Merrill Gardens at Gilroy
RCFE · Memory Care
A Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) is a non-medical residential care home licensed by California CDSS under Health & Safety Code §1560. Residents receive help with daily living activities such as bathing, dressing, and medication management. An RCFE with a Memory Care designation is additionally required by California Title 22 (§87705 and §87706) to provide specialized staff training in dementia care, individualized care plans for residents with cognitive impairment, and appropriate supervision protocols — requirements that go beyond a standard RCFE license.
7610 Isabella Way · Gilroy, 95020
Quick facts
Quality snapshot
Updated April 25, 2026Compared to 33 California RCFE memory care facilities of similar size, over the last 36 months.
Source: California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division. View raw inspection records →
Quality grade· click to show how this was calculated
Severity19thWeighted citations per bed
Repeats100thRepeat deficiencies as share of total
Frequency38thDeficiencies per inspection
Tick mark at 50% = peer median · higher percentile = better facility
Quality grade· click to show how this was calculated
Weighted citations per bed
Repeat deficiencies as share of total
Deficiencies per inspection
Tick mark at 50% = peer median · higher percentile = better facility
Merrill Gardens at Gilroy scores C. Better than 52% of comparable California RESIDENTIAL CARE ELDERLY facilities. Severity: bottom 19%. Repeats: top 0%. Frequency: 38th percentile.
Each metric is converted to a 0–100 percentile within the peer set (higher = better). The composite grade averages all four. Peer set: CA / rcfe_memory_care / xl beds (33 facilities).
Citation severity over time
↓ improvingWeighted severity score per month · 24 months
Weighted score (24mo)
135
Last citation
Sep 25
Finding distribution
17 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
The rules that apply to this facility
California Title 22 requirements for this facility, with the specific regulation and a suggested question for each.Rules this facility has been cited for are shown first.
What dementia-care training must staff complete?Cited Sep 202222 CCR §87705 / HSC §1569.625
Because this facility markets dementia or Alzheimer's care, state law mandates higher training standards:
- 12 hours initial dementia training — 6 hours before a staff member works independently with residents, 6 more within the first 4 weeks.
- 8 hours annual dementia in-service — required every year thereafter.
- Administrator CE — the 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: Ask how dementia training records are kept — families may request documentation.
What must this facility report to the state — and how fast?Cited May 202422 CCR §87211 / WIC §15630
- ImmediateElopement, fire, epidemic outbreak, or poisoningImmediately
- 2 hoursAbuse with serious bodily injury2-hour phone report + 2-hour written report — to the California Department of Social Services (CDSS), Adult Protective Services, and law enforcement
- 24 hrsAbuse without serious bodily injuryWithin 24 hours
- Next dayDeath of a residentPhone by next working day; written within 7 days
- Next dayInjury requiring medical treatment beyond first aidPhone by next working day; written within 7 days
- WrittenBankruptcy, foreclosure, eviction, or utility shutoff noticeWritten notice to CDSS and residents — $100/day penalty (max $2,000) for failure
Your enforcement lever:Incidents that aren't reported on time are themselves a separate violation. If you believe a reportable event wasn't filed, you can submit a complaint directly to the California Department of Social Services (CDSS).
How many staff must be on duty overnight?22 CCR §87415
Based on 214 licensed beds:
1 awake caregivers on duty overnight, one on-call caregiver physically on premises, and one additional on-call caregiver.
State law adds one awake caregiver for each 100 residents above 200.
Violation pattern to watch for:A facility that documents a staff member as "on call" but with that person physically off-site — when the law requires on-premises presence — is in violation of this section.
Ask on tour: Ask the facility to walk you through their overnight staffing plan and confirm whether on-call staff are on premises or off-site.
What health conditions can this facility legally accept or refuse?22 CCR §87612–87615
Restricted — allowed with physician order + care plan
- Supplemental oxygen
- Insulin and injectable medications
- Indwelling or intermittent catheters
- Colostomy / ileostomy
- Stage 1 and Stage 2 pressure injuries
- Wound care (non-complex)
- Incontinence
- Contractures
Prohibited — facility must refuse or discharge
- Stage 3 or Stage 4 pressure injuries
- Feeding tubes (PEG, NG, or J-tube)
- Tracheostomies
- Active MRSA or communicable infections requiring isolation
- 24-hour skilled nursing needs
- Total ADL dependence with inability to communicate needs
A hospice waiver (HSC §1569.73) can allow continued care for residents on hospice who would otherwise fall into a prohibited category.
Ask on tour: Ask whether your loved one's specific care needs are restricted or prohibited, and what the facility's process is if needs change after admission.
How does CDSS enforce these rules?22 CCR §87755–87777 / HSC §1569.58
- 1Notice of DeficiencyWritten citation with a correction deadline. Facility must submit a Plan of Correction.
- 2Civil PenaltyStarts at $50/day for non-serious; $150/day for serious deficiencies — immediately, with no grace period. Repeats escalate to $150 first day + $50/day, then $1,000 first day + $100/day.
- 3Suspension of AdmissionsFacility cannot accept new residents until violations are corrected.
- 4Temporary Suspension or RevocationEmergency suspension for imminent danger; full revocation after administrative hearing.
- 5Exclusion OrderAdministrator and operator can be barred from all CDSS-licensed facilities — not just this one.
See how these rules have been applied to this specific facility:
View state inspection record and citationsState records
California Dept. of Social Services · Community Care Licensing- License number
- 435202806
- License type
- RESIDENTIAL CARE ELDERLY
- License status
- LICENSED
- License expires
- Not yet indexed
- Licensed beds
- 214
- Operator
- Mg at Gilroy, Lp ; Shi-iv Merrill Gp, Llc ; Merril
Inspections & citations
47
reports on file
23
total deficiencies
17
Type A (actual harm)
1
dementia-care citations
Other visitFebruary 24, 2026No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
An unannounced compliance check was conducted to verify the facility was following its corrective action plan from a June 2024 non-compliance meeting. The inspector toured the memory care and assisted living units, reviewed resident and staff files, confirmed required training was completed, and found that medication cabinets were properly secured with no hazardous chemicals accessible to residents with dementia. No violations were found, and the facility will continue to be monitored for the next two years to ensure ongoing compliance.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Steve Chang conducted an unannounced case management – legal/non-compliance visit. LPA met with General Manager (GM), Billy Mitchell. The purpose of the visit is to ensure the facility is adhering to the compliance plan submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL) office at a non-compliance meeting held on June 13, 2024. During visit, LPA toured the facility with staff to include Garden House ( memory care unit), Plaza, common areas. There are 2 Med Techs and 4 caregivers in Assist Living for AM shift and PM shift. There are 4 caregivres and 1 Med Tech for Memory Care unit for AM shift and PM shift. LPA reviewed the facility's roster and observed the 11 staff members are associated to the facility. In Garden House, LPA randomly entered into rooms #101A, #100, #102A, #101B, #103, #104 and #106A with GM. All the cabinets observed secured. No observation of accessible sharp objects, chemicals, disinfectants, and hygiene products to residents in care with dementia. In Plaza, LPA randomly entered into rooms #227, #226, #225, #223, #222, $216, #214 with GM. No issues were noted. Residents who store their own chemicals, disinfectants and hygiene products are able to store these items per their physician's report/records. Continue on LIC809-C. Page 1 of 2. 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 LPA observed all training topics stated on the non-compliance plan was completed with signature log - fall policy; resident rights, toxic chemicals, and fire & alarms; and change of condition and mandated reporting. 5 random resident files were reviewed and observed complete. 5 resident files contained a signed personal rights form, updated physician’s report, and a signed updated appraisal/needs and services plan. 5 random staff files were reviewed. 5 staff are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. LPA advised GM regarding the importance of adhering to the facility's corrective action plan that was developed on June 13, 2024, to ensure the facility's stays within compliance of Title 22 regulation. GM was reminded of the discussion on June 13, 2024 of the facility being under monitoring inspection visits to ensure compliance with the compliance plan and Title 22 Regulations for 2 years. No deficiencies were cited today. This report was reviewed with General Manager Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
InspectionNovember 6, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
An inspector conducted a follow-up visit on June 13, 2025 to verify that the facility was following a compliance plan from a prior non-compliance meeting. The inspector toured the memory care and other areas, reviewed staff and resident files, confirmed required training was completed, and found no violations.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Manuel Monter arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – legal/non-compliance visit. LPA met with General Manager (GM), Billy Mitchell. The purpose of the visit to ensure the facility is adhering to the compliance plan submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL) after a non-compliance meeting held on June 13, 2024. During visit, LPA toured the facility with staff to include garden house (aka memory care), plaza, common areas. There were 7 staff members total on schedule during the AM shift in the Garden House. LPA reviewed the facility's roster on Guardian and observed the 14 staff members are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. In Garden House, LPA randomly entered into rooms 127, 126B, 126A, 125B, 120, 115A and 101A with the Garden House Director. All the cabinets observed secured. No observation of accessible sharp objects, chemicals, disinfectants, and hygiene products to residents in care with dementia. In Plaza, LPA randomly entered into rooms 304, 302, 203, 202, 209, 211 with the GM. No issues were noted. Residents who store their own chemicals, disinfectants and hygiene products are able to store these items per their physician's report/records. Page 1 Out of 2. 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 LPA observed all training topics stated on the non-compliance plan was completed on September 17, 2025 - fall policy; September 13, 2025 - resident rights, toxic chemicals, and fire & alarms; and September 15, 2025 - change of condition and mandated reporting. 5 random resident files were reviewed and observed complete. 5 resident files contained a signed personal rights form, updated physician’s report, and a signed updated appraisal/needs and services plan. 5 random staff files were reviewed. 5 staff are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. LPA advised GM regarding the importance of adhering to the facility's corrective action plan that was developed on June 13, 2024, to ensure the facility's stays within compliance of Title 22 regulation. GM was reminded of the discussion on June 13, 2024 of the facility being under frequent monitoring inspection visits to ensure compliance with the compliance plan and Title 22 Regulations for 2 years. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 Out of 2. END OF REPORT.
Other visitSeptember 25, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
This was the facility's required annual inspection on September 25, 2025, and no violations were found. The inspector noted that the main elevator was temporarily out of order (doors would not close automatically) but the facility had a technician evaluate it the same day, trained staff to operate it manually, and made accommodations including in-room dining and stairwell access with evacuation equipment available. The inspector also observed that hot water temperatures were initially too high but a plumber was actively reducing them during the visit, and all other areas—including food storage, medication management, staff training, emergency preparedness, and resident rooms—met requirements.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Kabariti arrived unannounced to conduct the facility's required - 1 year annual inspection. LPA met with General Manager (GM) Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director (HSD), Jocelyn Bailon Saloche. During visit, LPA toured the facility with the HSD to include the common areas, kitchen, resident bedrooms, bathrooms, and exterior. Facility temperature maintained between 71 to 74 degrees F. All emergency exits were clear of obstruction. Activities calendar and menu posted in a visible area. It was observed that the only elevator in the facility that goes to Plaza (2nd and 3rd floor) had "out of order" signs posted. GM stated the elevators broke down yesterday on 09/24/2025 around 3:00pm. GM stated that they immediately called the vendor and had a technician come to the facility the same day around 4:30pm - 5:00pm. They were informed that the elevator is still functional however, the doors will not automatically close on its own but the elevator can be operated manually. GM states as of today, if any of the residents want to use the elevator, they need to call a staff to assist them in the elevator. GM states all the staff are trained on how to operate the elevator manually. In addition, they residents (who are able) and staff are using the stairwells. LPA observed the stairwells are equipped with evac chairs. GM states that they are offering in-room dining for residents who rather stay in their rooms and activities on the 2nd and 3rd floor of Plaza. GM is actively working with the vendor to fix the elevator. Page 1 of 2. 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 Kitchen is supplied with at least 2 days worth of perishables and 7 days worth of non-perishable foods. Items inside the refrigerator observed covered and labeled. Refrigerator temperature maintained at 39 degrees F. Freezer temperature was maintained at 8 degrees F. Staff stated they had the freezer opened which may have affected the temperature. The kitchen staff showed a log of the freezer temperatures which they monitor every morning, and logged below 0 degrees F. Toxins, chemicals and disinfectants are secured and stored separately from the food supply. A total of 9 resident bedrooms were observed. 9 resident bedrooms are equipped with beds, linens, night stands, dressers, and adequate lighting. Oxygen in use signs posted on the doors of residents who are using oxygen per physician's orders. Between 11:20AM - 12:30PM, the hot water temperature was measured in rooms #125B, 120, 118B, 203, 209, and 306 which measured between 132.6 - 136.4 degrees F. The maintenance personnel stated they had their water boiler serviced recently. During visit, facility had a plumber who was actively working on reducing the hot water temperature. At 4:26PM, the hot water was measured and observed maintained at 115.5 degrees F. 7 resident records were reviewed and observed complete and up-to-date. 5 out of 7 residents were on medication management. The 5 residents centrally stored medications and records were reviewed and all medications were accounted for. 5 staff files were reviewed and observed complete and up-to-date to include a background clearance. The staff are provided annual training on topics to include but not limited to dementia, Alzheimer's, prohibited and restricted health conditions, hospice, pressure sores, medications, caregivers, and blood borne pathogens. The facility is equipped with smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. Fire extinguishers were last serviced on 4/26/2025. LPA observed the facility first aid kit and it was observed to be complete. The facility fire/earthquake/elopement drill log was reviewed and drills are being conducted quarterly. The last drill was conducted in August and September 2025. Facility has an updated emergency disaster plan and infection control plan. No deficiencies were cited today per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintSeptember 25, 2025· SubstantiatedType B1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Kabariti
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that the facility improperly charged a resident for assisted living services during a three-month stay in rehabilitation, even though the facility's own policy stated that such charges should be credited starting on day 15 of absence. The facility had approved the credit in December 2024 but failed to process it until July 2025, when the General Manager and VP of Operations finally refunded the amount to the resident's account. A violation was cited for this billing error.
