Belmont Village Albany.
Belmont Village Albany is Ranked in the top 45% of California memory care with 9 CDSS citations on record; last inspected Jul 2025.




Large Memory Care Community in Downtown Albany, reviewed on public record.

© Google Street View
Compared to 91 California facilities with a similar number of beds.
RCFE memory care · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better performance on inspection record. Source: California Dept. of Social Services · Community Care Licensing.
among peers to rank.
Rankings based on 36-month CDSS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.
FACILITY WATCH · BETA
Belmont Village Albany has 9 citations on record. Know the moment anything changes.
New findings, complaint investigations, or status changes — emailed to you free.
Citation history, plotted month by month.
9 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
9 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
The rules that apply to this facility.
State requirements with the exact regulation citation, plain-language explanation, and a question to ask on tour. Rules this facility has been cited for appear first.
Plain language
Because a facility markets dementia or Alzheimer's care, state law mandates higher training standards: 12 hours of initial dementia training (6 hours before a staff member works independently with residents, 6 more within the first 4 weeks), 8 hours of annual dementia in-service every year thereafter, and an administrator must include 8 hours of dementia-specific continuing education in every 2-year recertification cycle. Training must cover individualized care plans, behavioral expressions, appropriate supervision, and the facility's dementia care philosophy.
Ask on tour
“Can you show me each direct-care staffer's most recent dementia training certificate, and tell me when their next refresher is due?”
Questions to ask before you visit.
A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Belmont Village Albany's record and state requirements.
State records show one Type A deficiency (actual harm) was cited—what was the nature of that citation, what harm occurred, and what corrective actions were implemented?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Twelve complaints have been filed with CDSS—how many were substantiated, what were the primary subjects, and what changes resulted from those investigations?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
With 225 licensed beds, what is the staff-to-resident ratio on overnight shifts, and how does staffing in the memory care units differ from assisted living areas?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
16 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.
2025-07-01Other VisitType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
During a routine annual inspection on July 3, 2024, inspectors found two medication and safety hazards: prescription injections and hydrogen peroxide left unlocked in a resident's bathroom, and cleaning supplies and medication tablets stored in the room of a resident with dementia who cannot manage their own medications. The facility was otherwise well-maintained with proper fire safety systems, appropriate temperatures, and accessible common areas. The facility must submit a correction plan to address these storage violations.
“Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above by not properly storing required locked items for R1 and R2 which poses an immediate health and safety risk to persons in care. POC Due Date: 07/01/2025 Plan of Correction 1 2 3 4 ED agreed to conduct in-service staff training, review R1's and R2's LIC 602, and submit proof of staff signatures to CCLD that staff reviewed the regulation.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 07/03/2024 around 10:00 AM, Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) L. Holmes and L. Alexander arrived announced to conduct a required annual inspection. LPAs met with Jesus Gonzalez, Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. The facility’s fire clearance was approved for 225 non-ambulatory, 50 may be bedridden and 20 are approved for hospice waivers. Upon entry and during the visit, residents were lounging in the facility including but not limited to the common areas, bistro, dining area and courtyard area. Residents reside in individual apartments and the facility's room temperature was measured at 70 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The hot water temperature was 112 degrees F; there are censored faucets in the residents' shared bathrooms. The facility has a central medication room that remains locked. First Aid kits were stored throughout the facility. Smoke/carbon monoxide detectors are combined with sprinkler system. Fire extinguisher was last serviced on 04/05/2025. Fire drills are performed monthly and an annual evacuation is performed in conjunction with the local police department. Lunch was served while at the facility. There was adequate lighting throughout the facility. Indoor and outdoor passages were free of obstruction. Emergency Disaster Drill was conducted on 06/12/2025. LPA reviewed seven (7) resident records and 5 staff records including admission agreements and clinical files. Continued on LIC 809C... 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 LIC809. -Around 11:30 AM, LPA L. Alexander observed Enoxaparian Sodium Injections and Hydrogen Peroxide unlocked in the cabinet underneath R1's bathroom sink. -Around 11:45 AM, LPA L. Alexander observed scissors, Spouts brand Multi-Use Cleaner, Meyer's brand disinfectant cleaner, and Acetaminophen 500 mg tablets in Room #323 for R2. (LIC602 indicates Dementia and unable to administer own medication) Based on information obtained and observed, a deficiency is cited from Title 22 California Code of Regulations and listed on LIC 9099D. Failure to submit proof of correction by plan of correction due date, and any repeat violations within a 12-month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted and copy of this report reviewed with Jesus Gonzalez, Executive Director
