197610332-2-3-2026-31-AS-MGFS-DTZTB5-20260512143436

Community Care Licensing

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT

Facility Number: 197610332
Report Date: 02/03/2026
Date Signed: 02/03/2026 12:38:09 PM

Unsubstantiated

STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING DIVISION
WOODLAND HILLS S.RO, 21731 VENTURA BLVD., STE. 250
WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364

This is an official report of an unannounced visit/investigation of a complaint received in our office on
01/09/2026 and conducted by Evaluator Evelin Rios

COMPLAINT CONTROL NUMBER: 31-AS-20260109092633

FACILITY NAME:	PEOPLE'S CARE LANCASTER C12		FACILITY NUMBER:	197610332
ADMINISTRATOR:	PICKENS, YOLANDA		FACILITY TYPE:	738
ADDRESS:	8543 W AVENUE C12		TELEPHONE:	(909) 287-3557
CITY:	LANCASTER	STATE: CA	ZIP CODE:	93536
CAPACITY:	4	CENSUS: 2	DATE:	02/03/2026
		UNANNOUNCED	TIME BEGAN:	11:30 AM
MET WITH:	Administrator Yolanda Pikens		TIME COMPLETED:	12:45 PM

ALLEGATION(S):

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Staff handled client in a rough manner
Staff members worked while under the influence of drugs
Staff did not allow client in care to have access to telephone services
Staff did not follow reporting requirements

INVESTIGATION FINDINGS:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

On 02/03/26, at 11:30 a.m., Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Evelin Rios arrived at the facility to conduct an unannounced, subsequent visit and was greeted by the administrator Yolanda Pirkens. LPA explained the purpose of this visit was to obtain copies of records and deliver findings for this complaint.

On 1/14/26, LPA Rios conducted an unannounced initial complaint visit and was provided with the facility’s Personnel Report (LIC500). On 01/14/26, from approximately 12:50 p.m. to 3:25 p.m., LPA Rios conducted a physical plant tour and interviewed two (2) out of two (2) clients. Client #1’s (C1’s) Service Coordinator from North Los Angeles County Regional Center, Samantha Harper, was present for C1’s interview. LPA Rios also interviewed six (6) staff members. At approximately 3:26 p.m., LPA interviewed the administrator and obtained copies of the following: Client #1’s (C1’s) IPP, Individual Behavioral Support Plan (IBSP), Individual Program Plan (IPP), Conservatorship document, telephone contract and facility’s data collection or daily notes regarding C1. On today’s visit LPA Rios collected copies of Client#2’s (C2’s) IPP and C1's Physician’s Report. (Continue to LIC 9099C)

Unsubstantiated

Estimated Days of Completion:

SUPERVISORS NAME: Nichelle Gillyard
LICENSING EVALUATOR NAME: Evelin Rios
LICENSING EVALUATOR SIGNATURE:	DATE: 02/03/2026

I acknowledge receipt of this form and understand my licensing appeal rights as explained and received.

FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE:

DATE: 02/03/2026

This report must be available at Child Care and Group Home facilities for public review for 3 years.

LIC9099 (FAS) - (06/04)

Page: 1 of 3

Control Number 31-AS-20260109092633

STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT (Cont)

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING DIVISION
WOODLAND HILLS S.RO, 21731 VENTURA BLVD., STE. 250
WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364

FACILITY NAME: PEOPLE'S CARE LANCASTER C12	FACILITY NUMBER: 197610332
	VISIT DATE: 02/03/2026

NARRATIVE

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

(Continued from LIC9099)
Allegation: Staff handled client in a rough manner. It was alleged that C1’s protective glove was forcefully removed by staff. LPA interviewed C1 who denied the allegation. C1 corroborated having a sleeve they wore on their right arm but denied it was removed forcibly. LPA’s interview with C2 denied staff handles them in a rough manner and denied witnessing staff handle C1 in a rough manner. Interview with (6) staff and the administrator denied the allegation. LPA observed C1 was not wearing the sleeve and noted discoloration on C1’s right arm with no active bleeding. The healed wounds and scabs present are consistent with C1’s documented history in the IBSP, which notes episodes of C1 biting their skin and scabs. During interviews with staff and the administrator the sleeve did not stop C1 from their episode and C1 was asked not to sleep with it because it would move and leave marks on C1’s arm ultimately C1 decided not to wear it.
Based on LPAs interviews with clients and staff, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time.