View full inspector notes
Based on the reporting party (RP), it was reported that R1 moved into the facility in October 2024 and in late November 2024, R1 required hospitalization following almost 3 months at a rehab center (November 2024– February 2025). While R1 was in rehab, R1 was charged for assisted living care services in December 2024, after being told by the facility staff that R1 would only be charged monthly rent for the apartment. Based on the facility’s admission agreement with R1, it’s stated under the apartment hold policy that “ When you have been away from your Apartment for 14 consecutive days, credit for Assisted Living Services will be given beginning on day 15 until you return”. On 07/17/2025, the General Manager was interviewed who stated that the Business Office Director (BOD) who was handling the R1’s credit no longer works for the community and did not leave any communication regarding R1’s billing. It was stated that the BOD already had prior approval back in December 2024 to credit the amount back to the resident’s account but the GM was unsure why the BOD did not complete the refund. The GM admitted that the credit was not completed in December 2024. On 07/17/2025, the GM and VP of Operations processed the credit back to R1’s account. Proof of the ledger showing the credit was provided to the Department. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the above allegation is substantiated. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC9099-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.
Regulation
(f) The licensee shall comply with all applicable terms and conditions set forth in the admission agreement, including all modifications and attachments. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview, record review and observation the licensee did not comply with the section cited above wherein the licensee did not comply with the terms and conditions set forth in resident (R1)’s admission agreement by not ensuring R1 was credited assisted living care services costs per the admission agreement timeframe which poses a potential health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitAugust 19, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
This was a follow-up visit to check whether the facility was following its compliance plan after previous violations found in June 2024. Inspectors found that staff had completed required training on fall policy, resident rights, handling of toxic chemicals, fire safety, and reporting procedures, and that resident and staff files were in order with no unsafe items accessible to residents in memory care. No violations were found during this visit.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Kabariti arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – legal/non-compliance visit. LPA met with General Manager (GM), Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director (HSD) Jocelyne Bailon Saloche. The purpose of the visit to ensure the facility is adhering to the compliance plan submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL) after a non-compliance meeting held on June 13, 2024. During visit, LPA toured the facility with staff to include garden house (aka memory care), plaza, common areas. There were 14 staff members total on schedule during the AM shift in Prom/Plaza, and Garden House. LPA reviewed the facility's roster on Guardian and observed the 14 staff members are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. In Garden House, LPA randomly entered into rooms 111A, 116B, 120, 125B, 126A, and 126B with the Garden House Director. All the cabinets observed secured. No observation of accessible sharp objects, chemicals, disinfectants, and hygiene products to residents in care with dementia. In Plaza, LPA randomly entered into rooms 203, 209, 211, 301, 304, and 309 with the HSD. No issues were noted. Residents who store their own chemicals, disinfectants and hygiene products are able to store these items per their physician's report/records. Page 1 of 2. 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 LPA observed all training topics stated on the non-compliance plan was completed on 02/19/2025 - fall policy; 06/19/2025 - resident rights, toxic chemicals, and fire & alarms; and 07/17/2025 - change of condition and mandated reporting. The training document contains the topic, date, name and signatures of the participants. LPA advised the GM to ensure all staff (including new staff members) are provided annual training on these specific topics per the non-compliance plan. 5 random resident files were reviewed and observed complete. 5 resident files contained a signed personal rights form, updated physician’s report, and a signed updated appraisal/needs and services plan. 5 random staff files were reviewed. 5 staff are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. LPA advised GM regarding the importance of adhering to the facility's corrective action plan that was developed on June 13, 2024, to ensure the facility's stays within compliance of Title 22 regulation. GM was reminded of the discussion on June 13, 2024 of the facility being under frequent monitoring inspection visits to ensure compliance with the compliance plan and Title 22 Regulations for 2 years. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon Saloche and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.
Other visitJuly 17, 2025Type A1 deficiency
Plain-language summary
An unannounced follow-up visit on two incidents reported in July 2025 found that a resident reported being hit in the head by a private caregiver, though no visible injuries were found and the family chose to keep the same caregiver, and that a medication technician in training gave one resident another resident's medication while being supervised, with the resident who received the wrong medication having no apparent ill effects. The facility also had a similar medication error in February 2025 where a medication technician in training gave a resident the wrong medication, resulting in a hospital visit for monitoring. The facility has removed both medication technicians from duties pending retraining and plans to strengthen oversight of trainees during medication distribution.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Kabariti arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – incident visit. LPA met with General Manager (GM) Billy Mitchell. The purpose of the visit was to follow-up on two incidents that was reported to the Department on 07/14/2025 and 07/17/2025. On 07/14/2025, the Department was notified of alleged abuse between resident (R1) and R1’s private caregiver. It was stated that on 07/14/2025 around 1:00am, R1 pulled his/her pull cord and when staff responded R1 reported that he/she felt dizzy because R1’s private caregiver hit him/her in the head. Staff immediately contacted 911 and assessed the resident. There were no visible injuries such as bruising, redness, scratches, or marks on R1’s skin. The police arrived and R1 did not know why the police was there. The facility reported the incident to R1’s responsible party and felt R1 wasn’t in the right state of mind. Based on interview and record review, R1 has mild cognitive impairment and history of confusion upon waking up. R1’s family continued to keep services from the same private caregiver. Staff stated the resident has shown no indications of abuse. R1's physician's report, service plan and progress notes were obtained. On 07/17/2025, the Department was notified of a medication error that occurred during the morning shift of 07/17/2025. It was reported that the MedTech in training (S1) administered resident (R2)’s medication to resident (R3). See LIC809-C for additional information. 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 S1 was shadowing another MedTech (S2) on the floor. During the medication pass, S1 and S2 did not reconfirm the resident's medication prior to administering it. When S1 and S2 went to administer R2’s medication, the staff noticed they only had R3’s medication cup and then realized that R3 was given R2’s medication. R3 already left the community with family once the medication error was found. R3’s family and physician was immediately informed. The facility staff advised R3's authorized representative to seek medication attention, however it was stated that R3 was doing well. It was stated R3's family will monitor R3 during their outing and take action when needed. The facility plans to remove both MedTechs from the floor. Both MedTechs will be required to complete the medication training courses again prior to working on the floor. The Licensee will also provide training for the MedTech trainers regarding medication pass oversight between the trainer and trainee. The review of the facility’s compliance history showed another medication error of a similar incident occurred on 02/25/2025. The incident was reported to the Department on the same day. On 02/27/2025, LPA Kabariti followed up with the incident via phone call and it was stated that R1 was administered R2’s medication on accident by a MedTech in training (S3). S3 was shadowing MedTech (S4). S3 grabbed the wrong medication cup and did not reconfirm the medication prior to administering it to R1. R1 was taken to the hospital for monitoring and returned to the facility on the same day. Based on interview and record review, there were not adverse reactions from the medication error. After the incident, the facility removed both MedTechs from the floor and were required to complete re-training on medications. Based on record review, S4 completed the re-training on medications after the incident. Staff stated that S3 did not want to continue to pursue the MedTech position. Based on review of S1 – S4’s staff training records, S1 – S4 completed multiple training courses regarding medications. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 regarding the medication errors. See LIC809-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
a) Facility personnel shall at all times be sufficient in numbers, and competent to provide the services necessary to meet resident needs. … This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview and record review, the licensee did not ensure that staff were competent to assist residents with medication administration in 2 counts wherein 2 resident’s were administered another resident’s medication on 02/25/25 and 07/17/25 which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitJune 25, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
An unannounced case management visit was conducted to deliver an immediate exclusion letter for a staff member whom the state determined engaged in conduct unfit for working around residents; the staff member had only worked at the facility a few times in summer 2024 and is no longer allowed to have any contact with residents or be present at the facility. The facility management acknowledged the exclusion order and agreed to remove this person from all facility rosters. No violations of state regulations were found.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Kabariti arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit. LPA met with General Manager (GM), Billy Mitchell. The purpose of the visit was to hand deliver an immediate exclusion letter for an individual (S1) who the Department determined engaged in conduct inimical. S1 was not currently working in the facility. It was stated that S1 only worked in the facility a couple times during the summer of 2024. The immediate exclusion letter was handed to the GM. The GM was informed to remove S1 from any contact with residents and not allow S1 to be physically present in the facility. GM stated understanding. The Business Office Director (BOD) was advised to separate S1 from the facility roster. BOD stated understanding. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintJune 6, 2025No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Kabariti
Plain-language summary
An investigation found that a staff member mistakenly told a resident's family member that a medication had changed when it had not—the staff member worked morning shifts and was confused about the resident's afternoon medication routine. The facility's records and the resident's doctor confirmed the medication never actually changed, and the resident continued receiving it as prescribed. No violation was found.
View full inspector notes
On 04/04/2025, the facility was provided R1’s hospital discharge summary which listed multiple changes to R1’s medication regimen. On 05/31/2025, a staff from the facility called R1’s responsible party asking if he/she was okay with the change to R1’s medication (M1) as stated on the updated LIC602. Upon reaching out to R1’s primary care physician (PCP), it was discovered that no changes were made since 04/03/2025. During the investigation, it was found that a staff (S2) had called R1’s responsible party to inform him/her about a change in R1’s medication (M1) per a new physician’s report that was received on 05/30/2025. Based on interview with S2, S2 admitted to misspeaking about the medication change during the call with R1’s responsible party. It was stated that S2 was confused about R1’s PM (M1) medication order because S2 only works AM shifts and was not familiar with R1’s PM medication regimen. Upon further reviewing R1’s medications, S2 then realized that R1 did not have a change in medication order. S2 states that R1 continued to receive his/her medication as normal and no changes to his/her medication regimen was actually made. Based on interview with staff (S1), S1 corroborated S2’s statement. The review of records shows that R1’s medication (M1) order did not change and R1 continued to receive his/her medication as prescribed by the physician. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation is unfounded, meaning the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon Saloche and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.
Other visitMay 28, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
A licensing analyst conducted an unannounced follow-up visit on June 13, 2025, to verify that the facility was following through on a compliance plan from a previous non-compliance meeting. The inspector toured the memory care and other units, reviewed staff and resident files, confirmed all staff were fingerprint-cleared, checked that medications and chemicals were properly secured, and verified that required training on resident rights, reporting, and hazardous substances had been completed; no violations were found.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Kabariti arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – legal/non-compliance visit. LPA met with General Manager (GM), Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director (HSD) Jocelyne Bailon Saloche. The purpose of the visit to ensure the facility is adhering to the compliance plan submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL) after a non-compliance meeting held on June 13, 2024. During visit, LPA toured the facility with staff to include garden house (aka memory care), plaza, common areas, and the courtyard. There were 9 staff members total on schedule during the PM shift in Prom, Plaza, and Garden House. 9 out of 9 staff members are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. In Garden House, LPA randomly entered into rooms 101A, 102A, 103, 110, and 115 with the Garden House Director and HSD. All the cabinets observed secured. No observation of accessible sharp objects, chemicals, disinfectants, and hygiene products to residents in care. In Plaza, LPA randomly entered into rooms 207, 210, 211, 212, and 203 with the HSD and GM. No issues were noted. Residents who store their own chemicals, disinfectants, and medications are able to store these items per their physician's report/records. Page 1 of 2. 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 LPA observed all training topics stated on the non-compliance plan was completed on July 18, 2024. The training topics includes resident rights, mandated reporting, changes of condition, toxic substances and sharp objects. Staff were also provided in-service training on personal rights in December 2024 and toxic chemical storage in February 2025. The training document contains the topic, date, name and signatures of the participants. LPA advised the GM to ensure all staff (including new staff members) are provided annual training on these specific topics per the non-compliance plan. 5 random resident files were reviewed. 5 resident files reviewed contained a signed personal rights form, updated physician’s report, and a signed updated appraisal/needs and services plan. 5 random staff files were reviewed. 5 staff are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. LPA advised GM regarding the importance of adhering to the facility's corrective action plan that was developed on June 13, 2024, to ensure the facility's stays within compliance of Title 22 regulation. GM was reminded of the discussion on June 13, 2024 of the facility being under frequent monitoring inspection visits to ensure compliance with the compliance plan and Title 22 Regulations for 2 years. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.