2025-06-06Other VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
On June 6, 2025, inspectors met with facility staff to review a death, two incident reports, and related case outcomes. The facility reported that two residents in memory care had a physical altercation while passing each other; both families were notified and there have been no further problems between them, and one resident now has one-on-one supervision. Staff also reported a potential abuse incident involving another resident on May 15, 2025, which was reported to authorities, the staff member was terminated on May 23, 2025, and in-service training was provided to staff on May 20, 2025—no violations were cited.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 06/06/25 around 09:40 AM, L. Holmes, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) arrived unannounced to conduct a case management for a Death Report, two (2) SOC341s and to discuss the outcomes. LPA met with Raquel Lozano, Business Office Manager (S1) and Ciara Flores, Memory Program Coordinator (S2); Jesus Gonzalez, Executive Director (ED) is not available at this time. During the visit LPA, S1 and S2 discussed Residents (R1, R2, R3, R4) LPA noted findings, ED to request a death certificate from the family and forward it to CCLD. S2 confirmed that R1 was not receiving hospice care and services. R3 and R4 resides in Memory Care (MC), the two grabbed each other while in passing which resulted in a physical altercation. Both families were notified, there has not been any addition problems between the two or complaints from the families. R3 currently has a personal one on one. S3 reported a potential incident of abuse that occurred on 05/15/25 against R2 from S4. The incident was self reported to CCLD, Empowered Aging and Albany Police Department via an SOC341. In service training provided to staff on 05/20/25. S4 was later terminated on 05/23/25. No deficiencies cited, exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Ciara Flores, Memory Program Director.
2025-02-10Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that a resident wasn't receiving adequate supervision and was falling as a result. Investigators reviewed the resident's medical records, care documentation, and staffing schedules from September through October 2024, and interviewed staff and management; while some falls did occur and were not all witnessed, the facility documented all falls, called 911 when needed, reported incidents to nursing staff, had adequate staffing levels, and provided staff training on fall prevention. The complaint could not be substantiated based on the evidence reviewed.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
continued from LIC9099. Facility staff are not providing resident with appropriate supervision, resulting in falls. For the allegation, LPA reviewed Resident’s (R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5) resident records including but not limited to UIRs, Physician’s Report (LIC602), Centrally Stored Medication Reports, Care Notes, the schedule for The Neighborhood/Memory Care from 09/2024 - 10/2024, and R1’s consent for SafelyYou fall reduction. LPA confirmed R1 was diagnosed with Osteoporosis disease, had experienced fractures, had a common condition of mobility impairment that included use of walker if needed, and Dementia. Interviews with ED, Witness #4 (W4),and Staff (S2, S5, S6) revealed that not all R1’s fall were witnessed; however, falls that were unwitnessed and witnessed were documented on a UIR, 911 was activated and SafelyYou immediately reported falls to the concierge and nurse on duty. The facility appeared to be sufficient in staff when LPA reviewed the schedule for 09/2024 0 10/2024. LPA reviewed and confirmed the facility’s latest in-service and training plan of correction for all staff dated 10/08/2024 and 12/20/2024. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED . No deficiencies are being cited during this visit, exit interview conducted, and a copy of this report provided to Raquel Lozano, Business Office Manager
2025-01-15Other VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
A licensing analyst visited on January 15, 2024 to investigate a complaint and two instances where residents left the facility without staff permission. In the first incident on November 19, 2024, a resident with a history of wandering exited through an alarmed back door but was found within five minutes; in the second on January 4, 2025, another resident left through the main entrance and was located at a nearby bus stop two minutes later. No violations were found.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 01/15/24 around 01:15 PM L. Holmes, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) arrived announced to conduct a case management for complaint 15-AS-20241007145119 received on 10/07//2024, and to discuss two (2) reported elopements. LPA met with Jesus Gonzalez, Executive Director (ED) and explained the purpose of the visit. During the visit LPA and ED discussed Resident #1 (R1's) admission history, and reviewed Safely You footage for the investigation on the of the above complaint. LPA noted findings, ED will forward emails related to the complaint, staff and resident roster. ED reported on 11/19/24, R2 resides in Assisted Living, (AL) exited an alarmed back door at the facility around 4:30 PM. The concierge and caregiver intercepted R2 after the alarm and camera detection by 04:35PM. R2 has exiting behaviors, MD and Responsible Party (RP) were notified. Ed reported on 01/04/25, R3 resides in AL, exited through the main entrance of the facility around 2:00 PM. A caregiver intercepted R3 at the bus stop in front of the facility at 2:02 PM. R2 doesn't have exiting behaviors, will be monitored, MD and RP's were notified. No deficiencies cited, exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was provided to ED.
