128 Erten Street, Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Faith Manor Costs & Pricing
Faith Manor offers competitive pricing for its accommodations when compared to both Ventura County and the broader California market. For a semi-private room, Faith Manor charges $3,000 per month, which is notably below the county's average of $3,438 and also lower than the state average of $3,333. Similarly, for a private room, Faith Manor's rate of $4,000 remains economical compared to Ventura County's average of $4,082 and California's overall average of $3,939. This pricing structure positions Faith Manor as an attractive option for those seeking quality care at a more accessible cost in comparison to regional standards.
| Floor plans | Faith Manor | Ventura County | California |
|---|---|---|---|
| Semi-Private | $3,000 | $3,438 | $3,333 |
| Private | $4,000 | $4,082 | $3,939 |
Assisted Living communities with a similar price nearby
Overall Review of Faith Manor
Cons
The reviews describe numerous horrible experiences that are hard to detail.
They allege dangerous lifting of patients.
Family members are allegedly banned from seeing the resident.
The owner is accused of making unsubstantiated threats.
There is a lack of communication and updates from caregivers, including the nurse and owner.
A bait-and-switch fee was not disclosed until the last minute.
The on-call nurse is deemed useless and non-communicative.
Loved onesā records are reportedly not accessible upon request.
Insults and non-adherence to POA documents are alleged.
The reviews cite many more infractions.
Review
Faith Manor in Thousand Oaks is not a fit for the typical assisted-living resident. It is best suited for a highly specific, demanding family situation: a resident whose care needs are minimal and whose guardian or family can and will aggressively enforce safety, rights, and billing practices. In practical terms, this means families that can maintain constant oversight, demand transparent communication, and contest decisions and charges as a standard operating rhythm. For nearly any senior who needs reliable daily support, predictable oversight, and respectful, open engagement with staff, this community should be avoided.
Those considering alternatives should focus on facilities with proven governance, clear lines of accountability, and documented responsiveness to family requests. Prospective buyers should prioritize transparent pricing, routine updates, easy access to resident records, and strict adherence to powers of attorney. Look for visible staff continuity, measurable safety practices, and a licensing history that shows consistent compliance. In short, seek a community where care quality and resident rights are publicly demonstrated rather than assumed.
The single documented experience paints a stark picture of risk. Major concerns cluster around safety and dignity: dangerous lifting of residents, which implies potential direct harm; arbitrary bans on family visitation and restricted access to records; and threats from leadership that lack credibility or accountability. Communication breakdowns, no regular updates from caregivers, nurses, or the owner, leave families guessing and unable to protect loved ones in real time. Fee practices described as bait-and-switch, disclosed only at the last minute, undermine trust and raise ongoing questions about financial integrity. Together, these factors create a dangerous environment where basic protections for residents and their families are not reliably in place.
On balance, there are no clearly identified advantages in the available information that would meaningfully offset these significant negatives. The absence of constructive, verifiable positives, such as consistent staffing, proactive safety protocols, transparent billing, or respectful governance, means the risk calculus heavily favors alternatives. Even if routine nursing care or general amenities are present in any facility, the reported experiences suggest those elements are overshadowed by governance failures, poor communication, and rights violations. In decision-making terms, the negatives vastly outnumber any potential upsides.
For families evaluating this community, a disciplined decision path is essential. Schedule in-person tours with an emphasis on direct observation of lifting assistance, care deliveries, and staff interactions with residents. Request current and past incident reports, detailed care plans, and a written promise to honor POA directives. Demand a copy of the full fee schedule, including any anticipated increases, and insist on a clear process for fee disputes. Speak with multiple staff members and, if possible, current residents or their families about everyday operations. Before any commitment, verify licensing history with the state and ask for explicit examples of how resident rights have been protected in practice.
The verdict is clear: Faith Manor is not recommended for families seeking a safe, transparent, and resident-centered environment. Alternatives with stronger governance, consistent communication, and robust protections for resident rights should be the default path. If care decisions must be made quickly, pivot toward communities with verifiable safety records, open records policies, and a demonstrated commitment to POA compliance. The right choice will prioritize clear accountability, respectful treatment, and unwavering access to information for families monitoring a loved oneās well-being.












Beyond the Bingo Hall: 50+ Enriching Activities for Seniors in Assisted Living
Understanding the Distinctions: Assisted Living and Memory Care Explained
Guiding Elderly Parents Who Refuse Assisted Living: 6 Practical Steps