Other visitApril 9, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
This was a follow-up investigation into a resident's death by suicide that occurred on May 23, 2024, after staff found the resident unresponsive in their bedroom during a morning wellness check. The resident left a note indicating they acted alone, had no known history of suicidal thoughts or depression in their records, and staff could not explain how they obtained the means used. The state investigated whether the facility failed to supervise or prevent this incident but found the allegation unsubstantiated and cited no violations.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Kabariti arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – incident visit. This visit is a follow-up to a case management visit conducted at the facility on 05/29/2024. LPA met with General Manager, Billy Mitchell. On 05/23/2024, the Department was informed of resident (R1)’s death that was observed by staff during morning check-ins with the residents. The Department was investigating the allegation of neglect/lack of supervision resulting in R1 committing suicide while in care. During the investigation, it was found that at approximately 0945 hours, staff checked in with R1 as R1 did not check in with the front desk by 0830 hours based on the facility’s policy. When staff entered R1’s bedroom, staff found R1 deceased inside his/her bedroom by apparent suicide. A note was found stating that R1 acted alone without any assistance. The facility staff immediately called 911. Staff members and resident were interviewed. Based on interviews, R1 never made any suicidal statements and/or had suicidal ideations. R1 was independent and did not require any kind of assistance. Based on record review of R1’s file, documents did not indicate or notate any signs of depression or suicidal behaviors. Facility staff did not provide and could not state how R1 obtained items used to aid in his/her death. Page 1 of 2. 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 The review of the police report records indicated that there were no signs of trauma or foul play. The Department has investigated the allegation to be unsubstantiated, meaning, although the incident may have happened and/or did occur, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove a Title 22 violation. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.
ComplaintApril 9, 2025· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Kabariti
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation looked into allegations about billing for services, document falsification, and disclosure of resident information. The department interviewed residents, staff, and reviewed records but found insufficient evidence to substantiate any of the allegations—some residents and staff gave conflicting accounts, while others denied the claims entirely. No violations were cited.
View full inspector notes
The review of R3’s records indicates that R3 is paying for shower services as R3 requires moderate assistance with showers. Based on interview with R3, it was stated that upon admission in the facility (April 2024) R3 was refusing showers due to a fall incident that occurred in another care facility. R3 states he/she was not comfortable with showers yet and refused the shower service. R3 denied the facility missing a shower week, besides one week when the facility did not have hot water which R3 received a shower the week after. R3 states that he/she receives shower weekly and did not have any complaints about the services he/she is receiving. It was alleged that resident (R4) is being charged for showers and laundry but R4’s family does the laundry and R4 showers him/herself. The review of R4’s records indicates that R4 is not paying for shower services and requires minimal assistance with showers. Records show that R4 is paying for weekly laundry services. Based on interview with R4, it was stated that R4 shower him/herself. R4 stated that the staff does his/her laundry weekly and did not have any complaints about the services he/she is receiving. It was alleged that resident (R5) is receiving shower services but is being charged for dressing services, when R5 can dress him/herself. The review of R5’s records indicates that R5 is paying for shower services as R5 requires moderate assistance with showers. R5 is independent in dressing and is not paying for this service. Page 2 of 4. 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 Based on interview with R5, it was stated that R5 received weekly shower services since the day R5 has moved in. R5 denied the staff missing a shower week. R5 states he/she is able to dress him/herself daily but sometimes may need assistance from the staff. R5 did not have any complaints about the services and care he/she is receiving and states the facility is meeting his/her daily needs. It was alleged that the facility staff are falsifying documents because the staff are making the residents sign documents that has been written by staff to be completely untrue. It was also alleged that staff are falsifying documents as they are told by S1 to not to document everything because it leaves a paper trail. 4 residents were interviewed. Based on resident interview, 4 out of 4 resident’s denied staff falsifying their documents. 4 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, it was stated by staff (S3) that a former staff was told not to document everything because it leaves a paper trail and S1 does not want a paper trail. Another staff stated that S1 instructed S2 to falsify other documents (pendant log) during a licensing visit. Based on interview with S1 and S2, both staff denied falsifying documents. S1 stated that a former staff was claiming that he/she was told not to document anything, when the documentation actually needed to be completed by another staff member. S1 also denied instructing S2 to falsify the pendant logs. Based on interview with the former staff, it was stated that he/she was told by another staff (name unknown) that S1 had directed the other staff to falsify documents. Based on interview with S2, it was stated that S2 was helping to print the pendant logs. S2 denied S1 instructing him/her to falsify the pendant log by changing the times and believes they are not able to modify the times in the pendant system. Page 3 of 4. 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 that staff (S1) did not keep resident’s information confidential by disclosing a resident’s death to other residents. 3 staff members (S2 – S4) were interviewed. Based on staff interview, 3 out of 3 staff stated that the residents found out about another resident’s death by staff (S1). It was stated that S1 disclosed the information to resident (R1) and (R2). Based on interview with S1, S1 denied disclosing a resident’s death to other residents. 2 residents (R1 – R2) were interviewed. Based on resident interview, R1 and R2 denied staff disclosing a resident’s death to them. R1 and R2 states they found out about the resident’s death through other residents at the facility, and not by the staff. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegations are unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicates that although the allegations are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. Page 4 of 4.
Other visitFebruary 20, 2025Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Kabariti
Plain-language summary
An unannounced compliance check found that the facility had completed required staff training on dementia care, resident rights, and reporting procedures as promised in a previous correction plan, but inspectors discovered cleaning chemicals stored accessibly under a kitchen sink in one resident room—chemicals that a resident with dementia should not be able to reach according to the resident's physician's instructions; staff removed the items immediately when notified. The facility's other areas, including the memory care unit, had hazardous items properly secured, and resident files contained required physician reports and care plans. The facility remains under monitoring for the next two years to ensure continued compliance with state regulations.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine (Dolores) Kabariti arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – legal/non-compliance visit. LPA met with General Manager, Billy Mitchell. The purpose of the visit to ensure the facility is adhering to the compliance plan submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL) after a non-compliance meeting held on June 13, 2024. During visit, LPA toured the facility with staff to include garden house (aka memory care), plaza, common areas, and courtyard areas. During the tour, LPA observed 11 staff members who are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. In Garden House, LPA randomly entered into rooms 125A, 124, 122A, 120, and 113 with the Garden House Director. All sharp objects, chemicals, disinfectants, and garden supplies observed secured in garden house. LPA observed 1 out of the 5 rooms had hygiene products accessible, however, based on the resident's physician's report the resident is not at risk if allowed direct access to these items. LPA observed the resident's room door was closed. In Plaza, LPA randomly entered into rooms 210 and 202 with the Health Services Director. LPA observed 1 out of 2 resident rooms (R1) contained chemicals/disinfectants to include laundry detergent and dish soap accessible in the cabinet underneath the kitchen sink. Based on review of this resident's (R1) file, the resident is diagnosed with dementia and should not have access to chemicals/disinfectant items per the signed physician's communication sheet. HSD removed the items immediately and informed the resident. Page 1 of 2. 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 Based on the non-compliance plan, training was scheduled to be completed by a certain date for reporting requirements; change of condition and observations of decline in condition or ability; personal rights of a resident; reappraisals; and care of persons with dementia as it pertains to toxic substance and sharp objects. LPA observed all training topics stated on the non-compliance plan was completed on July 18, 2024 . Staff were also provided in-service training on personal rights in December 2024. The training document contains the topic, date, name and signatures of the participants. LPA advised the GM to ensure all staff are provided annual training on these specific topics per the non-compliance plan. 5 random resident files were reviewed. The files reviewed contained a signed personal rights form, physician’s report, and a signed up-to-date appraisal/needs and services plan. 5 random staff files were reviewed. 5 staff are associated to the facility and fingerprint cleared. LPA Kabariti advised to ensure all new staff review and receive instruction regarding resident rights upon hire and the training must be documented in the staff’s file. LPA advised GM regarding the importance of adhering to the facility's corrective action plan that was developed on June 13, 2024, to ensure the facility's stays within compliance of Title 22 regulation. GM was reminded of the discussion on June 13, 2024 of the facility being under frequent monitoring inspection visits to ensure compliance with the compliance plan and Title 22 Regulations for 2 years. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC809-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon and a copy of the report and appeal rights was provided. Page 2 of 2.
Regulation
(a) ... the licensee shall ensure that disinfectants, cleaning solutions, poisonous substances, ... and other similar items which could pose a danger to residents are in locked storage and are not left unattended if outside the locked storage.This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on record review, interview and observation the licensee did not ensure to keep toxic items inaccessible to resident (R1) who is diagnosed with dementia and should not have access to cleaning solutions and toxins per the physician, which posed an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintDecember 19, 2024· MixedType A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that the facility had inadequate night shift staffing—sometimes only one staff member for the entire assisted living section instead of the required two—which resulted in slow response times to residents' call buttons, with some residents waiting 30-45 minutes or longer for help. Call logs for May 2024 confirmed that one resident had 33 calls that took over 30 minutes to answer and 26 calls that took over 15 minutes between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., when the facility's own standard is a 15-minute response time. A separate allegation that a resident was left in bed with soiled sheets was investigated but not substantiated.
View full inspector notes
It was also alleged that it’s difficult for staff to respond to residents call buttons in a timely manner due to the low number of staff who work the night shift. It was stated that instead of the response times being between 5-10 minutes, it has increased to 20-30 minutes On 05/29/2024, 3 residents were interviewed. Based on resident interview, 2 out of 3 residents states that the facility does not have enough night supervision. It was stated that there is only 2-night shift staff for the whole building. 4 staff members were interviewed throughout this investigation. Based on staff interview, 2 staff states there is not enough night supervision staff. 2 staff states there is only two staff who work the NOC shift. It was stated that there were some days where only one staff would work the NOC shift. S3 stated that there was a time before S3 was hired when there was only 1 NOC shift staff working in Prom and Plaza. Based on record review, the NOC staffing schedule in May 2024, it shows only 1 caregiver scheduled in the Prom/Plaza (Assisted Living) section of the facility on Sunday and Mondays. Based on staff interview, the standard NOC staffing schedule should be 2 staff in the prom and plaza area. Based on resident interview, 2 out of 3 residents states a negative experience with the facility’s pendant system. R1 states a time where he/she was sitting on the floor for about 45 minutes before a staff responded to his/her pendant call. R2 states that no one comes for about 45 minutes. R2 states in the morning, it takes about half an hour to an hour for staff to respond. Based on review of R1’s pendant call logs, it shows that in May 2024 there were 88 calls that had a response time of 10 minutes and more. 33 out of 88 calls had over a 30-minute response time. 26 out of 88 calls had over a 15-minute response time between the hours of 10:00PM – 6:00AM. Page 2 of 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 Based on review of R2’s pendant calls logs, it shows that in May 2024 there were 55 calls that had a response time of 10 minutes or more. 16 out of 55 calls had over a 30-minute response time. R2 did not press the call button between the hours of 10PM – 6AM. Based on interview with the General Manager, the expectations is for staff to respond to the residents call button within 15 minutes. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview, record review and observation the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the above allegations are substantiated. Deficiencies are being cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC9099-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided. Page 3 of 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 On 06/12/2024, 3 residents were interviewed. Based on interview, 3 out of 3 residents stated the bedsheets are self-provided and staff assist with washing their bedsheets. 3 out of 3 residents denied being left in bed without bed sheets. Based on interview with R1, R1 denied being left in bed without bed sheets. R1 states that staff has changed his/her sheets in the middle of the night because he/she wet the bed, but staff did place another set of sheets on his/her bed. R1 states that some of the staff are not able to change his/her sheets in the middle of the night but R1 stated that staff always provided him/her with bed sheets. On 06/12/2024, LPA Dolores observed R1’s bed had bedsheets. A witness (W1) was interviewed. W1 stated that R1’s bed sheets were self-provided. W1 states a time where he/she observed R1’s bed was made but upon checking the bed, W1 observed R1’s bed sheets were stained with urine and blood. W1 thinks that the night staff might have left R1 in bed with the urine and blood-stained sheets because the staff was not able to lift R1. W1 denied observing R1 without bed sheets. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview and observation the above allegation is unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicated that although the allegation is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
Regulation
(a) In addition to the rights listed in Section 87468.1, Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities, … (4) To care, supervision, and services that meet their individual needs and are delivered by staff that are sufficient in numbers, qualifications, and competency to meet their needs. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview and record review, the licensee did not ensure there was enough staff scheduled in prom and plaza during the NOC shift in May 2024 and did not ensure staff responded to the resident’s call buttons within 15 minutes, which poses an immediate health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintDecember 19, 2024· SubstantiatedType A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
This was a complaint investigation into whether staff followed a resident's care plan regarding medication management. Staff removed the resident's medications from their room without notifying the resident or family members first, based on a nurse's determination that the resident needed help managing medications—but the nurse had not completed and finalized the updated evaluation before the removal took place, and the resident's physician records showed no change in the resident's ability to manage their own medications safely. The facility was cited for this violation.