2024-12-17Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found no violations of care standards. The family alleged the resident lost excessive weight, was not weighed regularly, did not receive timely medical care, and that staff did not communicate with family about health changes; however, records showed the resident was weighed weekly after a doctor requested it, pain medications were given as ordered, and hospice staff were present when the family visited on the day before the resident's death.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Page 2 Allegation: Resident (R1) lost a large amount of weight while in care. FM stated R1 lost 40 lbs while in facility’s care. Two of the 9 staff who provided care to R1 were interviewed. These 2 staff stated they noticed R1 losing weight but R1 at times refused to eat. When R1 refused to eat, they either changed the food, provide options or switch caregiver. Two facility LVNs and facility RN stated if resident lose weight they inform the resident’s primary care physician. Review of medical records showed that prior to R1’s passing away, R1 had appointments with medical professional of which FM brought up the issue of R1 losing weight; however, R1’s weight was not recorded due to the visits were virtual. On 4/07/21, the medical professional sent correspondence to the facility and requested to send R1’s weekly weight record. Weekly weight records from 4/05/21 to 7/23/21 ranged from 112 lbs to 120 lbs. LIC602A dated 5/04/21 showed R1 weight was 118 lbs. LPA was not able to interview R1 as R1 was no longer at the facility when complaint was received. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. Allegation: Facility did not contact resident's (R1) representative on status of resident's health. FM stated that on 8/03/21, day prior to R1 passing away, FM went to the facility and found R1 unresponsive with sunken cheeks and mouth open, and that the facility did not inform FM. Review of records showed that prior to R1’s death, facility’s hospice visit note dated 8/03/21 showed hospice agency staff were at the facility with FM. All 3 caregivers interviewed stated if there’s a change in resident’s condition, they inform the facility med-tech and/or nurse. All 4 facility nurses including Director of Resident Care Services (DRCS) stated they inform the resident’s family/responsible person and primary care physician (pcp) of the changes in resident’s conditions. DRCS also stated she conducts care conference with the resident's family and/or responsible person to discuss and let them know that she will contact the pcp. One of the facility nurse (S2) stated that if resident is on hospice and actively dying, they call hospice staff and resident's family to inform of the change in condition. Resident (R4) stated that the facility staff are good in providing update for him and his wife who is also a resident of the facility. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. .....continued on 9099C (page 3) 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 Page 3 Allegation: Facility did not adhere to the resident's care plan. FM stated that it is in the care plan that staff agreed to weigh R1 regularly, but this did not happen. FM also stated the staff were not giving R1 pain pills and that FM fought to have staff continue the pain management. All staff interviewed stated that residents in the Memory Care are weigh every month. R2’s husband stated that R2 is weighed every month. Review of R1 record showed that on 4/07/21, R1’s medical professional sent correspondence to the facility and requested to send R1’s weekly weight records. Records from 4/05/21 to 7/23/21 showed R1 was weighed once a week. Review of resident’s record showed there were changes over time in R1’s doctor’s order of pain medications and the medications were administered. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. Allegation: Resident did not receive medical care in a timely manner. FM stated that on 8/03/21 FM came to the facility and found R1 unresponsive, with sunken cheeks and mouth open. R1 was taken to the hospital and died on August 4, 2021. FM also stated that FM believes that R1 should have been taken to the hospital sooner. Review of records showed R1 was placed and admitted on hospice care on 7/02/21 due to advanced dementia and failure to thrive. Staff interviewed stated that if resident is on hospice and actively dying, they call the hospice agency unless the resident fall or sustained head trauma, 9-1-1 is called. Records showed R1 was visited by hospice on the following dates: 7/06/21 to 7/09/21; 7/14/21 to 7/23/21; 7/26/21 to 7/30/21; 8/03/21. Death Report showed R1 passed away on 8/04/21 and death certificate showed senile degeneration of the brain as cause of death. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has not been met, therefore the allegations are found to be unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means that although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred. Exit interview conducted and copy of this report provided.
