505 Hills Lane Drive, El Cajon, CA 92020
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Noble Living II Costs & Pricing
Noble Living II offers competitive pricing for its residents, particularly when compared to the broader market in both San Diego County and the state of California. For semi-private accommodations, monthly costs range from $4,200 to $4,300, which is noticeably higher than the county average of $3,518 and the state average of $3,333. Similarly, the cost for private rooms at Noble Living II stands at $4,700 - significantly exceeding both San Diego County's and California's consistent rate of $3,939. While these prices reflect a premium offering that may include enhanced services or amenities associated with Noble Living II, potential residents should carefully consider how these costs align with their needs and budget compared to other options in the region.
| Floor plans | Noble Living II | San Diego County | California |
|---|---|---|---|
| Semi-Private | $4,200 to $4,300 | $3,518 | $3,333 |
| Private | $4,700 | $3,939 | $3,939 |
Memory care communities with a similar price nearby
-
from +$350 / mo
Champine Manor
$4,550 / month24.9 miles away -
from -$700 / mo
Ramona Senior Lodge Assisted Living
$3,500 to $5,500 / month14.5 miles away -
from -$400 / mo
The Rose of Poway
$3,800 to $4,200 / month12.8 miles away -
About the same
Summerfield of Encinitas Memory Care
$4,295 to $4,895 / month22.4 miles away -
from +$750 / mo
Stellar Care
$4,950 / month6.3 miles away
Overall Review of Noble Living II
Cons
The place should be shut down.- Nobody cares and nobody oversees the staff who work there.
- Some staff bully the patients.
- Water is withheld from patients to avoid changing diapers, and patients are treated differently when the family isn’t present.
- Patrons pay a lot for caregivers who are incompetent and for a greedy owner.
Review
This community is best suited for residents who are largely independent or for families who can provide constant, hands-on supervision. In practice, any elder who relies on staff for basic daily care, hydration, timely diaper changes, respectful interaction, will not be well served here. The reality described suggests that only a vigilant, on-site family presence can prevent ongoing neglect, manipulation, or mistreatment. For anyone without a dedicated advocate on site, the risk is substantial. The blunt takeaway is that Noble Living II rewards oversight and advocacy far more than it rewards residents’ well-being; without that ongoing monitoring, conditions deteriorate quickly.
The core drawbacks overwhelm any conceivable benefit. The reviewed experience paints a picture of neglect, bullying, and disregard for basic comfort and safety. Water can be withheld to avoid care tasks, and residents appear targets for mistreatment, with a leadership stance that prioritizes profit over people. This combination creates immediate safety concerns, dehydration, skin problems, unaddressed medical needs, and long-term trust issues that irreversibly undermine daily life. The absence of credible accountability means problems persist, escalate, and remain hidden until consequences manifest, turning what should be a calm home into a precarious environment.
Any potential positives fail to offset the principal failures. If there are any redeeming factors, such as a convenient location, familiar routines, or occasional orderly days, they are dwarfed by a culture of neglect and coercion. Paying a premium for care that is inconsistent at best and actively harmful at worst makes the overall value proposition unacceptable. The financial cost becomes a poor bargain when resident welfare is not reliably protected, and the sense of security families seek is absent. In short, there is no meaningful return on investment when care quality is episodic, or worse, hostile.
For families weighing options, this facility clearly signals alternatives should be pursued when a resident needs reliable, compassionate care. Look for communities with transparent staffing patterns, strong on-site supervision, and explicit safeguarding policies against mistreatment. During visits, assess how staff interact with residents, how quickly needs are addressed, and whether residents are clean, hydrated, and properly supervised. Review state inspection records and any independent quality metrics, and insist on meeting caregivers and the administrator. Demand clear care plans, real-time updates, and escalation procedures. If anything about the atmosphere feels evasive or punitive, move on.
Those most at risk are residents who cannot advocate for themselves or who depend on others to monitor quality. Anyone prioritizing dignity, respect, and dependable care should immediately prioritise alternatives with proven staffing stability and governance. The pattern described, neglect, intimidation, and profit-driven management, leaves little room for trust. Avoid relying on occasional good days or surface-level order; treat these as red flags indicating deeper, systemic problems. A community that permits water denial and bullying will erode health, autonomy, and peace of mind, making the safest choice clear: seek a setting with verifiable commitment to resident welfare.
Bottom-line guidance is decisive: Noble Living II does not meet the needs of most seniors requiring consistent, respectful care. The repeated reports of neglect and coercive behavior vastly outweigh any supposed convenience, and the risk to resident health and safety is unacceptable. For families, the prudent course is to pursue facilities with demonstrable safety records, transparent governance, and active resident advocacy. Build a shortlist around communities with strong staffing commitments, patient-centered cultures, and reliable oversight. If staying with this option is unavoidable, execute rigorous supervisory protocols, insist on immediate escalation for every concern, and document every care interaction meticulously. In practical terms, prioritize a setting that treats residents as people first, with clear boundaries, accountability, and unwavering protection of well-being.
6 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Board and Care Home
Memory Care
Activities on-site
Cable or satellite TV
Dining room
Fully furnished
Garden
Housekeeping services
Indoor common areas
Move-in coordination
Outdoor common areas
Private
Private bathrooms
Respite or short term stays offered
Swimming pool / hot tub
Telephone
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
San Diego International-Lindbergh (13 miles away)
24-hour supervision
Ambulatory care
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
High acuity care
Incontinence care
Meal preparation and service
Medication management
Special dietary restrictions
Transportation arrangement (medical)
Transportation to doctors appointments
BBQs or picnics
Birthday parties
Excellent access to nearby amenities and healthcare.
22 Remarkable Caregiver Support Groups Available Online and In-Person
Understanding Medicaid Coverage for Assisted Living: A Comprehensive Guide
How and When Medicaid May Cover Assisted Living Costs