View full inspector notes
It was also alleged that staff did not follow R1’s care plan as R1’s care plan states he/she is not on medication management when staff removed the medications from R1’s bedroom. 1 staff member was interviewed regarding this investigation. This staff member was present and involved in removing R1’s medication from R1’s bedroom. Based on staff interview, R1 was not under medication management during the time of move-in and the General Manager at the time approved R1’s spouse to help administer R1’s medications. One day [specific date unknown], S1 was directed by the General Manager to remove R1’s medications from his/her room. The reason the medications needed to be removed was after the facility nurse determined R1 needed assistance with medication management after completing a 30-day medication evaluation after admission. However, the nurse did not provide and finalize the updated evaluation prior to removing the medications from R1’s bedroom. S1 stated that prior to removing R1’s medications from his/her room, the staff did not notify R1 or R1’s spouse and/or family member that R1’s medications would be removed. S1 admitted this to be a mistake as they should have notified R1 and R1’s responsible parties prior to removing the medications. R1’s spouse became upset with staff, in which staff returned R1’s medications. Based on record review, R1’s service plan upon admission dated 12/30/2023 indicated that R1 was independent and did not require assistance with medication administration. It’s indicated that R1 could self-manage his/her medications. R1’s service plan was updated in July 2024. Based on R1’s physician’s report from January 2024, it stated that R1 had mild cognitive impairment and was able to administer own prescription medication, able to administer own PRN medication and able to store own medications. The review of records does not show any incidents concerning R1’s medication compliance and safety by storing his/her own medication. There were also no records from R1’s physician regarding the change of R1’s capacity to store his/her own medications or other diagnosis which would deem unsafe if R1 would store his/her medications. Page 2 of 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 The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview, record review and observation the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the above allegations are substantiated. A deficiency is being cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC9099-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided. Page 3 of 3.
Regulation
(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (8) To have their representatives regularly informed by the licensee of activities related to care or services, including ongoing evaluations, as appropriate to their needs. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview, record review and observation the licensee did ensure to comply with the section cited above by not informing R1 and R1’s authorized representatives of the need to remove R1’s medications from his/her room prior to removing the medications, despite R1’s care plan not requiring medication management which poses an immediate health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintDecember 19, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A complaint was investigated regarding whether staff were checking on a resident frequently enough. Staff interviews and record review showed that caregivers were checking on the resident multiple times per shift, the resident was being monitored closely after a change in condition, and the facility had a service plan in place addressing the resident's fall risk; the investigation found no violation.
View full inspector notes
On 04/05/2024, 5 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, it was stated that staff check in on R1 at least 2 times per day for medications, however caregivers check in on R1 about 2 or 3 times more per shift. It was stated that there were no incidents reported for R1 on 03/01/2024. The number of times staff check in on R1, was depending on the staff. S2 stated to check in on R1 about 3 – 5 times per his/her shift. S3 states to check in on R1 at least 4 times per his/her shift. S4 states to check in on R1 about 4-5 times per his/her shift. Based on record review, on 03/01/2024, there were no progress notes written by staff on this day. On 03/02/2024, it was noted that R1 requested for pain reliver medication due to pain. From 03/02/2024 – 03/04/2024, R1 was on alert charting due to a change of condition and was being monitored for his/her pain. On 03/03/2024, staff mentioned concern that R1’s pain could be a cause of a fall. On 03/04/2024, R1 was taken to the hospital by his/her family member where R1 was seen for a swollen ankle. The review of records show that R1 is a high potential for falls but does not require assistance with ambulation, mobility, escorting, and transferring. On R1’s service plan, it states that R1’s family member has been evaluated by the community to be at risk for injury which may cause permanent disability or be life threatening. Interventions were put in place for R1’s safety, however, based on record review there was no indication on R1’s service plan that staff were required to check in on R1 every hour. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation is unfounded, meaning the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.
Other visitDecember 10, 2024Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced case management visit on December 6, 2024, state licensing officials delivered an immediate exclusion order for a staff member who physically abused a resident on December 2, 2024 by dragging the resident across a room, covering the resident's mouth, and pushing the resident to the ground, resulting in bruises on the shoulder and toes. The facility had already terminated the staff member's employment on December 4, 2024. The state cited the facility for violating the resident's personal rights and ordered that the staff member be permanently removed from any contact with residents or presence at the facility.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Christine Dolores and Marcella Tarin arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit to deliver an immediate exclusion letter for staff (S1). LPAs met with General Manager (GM), Billy Mitchell. On 12/06/2024, the Department conducted an initial visit to investigate a reported incident involving physical abuse to resident (R1) by staff (S1). The incident occurred on the night of 12/02/2024 and the facility was informed on 12/03/2024. On 12/03/2024, S1 was escorted out of the building and on 12/04/2024, S1's employment was terminated from the facility. LPAs provided a letter "Order to Licensee/Facility of Immediate Exclusion From Facility" That the department determine that S1 engaged in conduct inimical as a staff in the facility. GM was informed to remove S1 from any contact with residents and S1 may not be physically present in any facility. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC809-D. The Department issued a citation under 87468.1(a)(3) Personal Rights. S1's aggressive action towards R1 violated R1's personal rights when S1 quickly dragged R1 across the room to the bathroom, covered R1's mouth, and pushed R1 to the ground causing R1 to sustain bruises on his/her shoulder area and toes. This report was reviewed with General Manager (GM) Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report along with the appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (3) To be free from punishment, humiliation, intimidation, abuse, or other actions of a punitive nature,... This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview, record review and observation S1's aggressive actions towards R1, the night of 12/02/2024 violated R1's personal rights, which poses/posed an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintDecember 6, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
This was a complaint investigation into how the facility handled potential scabies cases and infection control practices. The investigator found that staff did discard protective gowns after each use as required, and residents showing scabies symptoms were placed in isolation until a doctor's diagnosis was confirmed; those with itching from other causes like dry skin were not isolated, which is appropriate. No violations were found.
View full inspector notes
On 12/15/2023, 6 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, there were a couple residents who were diagnosed with scabies on separate occasions (10/26/2023 and 11/06/2023), but as of 12/15/2023 the residents no longer had scabies. It was stated that some residents did not have a confirmed diagnosis of scabies and were experiencing symptoms of itchiness. These residents’ physicians were notified and prescribed a PRN medication. The review of records show that R1 was noted to have itchiness and redness on 10/26/2023. Based on staff interview, R1 was diagnosed with scabies. R1’s hospice nurse was notified and R1 was prescribed and applied a PRN medication. Staff noted R2 was experiencing symptoms of itchiness. R2’s doctor and authorized representative was notified, and R2 was prescribed a PRN medication. R2 was also being seen by a home health agency for another condition. Staff stated that R3’s itching was caused by dry skin. R3’s doctor was informed and prescribed a PRN medication. Staff denied the observation of R3’s skin being red and bumpy. R4 was noted to be under hospice care. Staff stated that R4 was not exhibiting any symptoms. The review of R4’s records did not include notes of a diagnosis of scabies or symptoms of itchiness. Staff stated that R5 was being seen by a home health agency and was not experiencing any symptoms of scabies. The review of R5’s records did not include notes of a diagnosis of scabies or symptoms of itchiness. It was alleged that staff are not discarding PPE gowns after assisting residents who are under isolation or quarantine because they were not told to discard it. It was also alleged that residents who were experiencing symptoms of scabies were not placed under quarantine. Page 2 of 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 On 12/15/2023, 6 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, 6 out of 6 staff members stated they discarded the PPE gowns after every use. Based on review of the facility’s infection control plan, it’s stated that items and equipment that are single-use shall be disposed of in an appropriate waste container with a tight-fitting cover. Based on staff interview, the gowns being used are disposable and they are disposed in the trash bin upon exiting the resident rooms, which is located next to the isolation room. Staff stated that resident’s who were suspected to have scabies and were experiencing symptoms of scabies were placed under isolation until they were informed of a diagnosis from the resident’s physicians. Those who were experiencing itchy skin due to a condition not related to scabies (example dry skin), were not placed under quarantine . Based on review of the facility’s infection control plan, it’s stated there shall be separation and care of residents whose illness requires separation, including quarantine or isolation, from others. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegations are unfounded, meaning the allegations are false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon and a copy of the report was provided. Page 3 of 3.
ComplaintDecember 6, 2024· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation looked into allegations that a resident's hygiene needs were neglected, that clean linens were not provided, and that staff did not follow proper sanitation practices when handling soiled items. The facility's records, staff interviews, and scheduling documents did not provide enough evidence to prove these allegations occurred, so no violations were found.
View full inspector notes
The review of R1’s service plan states that R1 has full dentures but refuses to wear the dentures. 4 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, 4 out of 4 staff did not remember R1 using dentures. It was stated that R1 moved from Assisted Living to Memory Care and staff did not remember R1 moved into memory care with dentures. Based on record review of R1’s safeguard of personal property and valuable form, there were no items to include the dentures that was entrusted to the facility. The word “waived” is written across the form and the form was signed and dated by R1’s responsible party on 03/17/2021. It was alleged that the facility staff did not ensure that R1’s hygiene needs were met while in care as it was observed that R1 was filthy after not being bathed for a week. It was alleged that R1’s hygiene needs were not met because the facility was short staffed. The date of this encounter is unknown. Based on record review, R1’s showers were scheduled twice a week and required staff hands on assistance. 4 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, 4 out of 4 staff denied R1’s hygiene needs being neglected by the staff. Staff states that R1’s family did not bring up any concerns that R1 wasn’t showered for a week. Staff states the facility was short staffed around July 2023 but denied the shortage of staff reflecting on the shower schedule. Staff states the residents were still being provided their showers on their scheduled days. The review of the facility’s staffing schedule shows that there were at least 3 staff scheduled in memory care, in the AM and PM. It was alleged that staff did not ensure R1 had clean linens while in care as there was a day where R1’s responsible party and R1’s social worker needed to change R1’s bedsheets because they were soiled. Page 2 of 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 The date of this encounter is unknown. 4 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, 4 out of 4 staff were not able to recall a time where R1 had soiled linens. It was stated that if staff were to observe that a resident’s sheets are soiled, the staff would immediately change the sheets and put new ones. It was alleged that staff did not follow safe sanitation practices as a staff who wore disposable gloves for cleaning was touching other surfaces and items with the same glove on. It was stated that when R1’s responsible party placed R1’s soiled items outside R1’s bedroom door for laundry service, the staff picked up the soiled linens with possibly the same disposable gloves. It was stated that the staff did not serve R1 any food. The reporting party did not indicate that the staff provided any care to the resident or other residents with the same gloves used during cleaning. 4 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, it was stated that they spoke with the alleged staff who did not follow safe sanitation practices, and the staff denied the allegation. It was stated that facility staff are provided training on infection control. Staff state that they can use gloves when cleaning but they are trained to change out their gloves before they provide any care to the residents. It was stated that staff are trained to change their gloves after every resident when assisting them with ADL (activities of daily living) care. Based on record review, infection control training was completed on 05/25/2023. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegations are unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicates that although the allegation is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon and a copy of the report was provided. Page 3 of 3.
Other visitDecember 6, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
On December 2, 2024, a staff member treated a resident in an aggressive manner, which was recorded on the facility's security video; the staff member was immediately removed from the building on December 3 and terminated on December 4. The facility conducted an internal investigation and provided all staff with training on resident safety, de-escalation, and reporting procedures. No regulatory violations were found.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – incident visit. LPA met with Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon. The purpose of the visit was to follow-up on a physical abuse incident that occurred at the facility the night of 12/02/2024. On 12/03/2024, the Department was informed of an incident that occurred between staff (S1) and resident (R1). On 12/03/2024, the community was made aware that R1 was treated in an aggressive manner by S1 the night of 12/02/2024. The incident was captured on the facility's fall detection video system. After the community was made of the incident, S1 was escorted out of the building on 12/03/2024. S1’s employment was terminated on 12/04/2024. The facility also conducted an internal investigation with all the staff involved and who have witnessed the fall detection video footage. On 12/04/2024 and 12/05/2024, the facility conducted an in-service training with all staff (AM/PM/NOC) to include topics of understanding the importance of “see something say something”; mandated reporters; the steps to take to ensure residents safety and well-being; and understanding resident rights. HSD states the training also included proper intervention and techniques for redirection, de-escalation, and dementia. Documents were obtained to include the in-service training sheet/materials and 4 staff member’s job application. A copy of the fall detection video was provided to LPA Dolores via a USB stick. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon and a copy of the report was provided.
Other visitDecember 6, 2024Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A resident died on May 25, 2024, from ligature strangulation while under the influence of alcohol; the facility had documented the resident as a fall risk with a history of alcohol use and multiple fall injuries, but did not update the resident's care assessment after November 2023 despite these ongoing concerns. The state cited a violation for failure to reassess the resident and assessed a $1,000 penalty for repeating this violation within 12 months, with an additional penalty pending review for the resident's death. The facility was informed of its right to appeal.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a follow-up case management – incident visit that was initiated on 05/29/2024. LPA met with Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon. On 05/25/2024, resident (R1) passed away at the facility and the cause of death was an accident. R1 had ligature strangulation in the setting of ethanol use. Based on R1’s evaluation report dated 11/30/2023, R1 had a history of substance use which may cause some interpersonal and/or health problems but does not significantly impair overall independent functioning. However, staff still had concerns about R1’s alcohol consumption and overall safety after drinking alcohol. Based on R1’s progress notes, R1 had multiple fall incidents from 2021 – 2024 resulting in injuries. Staff interviewed were aware that R1 was a fall risk, had multiple fall incidents and liked to drink alcohol. The review of R1’s assessment shows R1 was last re-assessed on 11/30/2023, even though R1 continued to be a fall risk and had multiple falls resulting in injuries after 11/30/2023. There was no reassessment completed after 11/30/2024. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC809-D. A civil penalty of $1000 is being assessed today for a repeat violation within 12 months. See LIC421IM. Failure to correct the deficiency may result in additional civil penalties. An additional Civil Penalty for a violation resulting in serious bodily injury of a resident is pending review. This report was reviewed with Health Services Director, Jocelyne Bailon and a copy of the report along with the appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
(a) The pre-admission appraisal shall be updated, in writing as frequently as necessary to note significant changes and to keep the appraisal accurate. The reappraisals shall document changes in the resident's physical, medical, mental, and social condition. Significant changes shall include but not be limited to: (3) Any illness, injury, trauma,…
Inspector finding
Based on interview, record review, and observation the licensee did not comply with the section cited above wherein the facility did not reassess R1 after 11/30/2023, even though R1 continued to be a fall risk and had multiple falls resulting in injuries after 11/30/2023 which poses an immediate health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintOctober 29, 2024· MixedType A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
On October 18, 2023, a complaint investigation found that a resident's alert button was positioned out of reach from the bed, staff did not respond when the button was pressed during testing (taking 11 minutes with no response), and records showed the resident's alerts went unanswered on seven separate dates in October. The facility was cited for this deficiency. Two other allegations in the complaint—regarding a 911 call and the resident's voice in meal seating—were found to be unsubstantiated or unfounded and did not result in citations.