2024-12-12Other VisitType B · 4 findings
Plain-language summary
This was a follow-up investigation into a complaint received in July 2024 regarding a resident who developed a stage 3 to 4 pressure wound and required emergency hospitalization at Alta Bates Medical Center in Berkeley. The facility failed to provide required medical documentation and incident reports to licensing when requested, did not notify the state of changes to the resident's hospice care plan, and did not give written notice when discontinuing private caregiver services that were part of the resident's care agreement. The facility has been cited for violations and must submit a plan to correct these issues.
“Based on interviews and records reviewed the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above by not abiding by R1's admission agreement which posed a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.”
“Based on interviews and records reviewed the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above by not providing R1's Initiation of Hospice notification and LIC602 to CCLD which posed a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.”
“87633 Hospice Care of Terminally Ill Residents (g) In addition to...Section 87211, Reporting Requirements... report...hospice services are interrupted or discontinued for any reason...any deviation from the resident’s hospice care plan, or other incident...- This requirement was not met as evidenced by:”
“Based on interviews and records reviewed the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above by not abiding by R1's admission agreement which posed a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 12/12/24 around 10:40 AM L. Holmes, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) arrived unannounced to conduct a case management for complaint #15-AS-20240716140724 received on 07/16/2024. LPA Jesus Gonzalez, Executive Director (ED) and explained the purpose of the visit. During the investigation of the above complaint, LPA interviewed ED, Staff (S1, S2, S3, S4, S5) Witnesses (W1, W2, W3, W4), obtained a resident roster, and requested the following for Resident #1 (R1): current Physician's Report, Admission Agreement, ID/Emergency Contact information, hospice care plan, care notes, incident reports, hospice notification, facility's regulations and documentation regarding Stage 3 and 4 pressure wounds, emails and/or written communications to R1's family regarding pressure wound injuries. -On 07/23/24, LPA requested R1’s Initiation of Hospice notification and Physician’s Report (LIC602) from S1. LPA requested the reports be provided to the Community Care Licensing Department (CCLD) by 07/30/2024 for preliminary review. The records weren’t provided to LPA during the investigation. -On 07/23/24, LPA requested R1’s Unusual Incident Reports (UIRs) from S1. R1 was transported to Alta Bates Medical Center in Berkeley for emergency services to treat a stage 3 to 4 pressure wound. Notification of deviation of R1’s hospice care plan on 07/14/24 was not provided to CCLD. Continued on LIC809C... 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 LIC809. -W1 and S5 confirmed that Private PALs were not available throughout the entire duration of R1’s admission agreement. The licensee did not provide any written notice (30 or 60 days) for the change in services noted below on pages 5, 10 and 30. Records and interviews revealed that W1 hired a private caregiver from 12/2022 to 07/2024 to aid in the care of R1. Page 5 II. Personal Assistance and Care “… Appendix A . We may change the scope and pricing of the services and our discretion upon sixty (60) days’ written notice to you. Page 10 C. Private PALs and Services from Home Health Agencies “To accommodate additional resident needs and preferences, we offer private care-giving and companion services for an additional fee as set forth in Appendix B ” Page 30. B. Termination by Us . (1) Upon (30) Days’ Notice . We may terminate this Agreement upon (30) days’ written and verbal notice to you and your personal representative if any of the following events occur: d. If, after admission, we determine that you have a need not previously identified and a reappraisal has been conducted pursuant to Section 87463 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, and we and the person who performs the reappraisal believe that the community is no longer appropriate for you. Deficiencies are cited from Title 22 California Code of Regulations and listed on LIC9099D. Failure to submit proof of correction by plan of correction due date, and any repeat violations within a 12-month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report and appeal rights were provided to ED.