Allegation: Staff members worked while under the influence of drugs. It was alleged that staff smoke marijuana during their breaks. LPA’s interview with clients denied witnessing staff smoking marijuana or observed staff appearing to be under the influence while working. LPA’s interview with six (6) staff members and the administrator also denied the allegation. The administrator reported that drug testing is conducted at the time of hire and that their primary concern involves substances other than marijuana. Additionally, there have been no instances requiring further drug testing, as staff performance has been adequate. Based on LPAs interviews with clients and staff, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time.

(Continue to LIC9099-C) Page 2 of 3

SUPERVISORS NAME: Nichelle Gillyard
LICENSING EVALUATOR NAME: Evelin Rios
LICENSING EVALUATOR SIGNATURE:	DATE: 02/03/2026

I acknowledge receipt of this form and understand my licensing appeal rights as explained and received.

FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE:

DATE: 02/03/2026

LIC9099 (FAS) - (06/04)

Page: 2 of 3

Control Number 31-AS-20260109092633

STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT (Cont)

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY CARE LICENSING DIVISION
WOODLAND HILLS S.RO, 21731 VENTURA BLVD., STE. 250
WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364

FACILITY NAME: PEOPLE'S CARE LANCASTER C12	FACILITY NUMBER: 197610332
	VISIT DATE: 02/03/2026

NARRATIVE

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

Allegation: Staff did not allow client in care to have access to telephone services. It was alleged staff prohibited C1 from contacting their father by restricting C1’s use of their personal phone and denying access to the facility phone. C1’s Service Coordinator reported that the cell phone, leased by C1’s father, was intended to be used by the facility as a motivational tool to encourage C1 to stay on task. LPA’s interview with C1 revealed they had not been in the mood to get out of bed for several days and were unsure of the reason. Additionally, C1 revealed they were not on task to use the cellphone, Services Coordinator added there were three days when C1 was just in bed refusing to get out of bed and believes C1 is referring to that time when C1’s dad would have been informed and tried to get C1 out of bed by offering the phone if C1 would get out of bed first. LPA’s review of the conservatorship documents and the telephone agreement between C1 and their father confirmed that C1 had willfully entered an arrangement requiring them to stay on task (such as chores and personal hygiene) in exchange for cell phone use. The Administrator denied the allegation and stated they remained in contact with C1’s father and did not prevent C1 from contacting him. Interview with staff acknowledge they use the cell phone as a technique to motivate C1 to assist in their care but deny they would outright refuse the cell phone if C1 would ultimately deny a task. According to staff and the Administrator, C1 is permitted to use their personal cell phone to speak with their parents, as well as the facility phone. Furthermore, the administrator stated they use the “this-then-that” approach to motivate C1 to participate in self-care tasks. Based on LPA's record review and interviews with clients and staff, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time.

Allegation: Staff did not follow reporting requirements. It was alleged that a staff informed a lead staff member about C1’s protective glove being forcefully removed by staff. LPA's interview with lead staff members denied the allegation. The LPA’s interview with the Administrator clarified that staff were not referring to a sleeve related incident but had raised concerns regarding client dignity. The Administrator explained that lead staff are trained to provide additional information or guidance to staff and would have elevated any significant concerns. According to the Administrator, the concerns raised by staff were not reportable to Community Care Licensing. LPA was unable to corroborate the allegation regarding the sleeve being forcibly removed therefore, based on LPAs interviews with clients and staff, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time.

No citation(s) were issued. An exit interview was conducted. A copy of this report issued.

SUPERVISORS NAME: Nichelle Gillyard
LICENSING EVALUATOR NAME: Evelin Rios
LICENSING EVALUATOR SIGNATURE:	DATE: 02/03/2026

I acknowledge receipt of this form and understand my licensing appeal rights as explained and received.

FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE:

DATE: 02/03/2026

LIC9099 (FAS) - (06/04)

Page: 3 of 3