View full inspector notes
On 10/18/2023, LPA Dolores entered into R1’s bedroom. R1’s bed was removed as R1 passed away early morning of 10/18/2023. LPA observed an alert button on the wall that was placed above the night stand. Based on interview with staff (S1) and (S2), R1’s bed was located to the right of the night stand. LPA observed that the alert button may not be of arms reach if a person is laying down in bed. The alert button did not contain a pull cord. Based on interview with S2, S2 stated that R1 was not able to reach the button. LPA Dolores pressed the alert button above the night stand at 2:34PM and there was no response from staff at 2:45PM (11 minutes after the alert button was pressed). At 2:39PM, LPA entered room #2 located right next to R1’s room. At 2:39PM, LPA pressed the alert button next to the bed. 2:41PM, S1 pushed the alert button in the bathroom. 2:42PM, LPA Dolores pressed the alert button next to the bed a second time. At 2:45PM, there was no response from staff. Based on record review, R1’s alerts were not responded to on 10/07/2023, 10/08/2023, 10/10/2023, 10/12/2023, 10/15/2023, 10/17/2023, and 10/18/2023 (7 different occasions). The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on record review and observation the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the above allegation is substantiated. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC9099-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report and appeal rights was provided. PAGE 2 OF 2. 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 Based on record review, R1 was under hospice care. On 10/10/2023, R1’s family member called 911 and the paramedics and police arrived to the facility. Based on interview with S2, R1’s family member called 911 because R1 was not feeling well. The paramedics arrived to the facility and assessed R1 and R1 verbalized that he/she wanted to stay and did not want to go to the hospital. S2 states the facility was instructed by R1’s hospice team to call 911 if the resident sustains an injury like a fall. The review of R1’s records indicates that R1 was a DNR and on comfort focused treatment. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview and record review the above allegation is unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicates that although the allegation may be valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. PAGE 2 OF 2. 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 Based on record review, the facility obtained both POA documents from two of R1’s family members. The first POA document is dated in 2020 and the second POA document is dated in 2023. Based on interview, S1 and S2 states they received two POA documents from both family members. The second POA document dated 2023 was when R1 already had dementia. S2 states they were using the initial POA documents while pending further clarification from the facility’s corporate office on if the second POA document was valid as it was dated when R1 already had dementia. It was alleged that the facility staff does not allow R1 to have a voice in memory care because R1 sits with the same person during meals every day and R1 does not even like the person he/she sits with. It was alleged that the staff does not listen to R1 because R1 has Dementia. Based on staff interview, R1 did not have a preference of who he/she wanted to eat with. R1 would agree with whoever family member is in the room. R1 did not verbalize that he/she wanted to sit with certain residents or staff during mealtime. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview and record review, the above allegations are unfounded meaning the allegations are false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
Regulation
(a) In addition to the rights listed in Section 87468.1, Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities, residents in privately operated residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (4) To care, supervision, and services that meet their individual needs and are delivered by staff that are sufficient …
Inspector finding
Based on interview, record review and observation the licensee did not comply with the section cited wherein R1's alert button was not responded to on 7 different occasions and based on LPA Dolores observation on 10/18/23 which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintOctober 29, 2024· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint was investigated in August 2023 alleging the facility was frequently short-staffed in memory care. The investigation included interviews with staff and a witness, a review of staffing schedules, and an on-site observation; most staff reported adequate staffing levels, and the inspector found no violation based on the available evidence.
View full inspector notes
On 08/22/2023, 1 witness was interviewed. Based on witness (W1) interview, it was stated that the facility is short staffed mostly everyday. It was stated that the morning and afternoon shift has 2 caregivers and 1 medtech. W1 states that on 08/22/2023, there was only 2 staff. W1 states that he/she is constantly looking for staff to help R1. W1 states if he/she is really complaining the staff come within 10-15 minutes. W1 stated that on 08/22/2023, staff came after 45 minutes and apologized for not coming sooner as the staff needed to take a lunch. W1 states it doesn’t happen often. On 08/22/2023, 8 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, 7 out of 8 staff stated the facility’s memory care has sufficient staff to meet the needs of the residents. It was stated that there are 4 staff (3 caregivers and 1 medtech) in the morning shift, 3 staff (2 caregivers and 1 medtech) in the evening shift, and 2 staff for the overnight shift. It was stated that the staff used to wash dishes around December 2022 time, however, since August 2023 the kitchen staff does all of the dishes. It was stated that the staff are assigned to groups, and they help each other out as a team. It was stated that the medtech also assist with care giving duties, when needed. 1 out of 8 staff stated they need more staff in memory care. On 08/22/2023, LPA Dolores entered the memory care unit around 11:50am and observed 2 staff were working in memory care, 1 caregiver and 1 medtech/caregiver. Based on interview with staff, the third caregiver was on break and the fourth caregiver was somewhere in the building but could not be located at that moment. LPA Dolores observed 3 housekeeping staff. After a few minutes, LPA observed the third caregiver walking down the hallway. LPA interviewed the fourth caregiver who states to be late to work. LPA Dolores observed lunch started at 12:10PM and observed 2 staff assisting the residents with dining. Based on record review, there were 30 residents residing in memory care. PAGE 2 OF 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 Based on record review of the facility’s staffing schedule, in July 2023 the AM and PM shift had 3 caregivers and 1 Medtech scheduled and 2 staff for NOC shift. There was only 1 day of the month (Saturday 07/22/2023) where there was only 2 caregivers and 1 Medtech scheduled in the PM. In August 2023 the AM shift had 3 caregivers and 1 Medtech, PM shift had 2 caregivers and 1 Medtech, and NOC shift had 2 staff scheduled. On 08/22/2023, the schedule shows 3 caregivers and 1 Medtech in the AM and 2 caregivers and 1 Medtech in the PM. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation is unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicated that although the allegation is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. PAGE 3 OF 3.
InspectionOctober 29, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
An inspector conducted an unannounced visit on April 25, 2026, to verify the facility had completed a corrective action plan from June 2024, which required training on resident rights, reporting changes in resident condition, and safety procedures for handling sharp objects and toxic substances. The inspector confirmed all required training was completed on time, resident files contained necessary documentation, and hazardous materials and sharp objects were properly secured throughout the facility. No violations were found.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – legal/non-compliance visit. LPA met with General Manager, Billy Mitchell. The purpose of the visit to ensure the facility is adhering to the compliance plan submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL) after a non-compliance meeting held on June 13, 2024. During visit, LPA toured the facility with GM to include garden house, assisted living, common areas, and courtyard areas. During the tour, LPA observed 9 staff members who are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. All sharp objects, chemicals, disinfectants, and garden supplies observed secured. Based on the non-compliance plan, training was scheduled to be completed by a certain date for reporting requirements; change of condition and observations of decline in condition or ability; personal rights of a resident; reappraisals; and care of persons with dementia as it pertains to toxic substance and sharp objects. LPA observed all training topics stated on the non-compliance plan was completed by the expected dates. The training document contains the topic, date, name and signatures of the participants. GM states a plan to complete the training bi-annually. Page 1 of 2. 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 5 resident files were reviewed. The files reviewed contained a signed personal rights form, physician’s report, and a signed up-to-date appraisal/needs and services plan. 5 staff files were reviewed. 5 staff are associated to the facility and fingerprint cleared. 5 staff are provided training on personal rights as of 10/29/2024. LPA Dolores advised to ensure all new staff review and receive instruction regarding resident rights upon hire and the training must be documented in the staff’s file. LPA Dolores advised GM regarding the importance of adhering to the facility's corrective action plan that was developed on June 13, 2024, to ensure the facility's stays within compliance of Title 22 regulation. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintOctober 7, 2024· MixedType A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
During a complaint investigation of this facility, inspectors reviewed records for a resident who fell 22 times between April and December 2022, sustaining injuries including a forehead bump with redness on one occasion and facial swelling and swollen cheeks after other falls requiring hospitalization. The facility was found to have violated regulations by failing to update the resident's care plan after most of these falls despite identifying the resident as high fall risk; however, inspectors found insufficient evidence that lack of staff supervision directly caused the falls, as the resident's admission agreement stated the facility was not designed to provide 24-hour supervision and the resident did not require staff assistance with mobility according to most care plans on file.