2024-12-12Complaint InvestigationSubstantiatedType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A resident on hospice care was transported to a hospital for treatment of a severe pressure wound on July 14, 2024, and the facility refused to allow them to return afterward—without following the required process of consulting with the resident's Power of Attorney, the hospice agency, physician, and licensing authorities to determine if the resident could safely stay. The resident's family was not present for the decision and learned about the facility's refusal only after the fact, and the resident was ultimately placed at a different facility. The complaint was substantiated, and the facility was cited for violating regulations.
“Based on interviews and records reviewed, Licensee failed to ensure the facility sought joint determination before denying R1’s return to the facility after being released for treatment of emergency services which posed an immediate health and safety risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
...continued from LIC9099. Interviews conducted with the ED, S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, W1, W2, W3, & W4 confirmed that emergency services were initiated for R1 to be transported to Alta Bates Medical Center in Berkeley, CA for a stage 3 to 4 pressure wound. S2 stated that on July 14, 2024 a nurse’s aide (S4) called the paramedics, R1 was on hospice, under hospice care, and was being transported for 1st aid; W2 was present. W4 stated that W1 and W2 were blindsided; W1 and W2 did not know that the facility would not allow R1 to return after treatment of the wound on 07/14/24. W1, R1’s Power of Attorney (POA), was not present and was out of the country at that time. W4 further stated that S2 outright refused to accept R1 back to the facility although R1 was under the care of hospice. With the efforts of W4, R1 was successfully placed at another Residential Care for the Elderly (RCFE) in Pinole, CA with the services of Sutter VNAH Alameda Hospice. S2 did not seek counsel for joint determination from the Community Care Licensing Department (CCLD), the resident, R1’s Power of Attorney (POA), the hospice agency, physician, and licensee to determine that R1’s continued retention at the facility would pose a health and safety risk. Based on interviews and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence for the violation has been met; therefore, the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED . Deficiencies cited from Title 22 California Code of Regulations and listed on LIC9099D. Failure to submit proof of correction by plan of correction due date, and any repeat violations within a 12-month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report and appeal rights were provided to ED.
2024-10-08Other VisitType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
On October 8, 2024, licensing conducted an unannounced case management visit at this facility following reports of COVID-19 cases in August and early September 2024. The facility failed to report positive COVID-19 cases to the state licensing agency within the required 24-hour timeframe, and a violation was cited for this reporting failure. The facility was required to submit a plan to correct this violation.
“- This requirement is not met as evidence by: Based on investigation, licensee did not comply with the section cited above by notifying CCLD of the incident within 24 hours which poses a potential health and safety risk to the persons in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 10/08/24 around 10:35 AM Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) L. Holmes arrived unannounced to conduct a case management. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Jesus Gonzalez and explained the purpose of the visit. On 09/03/24, LPA L. Holmes received a call from LPA L. Fontanilla requesting COVID-19 status for Belmont Village Albany as a result of a UIR report presented to licensing. LPA L. Holmes requested that ED confirm the number of Staff & Residents that were COVID-19 positive and advised that both should be reported to CCLD as the facility becomes aware of the positive results. Through email, LPA was advised by ED that there were positive COVID-19 cases dated from 08/23/24 - 09/02/24 along with a spreadsheet. During the visit, ED provided LPA with a facsimile and Unusual/Incident Reports (UIRs). LPA advised ED of the regulatory guidelines for reporting infectious diseases within 24 hours. Based on information obtained a deficiency is cited from Title 22 California Code of Regulations and listed on LIC 9099D. Failure to submit proof of correction by plan of correction due date, and any repeat violations within a 12-month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted, appeal rights, and copy of this report provided to Executive Director (ED) Jesus Gonzalez.
