, with adequate infection control measures, sufficient food supplies, clean and secure laundry and kitchen areas, and operational fire safety equipment.

The facility was inspected for infection control and general compliance. No deficiencies were observed during the visit, and the facility was found to be operating within compliance. Due to time constraints, the annual inspection was not completed and will be continued at a later date.

The hot water temperature was within the required range, bathroom wall tiles in apartment #206 were repaired, and the smaller outdoor patio was temporarily closed while the larger patio remained available. The newly constructed Memory Care unit meets Title 22 regulations and is ready to serve residents.

The hot water temperature was within the required range, bathroom wall tiles in apartment #206 were repaired, and the smaller outdoor patio was temporarily closed while the larger patio remained available. The newly constructed Memory Care unit meets Title 22 regulations and is ready to serve residents.

The complaint alleged that staff were not properly trained to provide care to residents. The allegation was investigated through interviews with the administrator, 7 staff members, and 11 residents, as well as review of training documentation. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated.

The investigation found that staff are fully trained and have more than the required annual hours of training. Interviews with staff and residents confirmed that staff receive ongoing training and are adequately trained to perform their duties. The allegation was determined to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint alleged that staff were not properly trained to provide care to residents. The allegation was investigated through interviews with the Executive Director, 7 staff members, and 11 residents, as well as review of training documentation. The allegation was determined to be unsubstantiated.

The investigation found that staff are fully trained and have more than the required annual hours of training. Interviews with staff and residents confirmed that staff are adequately trained and provide respectful and helpful care. The allegation was unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The facility was not compliant with the requirement to submit weekly reports of unvaccinated employees to the Pasadena Public Health Department and to test unvaccinated staff twice weekly and residents once weekly. No deficiencies were issued during the meeting.

The facility was found not compliant with the requirement to submit weekly reports on unvaccinated staff and residents and to conduct required testing. No deficiencies were issued during the meeting, and the facility committed to corrective actions to achieve compliance.

The facility was found to be in substantial compliance with no deficiencies at the time of the pre-licensing visit. Previous deficiencies related to hot water temperature and freezer/refrigerator temperatures were corrected.

The facility was found to be in substantial compliance with no deficiencies at the time of the pre-licensing visit. Previous deficiencies related to hot water temperature and freezer/refrigerator temperatures were corrected.

The applicant and administrator successfully completed Component II, demonstrating understanding of facility operation, staff qualifications, program policies, and application document requirements. They were advised to submit required signed documents and photo ID to the Community Care Licensing analyst.