View full inspector notes
It was alleged that the facility staff are not reappraising resident (R1) after falls resulting in resident sustaining injuries due to multiple falls. R1’s service plans from year 2021 - 2022 were reviewed. The review of records shows that on 04/07/2022, R1 was re-evaluated, and the fall potential section was updated from a low potential to a moderate potential for falls. The service plan included an action plan to check on R1 during med passes, meals and activities, provide night lights, arrange items within reach, slip mats in bathtub/shower, showers are draining properly, change heights of items to accommodate resident, remove trip hazards, check carpet/floor for intact surfaces, rearrange furniture if appropriate, emergency devices working and within reach, and room clutter. On 04/29/2022, R1 was re-evaluated, and the fall potential section was updated from moderate potential to high potential for falls. There were no action plans indicated on the service plan. The re-evaluation was based on a fall that was noted in R1’s record on 04/30/2022. Between 04/30/2022 – 09/08/2022, R1 was noted to have 8 falls (05/29, 06/24, 07/03, 07/05, 07/06, 08/08, 08/11, and 08/28). On 09/09/2022, R1 was re-evaluated, and the service plan was updated to still indicate a high potential for falls. The service plan included an action plan to include removing trip hazards and room clutter. Between 09/10/2022 – 11/22/2022, R1 was noted to have 14 falls (09/23, 09/24, 09/25, 10/01, 10/05, 10/07 (R1 noted to have 2 falls this day), 10/10, 10/31, 11/03, 11/05, 11/07, 11/08, 11/21). On 11/23/2022, R1 was re-evaluated, and the service plan was updated to still indicate a high potential for falls. The service plan included an action plan to use walker, arrange items to be within reach, and remove trip hazards. PAGE 2 OF 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 The review of records show that R1 sustained injuries after falls on 08/28/2022 and 11/05/2022. On 08/28, R1 was observed to sustain a bump on his/her left forehead with redness. 911 was called and resident was not sent out after further assessment and discussion with family. On 11/05, R1 was sent to the hospital for a fall and unresponsiveness. Resident returned to the facility with the left forehead and cheeks swollen. On 11/06, resident was seen with a contusion on the right facial area post fall. On 12/12/2022, a witness observed resident was walking in the hallway without a walker with a big bump on the left forehead area. R1 denied a fall. R1 was transferred to the hospital and returned the same day with new medication. Based on record review, the facility did not re-evaluate and update R1’s service plan after falls on 05/29, 06/24, 07/03, 07/05, 07/06, 08/08, 08/11, 09/23, 09/24, 09/25, 10/01, 10/05, 10/07, 10/10, 10/31, 11/03, 11/05, 11/07, 11/08, and 12/12. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on record review and observation the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the above allegations are substantiated. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC9099-D. A case management visit was conducted on 10/07/2024 due to violations observed during the investigation. See LIC809 on 10/07/2024. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided. PAGE 3 OF 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 It was alleged that resident (R1) sustained multiple falls due to the lack of supervision from facility staff. Based on record review, R1 sustained multiple falls between April 2022 – December 2022. The falls were noted by staff in R1’s records to either be witnessed or unwitnessed falls. R1 sustained majority of the falls in his/her bedroom. R1’s service plans on 04/07/2022, 04/29/2022, and 09/09/2022 R1 did not require staff assistance with mobility, ambulation or escorting. R1’s service on 11/23/2022, indicated that R1 may require escorts with or without the use of assistive devices to and from meals, activities and/or common areas and the plan for staff to escort R1 with his/her walker to meals and activities due to being high fall risk. On 11/05/2022, staff recommend a 24/7 companion due to frequent falls to R1’s responsible party. There is no indication that the 24/7 companion was started. R1’s signed admission agreement states that the community is not designed to provide twenty-four-hour care. It’s stated that resident may remain in the community as long as the care needs and level of functioning are consistent with those of other residents and with the level of staffing and facilities offered in the community. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on record review and observation, the above allegation is unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicates that although the allegation may be valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
Regulation
(a) The pre-admission appraisal shall be updated, in writing as frequently as necessary to note significant changes and to keep the appraisal accurate. The reappraisals shall document changes in the resident's physical, medical, mental, and social condition. Significant changes shall include but not be limited to: This requirement was not met as …
Inspector finding
Based on record review and observation, the licensee did not ensure resident (R1) was re-evaluated and R1’s service plans were updated after falls resulting in the resident sustaining injuries due to the falls which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitOctober 7, 2024Type B3 deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
During a follow-up inspection prompted by two earlier complaint investigations, inspectors found that the facility failed to obtain updated physician reports when a resident's care needs changed significantly over several months, and did not have the resident or their family sign off on updated care plans. The facility also did not notify the resident's physician about seven falls that occurred between April and October 2022, and did not follow through on a physician's recommendation for a special nutritional beverage until three months after receiving the recommendation.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management - deficiencies visit based on violations observed during 2 complaint investigations for complaint control number 26-AS-20221215152806 and 26-AS-20230714114133. LPA met with General Manger, Billy Mitchell and Resident Care Director, Jocelyne Bailon Solache . During the investigation for complaint control number 26-AS-20221215152806, it was found that on 07/09/2021, R1’s service plan was updated due to a change of condition in which R1 was moved from assisted living to memory care. On 04/07/2022, R1’s level of care increased from level 1 to level 2, which stated R1 was a low potential for falls to moderate potential for falls. On 04/29/2022, R1 went from a moderate potential for falls to a high potential for falls. On 11/23/2022, R1’s level of care increased from a level 2 to a level 10. Based on record review, resident (R1) did not obtain an updated physician’s report after any changes of conditions based on the re-evaluations and updated service plans. R1's physician's report was dated on 02/11/2021. R1 was admitted to the facility on 02/28/2021. R1’s service plans dated 07/08/2021, 04/07/2022, 04/29/2022, 09/09/2022, and 11/12/2022 were not signed by R1 and R1’s responsible party. The facility was unable to produce documents or proof to show the service plans were reviewed with R1’s and R1’s responsible party. On 04/30/2022, 06/24/2022, 07/05/2022, 07/06/2022, 08/09/2022, 09/23/2022, 10/07/2022 R1 sustained falls. Based on record review, it was not noted or indicated that R1’s physician was notified of the falls. SEE LIC809-C. 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 During the investigation for complaint control number 26-AS-20230714114133, it was found that R1's physician's report dated March 2023 stated a special diet for a nutritional beverage. Based on interview with a staff (S2), it was stated that the facility did not follow-up with R1's physician for an order of the nutritional beverage after receiving the physician's report in March 2023. Based on interview and record review, R1 was not receiving the nutritional beverage until the facility received a physician's order from R1's physician in June 2023. Deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC809-D. This report was reviewed with General Manger, Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
(a) A plan for incidental medical and dental care shall be developed by each facility. The plan shall encourage routine medical and dental care and provide for assistance in obtaining such care, by compliance with the following: (1) The licensee shall arrange, or assist in arranging, for medical and dental care appropriate to the conditions and ne…
Inspector finding
Based on record review and observation, the licensee did not ensure to obtain an updated physician’s report for resident (R1) after staff observed changes in R1’s conditions based on the re-evaluations and updated service plans, and did not obtain follow-up with R1's physician in a timely manner for an order for R1's nutritional beverage which poses a potential health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Regulation
(c) The licensee shall arrange a meeting with the resident, the resident’s representative, if any, appropriate facility staff, and a representative of the resident’s home health agency, if any, when there is significant change in the resident’s condition, or once every 12 months, whichever occurs first, as specified in Section 87467, Resident Parti…
Inspector finding
Based on record review and observation, the licensee did not ensure to review R1’s updated service plans with R1’s responsible party which poses a potential health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Regulation
(b) The licensee shall immediately bring any such changes to the attention of the resident's physician and his family or responsible person. This requirement was not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on record review and observation, the licensee did not ensure to report R1’s falls to R1’s physician on 04/30/2022, 06/24/2022, 07/05/2022, 07/06/2022, 08/09/2022, 09/23/2022, 10/07/2022 which poses a potential health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintOctober 7, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation looked into allegations of staff treating residents disrespectfully or being verbally or physically abusive. Investigators interviewed all seven residents and five staff members; all denied the allegations, and no records supported them. The complaint was found to be unfounded.
View full inspector notes
On 04/12/2023, 7 residents were interviewed. Based on resident interview, 7 out of 7 residents did not have any complaints of staff not treating them politely. 7 out of 7 residents denied staff being verbally and physically abusive to them. 7 out of 7 residents denied the observation of staff being verbally or physically abusive to other residents. On 10/07/2024, 5 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, 5 out of 5 staff member denied the observation or knowledge or staff not treating residents politely. 5 out of 5 staff denied the observation of staff being verbally or physically abusive to the residents. Based on record review, the Department did not receive any reports relating to these allegations. The Department has investigated the above allegations and based on interview, record review and observation the above allegations are unfounded, meaning the allegations are false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided. PAGE 2.
ComplaintOctober 7, 2024· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that staff pureed a resident's food and withheld a nutritional beverage without proper authorization. The investigation found that the resident's doctor had ordered the pureed diet in April 2023 and the responsible party had been informed of this change, but the facility lacked a formal physician's order for the nutritional beverage until June 2023, even though the doctor's notes from March 2023 had mentioned it. The complaint was determined to be unsubstantiated, meaning there was not enough evidence to prove violations occurred, though a follow-up case management visit was conducted in October 2024.
View full inspector notes
It was alleged that the facility staff pureed resident (R1)’s food without authorization from R1’s responsible party. On 07/21/2023, 2 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, S2 states that when R1 returned from his/her doctor’s appointment, R1’s responsible party provided the paper that states there was a change in diet to puree from R1’s doctor visit sometime in April 2023. S2 states that R1’s responsible party knew there was a change in diet because R1’s responsible party provided the facility with the diet order. S2 states R1’s hospice team was also informed of the diet change. Based on record review, R1’s physician signed a “diet order and dietary communication” form on 04/21/2023 for a puree diet. It was alleged that the facility staff are not accommodating to R1’s diet needs by not providing R1 with a nutritional beverage. The review of records show that R1’s physician’s report dated in March 2023 states a special diet for a nutritional beverage. On 07/21/2023, 2 staff members were interviewed. Based on staff interview, S2 states that they did not follow-up with R1’s physician in March to obtain the physician’s order for the nutritional beverage. S2 states despite the physician’s report in March 2023 stating R1 has a special diet for a nutritional beverage, the facility still requires an actual order from the physician. S2 states that since they did not have an actual physician’s order for the nutritional beverage, they were unable to provide the beverage to R1. S2 states they received an order in June 2023. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview and record review the above allegations are unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicated that although the allegation may be valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. However, a case management visit was conducted on 10/07/2024 due to a violation observed during the investigation. See LIC809 on 10/07/2024. This report was reviewed with General Manager Billy Mitchell and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintSeptember 19, 2024· SubstantiatedType A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A staff member physically handled a resident roughly on June 13, 2022, grabbing and lifting the resident aggressively from a wheelchair, squeezing the resident's chest and arms, and bending back the resident's finger—the resident had bruises on both arms, the forearm, and the finger. The facility delayed notifying the resident's family about the incident and the resident's complaints of shoulder pain until bruises were visible on June 17, four days later. The staff member was reassigned out of the memory care unit.
View full inspector notes
It was alleged that a staff member (S1) had roughly handled resident (R1) in care during the night of 06/13/2022 approximately around midnight. It was alleged that (S1) was upset that R1 was still awake around midnight and aggressively grabbed R1 from behind and pulled R1 up from his/her wheelchair. On 07/01/2022, 5 staff members were interviewed. Based on interview, S3 stated to be made aware of the incident between S1 and R1, on 06/15/2022, 2 days after the incident. S3 was notified by another staff (S2) of the observation between S1 and R1 the night of 06/13/2022. S3 stated that S2 gave R1 popcorn shortly after R1 had a fall, when S1 came into the TV room and “yanked” R1 up from his/her wheelchair, wrapped R1 under his/her shoulder saying it was time for bed. S2 attempted to defend R1 but S1 still continued to take R1 to bed. Based on review of the police records, a statement was taken from S2, who witnessed the incident. S2 stated to be in the dining room eating popcorn with R1, when S1 entered the room very upset that R1 was still up as it was 0030 hours. S1 approached R1 was behind and grabbed R1. S1’s arms were underneath R1 when S1 lifted R1 in an aggressive manger. S1 then forced R1 back and down into his/her wheelchair. Based on review of the police records, a statement was taken from R1. It was reported that R1 was in the dining room of the facility with S2 eating popcorn, when S1 entered the room upset and yelling at R1 for staying up. R1 reported that S1 approached him/her from behind and grabbed the victim from underneath the arms, lifted R1 up with S1’s hands across R1’s chest, inches below his/her throat and squeezed him/her. R1 reported that S1 had grabbed his/her right ring finger and attempted to fold it back. S1 wheeled R1 into his/her room and S1 slammed his/her up against the wall and put him/her to bed. Based on review of the police records, injuries were noted on 06/17/2022. R1 was observed with some bruising underneath both the left and right arms. Bruising was also noted on R1’s right forearm and right ring finger. PAGE 2 OF 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 After the incident, it was alleged that the facility did not informed R1’s family of a change in condition as R1 complained of pain and couldn’t move his/her arms and shoulders. It was alleged that the family was only notified of a fall that took place on 06/13/2022, and not the aggressiveness or pain until Friday, 06/17/2022 when bruises were discovered under R1’s arms. Based on staff interview, S3 stated that on 06/14/2022, 06/15/2022, and 06/16/2022 R1 complained of shoulder pain and requested for a PRN. S3 administered the PRN medication and monitored R1 for effectiveness of the PRN. On 06/14/2022, S3 did not notice any discoloration or bruising on R1 and informed his/her supervisor (S4) that R1 was complaining of shoulder pain. Based on interview with S4, S4 was made aware of incident at about 5:00PM on 06/15/2022. On 06/15/2022, S4 assessed R1 and observed R1 complained of pain on the left shoulder. S4 stated that R1 was complaining of so much pain that they couldn’t get R1’s shirt up to observe. S4 faxed the doctor. On 06/16/2022, S4 called the family and stated to have notified the family of R1’s shoulder pain and headache and suggested to R1’s responsible party to take R1 to the doctor to make sure. Based on review of R1’s records, it was indicated that on 06/16/2022 staff spoke with R1’s responsible party that R1 hasn’t been sleeping well at night. There was no note that staff informed R1’s responsible party of any complaints of pain starting from 06/14/2022, when R1 first complained of shoulder pain. Based on record review and interview, S1 was moved to assisted living and no longer assigned to the memory care unit. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on interview and record review the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the above allegations are substantiated. Deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC9099-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director, Jocelyn Bailon and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided. PAGE 3 OF 3.
Regulation
(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (3) To be free from punishment, humiliation, intimidation, abuse, or other actions of a punitive nature, such as withholding residents’ money or interfering with daily living functions such as eating, sleeping, or elimination. This requ…
Inspector finding
Based on interview and record review, the licensee did not ensure resident (R1) was free from abuse by staff (S1) who handled R1 roughly on the night of 06/13/2022 which poses an immediate, health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
ComplaintSeptember 19, 2024· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint about staffing was investigated at the facility on December 8, 2022. The investigator reviewed staff schedules, interviewed employees, and observed the memory care unit, but found insufficient evidence to confirm or deny the allegation. No violations were cited.
View full inspector notes
On 12/08/2022, 2 staff members were interviewed. Based on interview, in Garden House they normally have about 4 caregivers and 1 medtech per shift and NOC is normally 2 caregivers and 1 medtech. Staff from Assisted Living are pulled, if needed. It was stated that they utilize 1 agency staff in the AM shift at least 2-3 times a week and 2 agency staff in the PM shift at least 2-3 times a week. It was stated that agency staff are normally on the weekends. It was stated that if they are short staffed or have a call out, their staff either works doubles, leadership staff fills in to cover the shifts, or a staffing agency is contacted. 2 out of 2 staff stated the facility is constantly hiring, and the hiring of new staff is ongoing. Based on observation, on 12/08/2022 around 10:40AM, LPA Dolores entered the Garden House section. LPA observed 2 caregivers, 1 staff assisting with activities to a group of more than 10 residents, and 1 housekeeper on the floor. It was stated that 2 caregivers and 1 medtech was on break. Based on record review, there was 35 residents in memory care as of 12/08/2022. The facility’s Garden House schedule showed at least 3-4 caregivers and 1 medtech scheduled daily in the AM and PM. NOC shift shows at least 2 caregivers scheduled. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation is unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicates that although the allegation may have happened, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director, Jocelyn Bailon and a copy of the report was provided.