2024-09-26Complaint InvestigationUnsubstantiatedNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that residents reported staff respond promptly to call buttons during overnight shifts, assist with personal care needs like diaper changes multiple times per shift, treat residents respectfully, and use safety signs when mopping floors. Interviews with both residents and staff did not support the allegations of neglect, mistreatment, or unsafe conditions. No violations were found.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Residents are being neglected during overnight shift while in care Interview with residents revealed that staff would always respond to call buttons. R1 stated that overnight staff would come and check on R1 and pendent response time varies. Interview with staff indicated that if one staff cannot respond to call button, then another staff would get the call and would respond to the call button. Staff are not meeting the needs of the residents Interview with residents indicated that staff are good about assisting residents with ADL (Activities of Daily Living) care. R1 stated that staff assist with diaper changes and would always get help from staff. Interview with staff revealed that residents are checked for incontinence care at the beginning and end of each shift. S4 stated residents diaper changes are about 2-3 times per shift, but some residents are checked more frequent. Staff are yelling and mistreating residents Interview with residents revealed that staff are nice to residents and have not witnessed staff yell or scream at residents. R8 stated that staff treats resident well. Staff are placing residents in an unsafe environment Interview with residents and staff revealed that when staff mop the floors, there are yellow triangle signs that is put up warning of wet floors. Staff stated these signs are available at each floor for staff to put on the floor after mopping the floors. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did occur, therefore these allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED . No deficiencies are being cited on this date. Exit interview conducted with Ciara Flores. A copy of this report provided.
2024-08-20Other VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
On August 20, 2024, a state licensing analyst arrived unannounced to investigate an unusual incident report involving a resident's bowel movements. The facility's director confirmed the resident lives in independent housing where staff do not routinely track such matters, and said the facility would follow up with the resident and their spouse to address the concern. No violations were found.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 08/20/24 around 02:25 PM L. Holmes, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), arrived unannounced to conduct a case management for an Unusual Incident/Injury Report (UIR) for Resident #1 (R1). LPA met with with Carol Blackwell, Director of Resident Care Services (S2) and Erik Holzherr, Assistant Executive Director (AED). LPA explained the purpose of the visit. Upon interviewing S2 regarding R1's bowel movements, S2 immediately knew who R1 was and stated that R1 resides in an Independent Living (IL) unit and that the caregivers would not normally keep record of the IL residents' bowel movements. Now that the facility is aware, there will be some follow-up conversations with R1 and R1's spouse to aid with R1's condition. AED confirmed that the UIR was sent to CCLD and was aware of the incident as Assisted Living (AL) and IL support both sides. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted and copy of this report provided to Erik Holzherr, Assistant Executive Director (AED).
2024-08-20Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
On August 20, 2024, a licensing analyst visited Belmont Village Albany to review the case of a resident who fell on August 5, 2024 and sustained a severe hip and femur fracture, resulting in his transfer to a skilled nursing facility for specialized care that the memory care facility could not provide. The analyst confirmed that the facility had properly initiated the required 30-day notice to the resident's representative and was working with the family to coordinate the transition and arrange for removal of personal belongings. No violations were found.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 08/20/24 around 02:25 PM L. Holmes, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), arrived unannounced to conduct a case management for the recent diagnoses and relocation of Resident #1 (R1). LPA met with Jesus Gonzalez, Executive Director (ED) and Carol Blackwell, Director of Resident Care Services (S2). LPA explained the purpose of the visit. W1 email the following information to CCLD. R1 is a resident at Belmont Village Albany (BVA) and was admitted to the Highland Hospital in Oakland, CA after a fall at BVA during the night on 08/05/24. R1 has a severe fracture to the femur and hip area, and given his age, has decided not to receive treatment to repair the injury. R1 is expected to be completely bed-bound and receiving only pain and comfort medications. He is currently in a short-term skilled nursing facility (SNF), Richmond Post Acute. R1 require 24-7 care for his remaining time; R1 also has multiple other health conditions. The Unusual Incident/Injury Report (UIR) states that the incident occurred on 08/06/24 around 10:40 PM. W1 stated that in order to waive the 30-day termination notice requirement in the agreement, BVA is requiring a "health condition relocation order" from the Department of Social Services. Per Title 22 Division 6 Chapter 8 Article 11 Health-Related Services and Conditions, 87637 Health Condition Relocation Order is not initiated by R1 or W1 and the onus is on the licensee to follow the regulations. Given R1's current health condition and situation, LPAand ED discussed the options available to R1 and W1; R1 is currently at a SNF. ED stated that the 30-day notice had been activated by W1 and that he/she is willing to work with W1. LPA confirmed with Erik Holzherr, Assistant Executive Director (AED) that even if R1 is not returning to the facility, W1 would need to make arrangements to remove R1's personal belongings from the unit in order for maintenance to begin renovations and for BVA to retain a possible new resident. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted and copy of this report provided to AED.
2024-08-06Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation was conducted at this facility, and the allegations were found to be unfounded—meaning they were not substantiated by the evidence. No violations were identified. An exit interview was held with the complainant and a copy of the findings was provided.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Continued from LIC9099. This agency has investigated the complaint and have found that the complaint was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.
2024-07-03Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
A licensing inspector conducted a routine annual inspection on July 3, 2024, and found the facility in compliance with state requirements for fire safety, building maintenance, medication storage, and resident living conditions. The inspector reviewed resident and staff records, observed residents in common areas, and confirmed that fire drills are performed monthly with annual evacuation exercises conducted with local police. No violations were identified.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 07/03/2024 around 12 :30 PM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) L. Holmes arrived unannounced to conduct a required annual inspection. LPA met with Erik Holzherr, Assistant Executive Director (AED) and explained the purpose of the visit. The facility’s fire clearance was approved for 225 non-ambulatory, 50 may be bedridden and 20 are approved for hospice waivers. Upon entry and during the visit, residents were lounging in the facility including but not limited to the common areas, bistro, and courtyard area. The facility has a central medication room that remains locked. First Aid kits are stored throughout the facility. Smoke/carbon monoxide detectors are combined with sprinkler system. Fire extinguisher was last serviced on 05/16/2024. Fire drills are performed monthly and an annual evacuation is performed in conjunction with the local police department. Lunch was served while at the facility. Residents reside in individual apartments and the hot water temperature was a comfortable temperature with the censored faucet in the residents' shared bathroom. There was adequate lighting throughout the facility. Indoor and outdoor passages were free of obstruction. Last fire drill was conducted on 06/2024. LPA reviewed ten (10) resident records and 5 staff records. LPA also reviewed a sample of residents' clinical files. Exit interview conducted and copy of this report reviewed with Erik Holzherr, Assistant Executive Director.
2024-02-27Other VisitType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A licensing official conducted an unannounced visit on February 27, 2024 to investigate an incident where a resident who requires assistance to leave the facility was found walking back through the front door, having exited through an unsecured rear door without staff knowledge. Staff were unable to identify how or when the resident left, and the facility was cited for failing to ensure the resident could not leave unassisted. The facility was required to submit a plan of correction to address this exit security deficiency.
“Based on LPAs interviews and record review the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above in supporting R1's needs, which poses a potential health and safety risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 2/27/2024, at 10:00am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) L. Hall conducted an unannounced Case Management visit regarding an incident that was reported to CCLD on 2/14/2024. LPA met with Executive Director, Jesus Gonzalez and explained the purpose of the visit. The incident report received stated that Resident 1 (R1) was observed walking back into the community through the front door by the concierge. Record review of R1's physician's report dated 3/21/2023, indicated that R1 is not able to leave the facility unassisted. Staff 2 (S2) stated that staff checked cameras and did not catch her leaving, but there are exits where a PIN code is not needed and staff assume R1 left through rear door. LPA obtained a copy of the staff roster, resident roster, Resident 1 (R1) physician's report and progress notes for the month of February during the visit. Deficiency is cited per Title 22 California Code of Regulations and listed on LIC809D. Failure to submit proof of corrections (POC) by plan of correction due date and/or any repeat deficiencies within a 12-month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted. A copy of appeal rights and this report was provided.