Other visitSeptember 19, 2024Type B1 deficiency
Inspector: Marcella Tarin
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced annual inspection, inspectors found the facility met standards for temperature, emergency exits, food storage, medication security, resident bedrooms, bathrooms, fire safety equipment, and resident medical records. Two staff personnel files were incomplete—one file was not available at the facility and another lacked required health screening and tuberculosis test documentation—and all staff annual training records were not physically available on-site, though the manager said they had them in email. The facility was cited for these deficiencies and advised that all personnel records must be kept at the facility and available for inspection.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Marcella Tarin and LPA Christine Delores conducted an unannounced annual inspection visit at 9:45AM and met with General Manager (GM) Billy Mitchell and Health Services Director, Jocelyn Bailon. LPAs toured the facility inside and out with the General Manager to include the living room, dining room, kitchen, resident bedrooms, bathrooms, and exterior. Facility temperature maintained between 70 to 75 degrees F. Facility staff are fingerprint cleared and associated to facility. All emergency exits were observed to be clear of obstruction. LPAs toured the kitchen area and observed a perishable food supply of at least two days and a non-perishable food supply of at least seven days. Refrigerator temperature maintained at 35 degrees F and freezer maintained at -5 degrees F. The exterior of the facility was also inspected. No toxins, chemicals or items that can pose a danger to residents observed. LPA Tarin toured 7 resident bedrooms. 7 out of 7 resident bedrooms had functioning lights, storage space for personal belongings, clean bedding, a chair, lamp and dresser/table. LPA measured hot water temperature, range of 106.7 to 115.7 degrees F for 7 out of 7 resident bathrooms. The facility was equipped with smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. Fire extinguishers were last serviced on 6/30/2024. LPA observed the facility first aid kit and it was observed to be complete. The facility fire/earthquake drill log was reviewed and drills are being conducted quarterly. The last fire drill was conducted on 6/30/2024. Facility has emergency disaster plan. LPA reviewed 7 residents Centrally Stored Medication and Destruction Records (CSMDR). LPA observed 7 out of 7 CSMDRs are complete with all medications accounted and documented. LPA observed the medication storage area was locked and inaccessible to residents in care. Please see LIC 809-C. 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 LPA reviewed 5 out of 5 resident records. LPA observed 5 out of 5 resident records as complete to include a medical assessment, TB result, updated appraisal/needs and services plan, identification and emergency contact information, personal rights, and consent forms. LPA reviewed 6 out of 6 staff records. LPA observed 4 out of 6 records as complete to include fingerprint clearance, health screening, TB result, and personnel record. Staff (S1) and (S4) records were observed as incomplete. S1 file was not available for review by LPA. GM states corporate has the file and does not have the physical file in the facility. S1 does not have a health screening and TB result. GM states a plan to obtain a health screening and TB result. S4's file does not contain a health screening and TB result. GM states they have requested the health screening and TB result and are awaiting the documentation. 6 out of 6 staff records did not contain documentation for annual training. GM states he has the training records on file in an email and will email staff training records to LPA Tarin by morning of 9/20/2024. LPAs advised GM that all personnel records must be maintained at the facility and available for review by the licensing agency. During visit LPA obtained GM's administrator certificate and resume. Deficiencies were cited today per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC809-. Exit interview was conducted with GM. This report was provided to GM and appeals rights were provided.
Regulation
(a) The licensee shall ensure that personnel records are maintained on the licensee, administrator and each employee. Each personnel record shall contain the following information:
Inspector finding
This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Deficient Practice Statement 1 2 3 4 Based on record review and observation, licensee did ensure staff (S1) and (S4) health screening and TB result was not on file which poses a potential health, safety and personal rights risk to persons in care. POC Due Date: 09/26/2024 Plan of Correction 1 2 3 4 Licensee will submit a plan of correction to ensure (S1) and (S4) obtain health screening and TB result via email to LPA Tarin by POC due date 9/26/2024…
Other visitJune 24, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
An unannounced case management visit found no violations. The facility corrected paperwork related to a previous civil penalty issued in June 2024 for a staff member who worked without required criminal background clearance, and the correct penalty form was signed and provided to the facility.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management - other visit. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Kim Golden. During visit, a complaint report for complaint control number: 26-AS-20220404161647 was amended. The amended report was reviewed and handed to the ED. On 06/12/2024, the facility was issued a civil penalty for a staff member working in the facility without a criminal background check clearance. On 06/12/2024, the wrong civil penalty assessment form was generated. During today visit, the correct civil penalty form (LIC421BG) was reviewed and signed by the ED. LPA obtained the hard copy of the LIC421BG. ED obtained a copy of the signed LIC421BG. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Executive Director Kim Golden and a copy of the report was provided.
Other visitJune 13, 2024Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
State investigators held a non-compliance meeting on June 13, 2024, to address multiple violations at the facility, including failure to report a resident's death and serious injury to licensing within 24 hours, failure to conduct required background clearances and staff roster checks before hiring, and failure to update a resident's care assessment after a hospital stay. The facility must undergo frequent monitoring inspections for the next two years and submit a compliance plan to correct these violations. A civil penalty related to the serious injury is pending review, and the facility's administrator was terminated effective June 14, 2024.
View full inspector notes
On 06/13/2024 San Bruno Regional Office - San Jose Unit conducted a non-compliance conference meeting with Vice President of Operations Kim Golden, Legal Council (Hansen and Bridges) Joel Goldman, Vice President of Care Teri Moore-Showalter, Regional Director of Health Services Erika Hughes, and Garden House Director Jocelyne Bailon. Present in the meeting were Regional Manage Vivien Helbling, Licensing Program Manager Jackie Jin, and Licensing Program Analyst Christine Dolores. During the non-compliance meeting, the following serious violations were discussed: 87211(a)(2) Reporting Requirements, 87466 Observation of Resident, 87468.1(a)(2) Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities, 87463(a)(3) Reappraisals, 87468.1(a)(3) Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities, 87355(e)(2) Criminal Record Clearance, 87355(e)(1) Criminal Record Clearance, and 97705(f)(2) Care of Persons with Dementia. During this meeting, the compliance plan was developed and discussed with the licensee which includes more frequent monitoring inspection visits to ensure compliance with this compliance plan and Title 22 Regulations for 2 years. Licensee was provided the link below for resources and guidance to improve facility operations: https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/community-care/resource-guide-for-providers . During this meeting, an additional deficiency was issued as per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 following deficiencies found during case management visits and complaint investigations: on 05/29/2024, licensee and Administrator failed to report a serious injury and resident's death within 24 hours to Licensing. See LIC809-D for more information. Page 1 of 2. 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 On 01/31/2023 and 12/08/2022, licensee and Administrator failed to associate 4 staff members to the facility's roster prior to staff members starting work resulting in a repeat violation within a 12 month period. On 06/12/2024 and 12/08/2022, licensee and Administrator failed to obtain a criminal record clearance for 2 staff members prior to the staff members starting work. On 01/16/2024, licensee and Administrator failed to ensure a resident's reappraisal was updated after returning to the facility from the hospital. The current Administrator's last day at the facility is 06/14/2024. An additional Civil Penalty for violation resulting in serious injury is pending review. This report was reviewed with Vice President of Operations Kim Golden, Legal Council (Hansen and Bridges) Joel Goldman, Vice President of Care Teri Moore-Showalter, Regional Director of Health Services Erika Hughes, and Garden House Director Jocelyne Bailon. A copy of the report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
(d) The administrator shall have the qualifications specified in Sections 87405(d)(1) through (7). If the licensee is also the administrator, all requirements for an administrator shall apply. (2) Knowledge of and ability to conform to the applicable laws, rules and regulations. This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview, record review, and observation the Administrator failed to exhibit the knowledge of applicable laws, rules and regulations resulting in serious violations which poses an immediate health safety and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitJune 12, 2024Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
During a follow-up visit to address a complaint about staffing practices, inspectors found that a staff member worked at the facility for five days in May 2024 without having completed the required criminal background clearance process. The facility was cited for this violation and assessed a $500 civil penalty. The facility's management was notified of the violation and appeal rights.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management - deficiencies visit due to a violation observed during a complaint investigation. LPA met with Vice President of Operations, Kim Golden and General Manager Kippie Castronovo . During a complaint investigation for complaint control number 26-AS-20240524084602 , it was found a staff member (S1) was working in the facility without obtaining a criminal record clearance. Based on review of S1's file, S1 started at the facility of 05/17/2023 and ended employment on 05/2024. LPA reviewed the Department's Guardian Background Check System, which does not show that S1 has a criminal record clearance from the Department. A deficiency was cited during today’s visit, see LIC 809-D. A civil penalty is being assessed for the amount of $500 ($100 per day x 5 days = $500), for staff (S1) working at the facility without fingerprint clearance. See LIC421M. This report was reviewed with Vice President of Operations, Kim Golden and General Manager Kippie Castronovo and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
(e) All individuals subject to a criminal record review pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 1569.17(b) shall prior to working, residing or volunteering in a licensed facility: (1) Obtain a California clearance or a criminal record exemption as required by the Department or This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview and record review the licensee did not obtain a criminal record clearance for staff (S1) prior to S1 starting work which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitMay 29, 2024Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A licensing analyst conducted an unannounced visit after learning the facility failed to report a resident's death to the state within 24 hours of it occurring on May 25, 2024. The facility was cited for this failure to notify. The investigation into this matter was pending at the time of the visit.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management - incident visit. LPA met with General Manager, Kippie Castronovo. During today's visit, LPA was verbally informed of a resident (R1's) death on 05/25/2024. Based on record review and interview, the facility did not notify the Department of R1's death within 24 hours of the occurrence date. R1's documents were requested by tomorrow (05/30/2024) morning: physician's report, needs and services plan, identification and emergency information, and progress notes for May 2024. Documents were obtained during visit to include the incident report, police case number, and coroner's case number. This case management visit will be pending investigation. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC809-D. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Kippie Castronovo and a copy of the report and appeal was provided.
Regulation
(a) Each licensee shall furnish to the licensing agency such reports as the Department may require, including, but not limited to, the following: (2) Occurrences, such as epidemic outbreaks, poisonings, catastrophes or major accidents which threaten the welfare, safety or health of residents, personnel or visitors, shall be reported within 24 hours…
Inspector finding
Based on interview, record review, and observation the licensee did not ensure to report the resident (R1)'s death and incident to the department within 24 hours which poses / posed an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitMay 29, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A licensing analyst made an unannounced visit to review case management practices and examined one resident's records, including their service plan and medical information. No violations were found during this visit. The facility's general manager was informed of the findings and received a copy of the report.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management - incident visit. LPA met with General Manager, Kippie Castronovo. During visit, LPA obtained a copy of resident (R1)'s records to include: face sheet, identification and emergency information, consent forms, physician's report, ID, needs and services plan, and progress notes. This case management visit will be pending investigation. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with General Manager, Kippie Castronovo and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintJanuary 16, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged the facility was improperly restricting a resident's visitors based on the wishes of the resident's power of attorney. An investigation found no violation: the resident had the right to consent to visits regardless of what the power of attorney wanted, there was no restraining order or documented list of unauthorized visitors, and the power of attorney's legal documents did not give them authority to restrict visitations.
View full inspector notes
On 04/13/2022, the Administrator was interviewed. Based on interview, the facility did not have any current residents who have restraining orders or any unauthorized visitations. It was stated the residents have a right to see who they want and can have visitors if they consent to it unless there is a restraining order. It was stated that if a resident’s POA does not want a resident to see a certain visitor, the resident still has their right to consent to the visitation. Based on interview, R1’s POA did not want anyone to see R1. It was stated that R1 always wants to see his/her relative and can see his/her realize if he/she consents to the visitation. Staff (S2) stated R1's responsible party verbally stated they did not want R1's relative to visit, however, R1 always consented to seeing R1's relative. Based on record review, there is no documentation that R1 had any restraining orders nor was the facility provided a list of unauthorized visitors from the resident and/or resident's responsible party. Based on review of R1's POA (power of attorney) documentation, there is no documentation that allows R1's POA to restrict visitations. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation is unfounded meaning the allegation is false, could not have happened, and/or is without a reasonable basis. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Kim Golden and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintJanuary 16, 2024· SubstantiatedCitation on file
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Substantiated — CDSS found a violation and issued a citation. Full citation details are on file with the state.
Plain-language summary
A resident fell in their bedroom on August 27, 2023, and lay on the floor overnight with injuries including a head bump, skin tears, and ants on their body before staff found them the next morning; the resident had recently returned from the hospital with documented mobility problems and was supposed to be checked every 72 hours, but staff were unaware of this requirement, did not monitor the resident as instructed, and the resident's care plan was not updated to reflect their post-hospital needs. The facility was also found to have an ongoing pest control problem. The complaint was substantiated and the facility was assessed a $500 civil penalty with an additional penalty pending.