2023-11-30Complaint InvestigationMixedType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
This was a complaint investigation that found mixed results. The facility was found to have violated staffing regulations, but inspectors could not substantiate allegations about unqualified staff, inadequate hygiene care, or cleanliness—some because staff interviews showed proper procedures were in place, and others because inspectors lacked sufficient evidence to confirm or deny the claims.
“Based on observation on 7/22/22, Licensee did not comply with the regulation cited above by not physically distancing residents in accordance to PIN 21-49-ASC and local public health guidance. AGPA and LPA observed 5 residents on wheel chairs in one round dining table in memory care which poses a potential health and safety risk to persons in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Based on AGPA and LPAs observations and interviews which were conducted and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED . California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8), is being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Exit interview conducted. Appeal Rights and a copy of this report provided to Executive Director. 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 It was alleged facility failed to provide adequate staffing levels. However, based on interview with staff, if a staff is unable to report to work, then residents assigned to that staff will be distributed to the staff that are scheduled to work. S3 and S4 stated that caregivers in assisted living would assist in memory care if needed to. It was alleged there are unqualified staff working at facility. However, AGPA reviewed a sample of staff records on 7/20/23 and observed staff had completed the required training. It was alleged resident was left in soiled diaper and bedding at an extended period of time. Interview with 5 staff revealed that residents are checked every 2 hours or as needed. S4 stated most caregivers are familiar with the residents that staff are assigned to and how frequently those assigned residents needs to be checked. AGPA attempted to interview 3 residents, but AGPA was unable to obtain additional information. AGPA was unable to prove or disprove allegation. It was alleged facility is not kept clean. However, interview with staff revealed that dining room tables are cleaned after every meal. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there are not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED . Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided to Executive Director.
2023-07-20Other VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
An unannounced annual inspection was conducted on July 20, 2023, and the facility passed without any violations. Inspectors found the building well-maintained with adequate lighting and temperature control, functioning safety equipment including smoke detectors and fire extinguishers, clean bathrooms and hand-washing stations, and current staff clearances and resident records.
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 07/20/2023 at 09:40 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) L. Holmes and Associate Governmental Program Analyst (AGPA) L. Francisco conducted an unannounced annual inspection. LPA/AGPA met with Tamra Marie Tsanos, Executive Director (ED) and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA L. Holmes toured the facility with (ED) who currently holds a certificate (#604 9144740) that expires on 05/07/24. The facility’s fire clearance was approved for two hundred twenty-five (225) non-ambulatory residents; fifty (50) may be bedridden. Upon arrival, LPA observed one (1) staff attending the receptionist desk, and two families visiting in the facility's common area. LPA, ED, and two (2) staff members toured the facility, including but not limited to, common areas, wellness center, library, bathrooms, kitchen, dining room(s), medication room/nursing station, front area and courtyard(s). The facility consists of individual apartments housed by the residents and has a monitored unit for memory care (The neighborhood). All outdoor and indoor passageways were free of obstruction. There were no bodies of water present. A comfortable temperature was maintained at 71 degrees Fahrenheit (F). LP A observed lighting in all areas to be adequate for the comfort and safety of the residents. The hot water temperature was measured at 111.2 degrees (F). All shared restrooms, hand washing, and bathing areas were safe, sanitary and in operating condition. Hand washing signs, paper towels, and soap observed at all hand washing stations. Linen and hygiene products are available for all residents. PPE, sanitizer, and paper goods remain sufficient. ...continued on LIC9099C. 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. Smoke detectors and carbon monoxide were in operating condition during visit. Fire extinguisher was observed full and serviced 04/06/23. Emergency Disaster Plan is updated. Safety drills were last conducted 06/2023 and are rotational between AM and PM schedules monthly. AGPA reviewed five (5) staff records, and all staff have criminal record clearances. Five (5) residents records were reviewed and are complete. No deficiencies cited during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided to ED.
8 older inspections from 2021 are not shown in the free view.
8 older inspections from 2021 are not shown in the free view.
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
More options in neighboring cities
Licensed memory care in other cities within this county region — useful when your search radius crosses city limits.