View full inspector notes
PAGE 2 OF 3. On 08/08/2023, R1 was admitted to the hospital after a fall. The review of R1’s medical records noted that R1 was not safe to go back to the facility. R1’s active problems included impaired mobility and activities of daily living and muscle weakness. However, since R1 refused to go to a skilled nursing facility R1 was referred to Home Health. On 08/18/2023, the hospital case worker spoke with two staff at the facility and advised of the discharge and referral to home health. On 08/19/2023, R1 was discharged back to the facility. Based on the facility's protocols, resident was placed under alert charting for return from hospital and staff were to monitor R1 for 72 hours. Based on staff interview, 6 out of 6 staff stated that R1 was independent. Staff was unaware that R1 was on a 72-hour check and stated that staff was not checking on R1 as they were supposed to. Based on record review, there is only documentation that staff noted R1’s condition on 08/19/2023 and 08/21/2023. There is no documentation that R1’s condition was monitored on 08/20/2023. During staff interviews, it was also observed that R1 was not feeling well on 08/24/2023, however, there was no documentation of communication between staff nor of R1’s condition that day. On 08/27/2023, at 0750 hours, staff found R1 on his/her bedroom floor with dried blood and injuries to his/her body including a golf size bump on his/her forehead. Staff called 911 and R1 was transported to the hospital where it was noted that R1 had a bump on his/her forehead with redness and discoloration on the right side of his/her right eye, skin tear on his/her right elbow and on his/her hands and knees. Based on interview, R1 reported to be getting ready for bedtime, when R1 fell and hit his/her head on the night stand. R1 was on the floor and tried calling out for staff help, however, no one responded. R1 was not checked by the staff throughout that night and was found the morning of 08/27/2023 after calling out for help. Based on staff interview, when R1 was found on the floor, R1 had ants on his/her body. 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 OF 3. The review of records shows that R1’s service plan was updated on 08/20/2023. The updated service plan did not include any diagnosis and specific needs relating to R1’s condition after being discharged from the hospital on 08/19/2023. R1’s service plan also did not indicate the need for assistance in ambulation, despite R1’s hospital discharge paperwork stating that R1 had impaired mobility and activities of daily living (ADLs), and muscle weakness. R1 was noted to be a moderate fall risk, however, the facility did not implement any additional measures to ensure R1’s safety in the facility knowing R1 is a fall risk. There is also no documentation of any refusal of care. According to R1’s residency and service agreement, the facility’s responsibility was to regularly observe the residents health status to identify social and health care needs and provide the residents with needed consultations regarding social and health related issues. In the agreement, it was also stated that “the resident’s rights shall not be limited in any way by us or team members, except where it may be necessary for the health and safety of the residents.” Based on observation from the Department’s unannounced visits on 08/03/2023 and 11/09/2023, LPA Dolores observed ants on the floor of resident (R2)’s bedroom and ants along the walls of the Business Office Director’s office. Based on interview, the facility has ongoing issues with ants and currently has a contract with a pest control to eliminate the issue. The Department has investigated the above allegations. Based on record review, interview and observation conducted the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. Therefore, the Department found the above allegations to be SUBSTANTIATED. Deficiencies are being cited. See LIC9099-D. An immediate civil penalty of $500.00 is being assessed against the facility today for violation resulting in serious injury to a resident in care. An additional Civil Penalty for violation resulting in serious injury is pending review. This report was reviewed with Kippie Castronovo and a copy of the report and appeal rights was provided.
Other visitDecember 15, 2023No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
This was an administrative visit to deliver an updated license document that had been issued in January 2023. The facility's interim manager received and signed the amended document. No violations or concerns were identified during this visit.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management - other visit. LPA met with Interim General Manager, Kippie Castronovo. The purpose of the visit was to deliver an amended LIC809-D that was issued on 01/31/2023. LPA reviewed the LIC809-D with IGM. IGM signed the amended LIC809-D and was provided a copy of the LIC809-D. This report was reviewed with Interim General Manager (IGM), Kippie Castronovo and a copy of this report was provided.
ComplaintNovember 9, 2023No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged the facility failed to address foot pain for a resident. Staff reported the resident never complained of pain and family did not raise concerns, and medical records showed no documented foot or bunion issues; the complaint was found to be unfounded.
View full inspector notes
On 11/09/2023, 4 staff members were interviewed. Based on interview, the facility staff was unaware of any concerns regarding R1’s feet and bunions. 4 out of 4 staff states R1 has never complained of any pain. 4 out of 4 staff denied any observation of redness on R1’s feet. 4 out of 4 staff state R1 is constantly walking around Garden House and has never complained of any pain. S4 states to observe R1 was limping one day and when asked if R1 was in pain, R1 denied any feeling of pain and continued to walk around Garden House. 4 out of 4 staff state R1’s family and/or visitor has not addressed any concerns regarding R1’s bunions and feet. On 11/09/2023, 1 witness was interviewed. Based on interview, R1 has been complaining that his/her feet were hurting for “quite a while”, however, the facility was not informed of that information when R1 moved in. Based on records reviewed, there was no indication of medical concerns relating to R1’s bunions and/or feet. There was also no indication R1 complained of any pain which may prompt facility staff to seek medical attention. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation is unfounded meaning the allegation is false could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. This report was reviewed with Garden House Director, Jocelyn Bailon and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintJanuary 31, 2023· SubstantiatedType A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that on December 28, 2022, a staff member kneed a resident in the left side while attempting to help the resident back into a wheelchair after a fall, as captured on the facility's video system. The investigation substantiated the allegation, and the staff member involved has been terminated. The facility has developed a plan to correct the violation.
View full inspector notes
On 12/28/2022, a video from the facility’s fall detection program recorded a video of R1’s fall. During the video, S1 and S2 are seen attempting to assist R1 back onto the wheelchair. After failing to assist R1, the video shows S1 quickly knee R1 on the left side causing R1 to budge. Based on interview and record review, S1 – S2 has been terminated from the facility. The Department has investigated the above allegation and the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. Therefore, the Department found the above allegation to be SUBSTANTIATED. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. See LIC9099-D. A plan of correction was developed with the Executive Director, Nelson Rodrigues and a copy of this report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (3) To be free from punishment, humiliation, intimidation, abuse, or other actions of a punitive nature ... This requirement is not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on interview and observation of the fall detection video, it was evident that after S1 and S2 failed to assist R1 back onto the wheelchair after a fall, S1 kneed R1 on the left side causing R1 to budge, which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitJanuary 31, 2023Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced case management inspection, inspectors found that two staff members who had been terminated in January 2023 were not properly documented in the facility's personnel records, and the facility did not submit required transfer requests for these employees. The facility was assessed civil penalties totaling $6,000 for this repeat violation and has developed a plan to correct the issue.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct a case management – deficiencies visit. LPA met with Executive Director, Nelson Rodrigues. During a complaint investigation, LPA observed staff (S1) and staff (S2) were not associated to the facility’s personnel report summary. Based on record review and interview, the facility did not send the Department a request for transfer. S1 and S2 are not current employees of the facility and were terminated as of the middle of January 2023. A deficiency was cited during today’s visit, see LIC809-D. A civil penalty for repeat violation within the 12-month period is being assessed for the amount of $3,000 ($100 per day x 30 days = $3,000), for staff (S1) working at the facility without a transfer request. A second civil penalty for repeat violation within the 12-month period is being assessed for the amount of $3,000 ($100 per day x 30 days = $3,000), for staff (S2) working at the facility without a transfer request. See LIC421BG. A plan of correction was developed with Executive Director, Nelson Rodrigues. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report and appeals rights were provided.
Regulation
(e) All individuals subject to a criminal record review pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 1569.17(b) shall prior to working, residing or volunteering in a licensed facility: (2) Request a transfer of a criminal record clearance as specified in Section 87355(c) or. This requirement was not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on record review, interview, and observation the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above by not requesting a transfer to associate S1 and S2 to the facility prior to individuals starting work, which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Other visitJanuary 31, 2023No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A state licensing official visited the facility unannounced today to deliver an immediate exclusion letter for an employee who is no longer working there. The facility's executive director received the letter during the visit. No violations of facility operations were identified during this visit.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct a Case Management - Other visit. LPA met with Executive Director, Nelson Rodrigues. The purpose of the visit was to deliver an immediate exclusion letter to exclude an employee (S1) at the facility. Based on record review, S1 is no longer an employee at the facility. The immediate exclusion letter was handed to the Executive Director during today's visit. This report was reviewed with Executive Director, Nelson Rodrigues and a copy of the report was provided.
Other visitDecember 8, 2022Type A2 deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced inspection, investigators found that two staff members worked at the facility without required clearances: one staff member worked for more than 5 days without fingerprint clearance and was immediately dismissed, and another staff member worked for more than 5 days without being properly registered to the facility. The facility was assessed civil penalties totaling $1,000 for these violations and must submit additional paperwork to correct the staffing records.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived to the facility unannounced to open an initial complaint investigation. During visit, a case management visit was conducted. LPA met with Executive Director (ED) Diane Atkinson and Business Officer Director (BOD) Kippie Castronovo. During the complaint investigation, LPA and ED toured the Garden House unit and it was observed staff (S1) was not associated to the facility personnel report summary. Upon the review of the Guardian Background Check System, it was determined S1’s application is incomplete therefore is not fingerprint cleared. S1 was immediately dismissed from work and was informed S1 would not be able to work at the facility until they obtain a fingerprint clearance. LPA provided S1 with the document that was mailed to S1's mailing address from Guardian. BOD confirmed S1 has been working in the facility for more than 5 days. LPA observed three staff members who was not associated to the facility but are fingerprint cleared. Two out of three staff members were associated to the facility's old license. One out of three staff members (S2) is not associated to the facility and has been working in the facility for more than 5 days. BOD will submit the LIC9182 form along with other needed paperwork by end of business day. Deficiencies were cited during today’s visit, see LIC 809-D. A civil penalty is being assessed for the amount of $500 ($100 per day x 5 days = $500), for staff (S1) working at the facility without fingerprint clearance. A second civil penalty is being assessed for the amount of $500 ($100 per day x 5 days = $500), for staff (S2) working at the facility without association. Please see LIC 421BG. Exit interview was conducted with Executive Director Diane Atkinson and a copy of the report was provided along with the appeal rights.
Regulation
(e) All individuals subject to a criminal record review pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 1569.17(b) shall prior to working, residing or volunteering in a licensed facility: (1) Obtain a California clearance or a criminal record exemption as required by the Department or ... This requirement was not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on record review, interview, and observation the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above for staff (S1) which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
Regulation
(e) All individuals subject to a criminal record review pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 1569.17(b) shall prior to working, residing or volunteering in a licensed facility: (2) Request a transfer of a criminal record clearance as specified in Section 87355(c) or ... This requirement was not met as evidenced by:
Inspector finding
Based on record review, interview, and observation the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above for staff (S2) which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to persons in care.
InspectionDecember 1, 2022No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
A state inspector visited the facility unannounced to deliver an immediate exclusion letter for an employee, meaning that staff member is no longer allowed to work at the facility. The Executive Director was informed of the action during the visit. No violations of facility operations were found during this inspection.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived at the facility unannounced to conduct a Case Management - Other visit. LPA met with Executive Director, Diane Atkinson. The purpose of the visit was to deliver an immediate exclusion letter to exclude an employee (S1) at the facility. The immediate exclusion letter and declaration of service was handed to the Executive Director during today's visit. This report was reviewed with Executive Director, Diane Atkinson and a copy of the report was provided.
Other visitSeptember 19, 2022Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
An inspector conducted an unannounced annual inspection focused on infection control and found the facility generally well-maintained with proper mask use, hand sanitizer availability, and cleaning practices in place. During a tour of the community garden, inspectors found sharp gardening tools and toxic materials that residents could access, but staff immediately secured these items when the problem was pointed out. A violation was cited related to California regulations, and the findings were reviewed with facility leadership.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores arrived unannounced to conduct the facility’s annual inspection to focus on infection control. LPA met with Resident Service Director (RSD), Richard Padilla and Executive Director, Diane Atkinson. During visit, LPA toured the facility with RSD to include the assisted living section, dining rooms, kitchen, activity rooms, memory care, and exterior. All fire exit routes were free and clear of obstruction. All staff observed wearing a face mask. At 11:05 a.m., LPA and RSD observed multiple sharp gardening tools and toxins accessible in the community garden. Staff immediately secured the gardening tools and toxins. The facility's temperature was maintained between 68 - 75 degrees Fahrenheit. LPA observed 2 days worth of perishables and 7 days worth of non-perishables. LPA observed a designated entry point. Facility uses Accushield for symptom screening and temperature check for all visitors and staff. Hand sanitizer made available at entry and throughout the facility. Bathrooms supplied with hand washing sign, hygiene product, and paper supplies. LPA observed the facility's Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) supplies and PPE cart. Trash can observed with lid. Facility clean and disinfect multiple times daily and as needed. Staff are N95 fit tested. LPA reviewed the facility's procedures with RSD to include infection control training, isolation, testing, and monitoring. The following posters observed to include required mask, social distancing, symptoms of COVID, and cough etiquette. A deficiency was cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Executive Director, Diane Atkinson and a copy of the report was provided.
Regulation
(f) The following shall be stored inaccessible to residents with dementia: (2) Over-the-counter medication, nutritional supplements or vitamins, alcohol, cigarettes, and toxic substances such as certain plants, gardening supplies, cleaning supplies and disinfectants.
Inspector finding
Based on observation and interview, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above by having multiple sharp gardening tools and toxins accessible in the commuity garden to persons with dementia which poses an immediate health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care. POC Due Date: 09/20/2022 Plan of Correction 1 2 3 4 Licensee immediately secured all the sharp gardening tools and toxins during visit. Licensee states to implement a locked storage for all gardening supplies g…
Other visitSeptember 7, 2021No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
This was an unannounced pre-licensing inspection on August 20, 2021, where inspectors reviewed resident and staff files, checked required postings about rights and protections, and confirmed staff background clearances. No issues were found and the facility appeared ready to operate. The application still required final approval from the state before the facility could be licensed.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores and Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Jackie Jin conducted an unannounced pre-licensing continuation visit from 8/20/2021. LPA and LPM met with Administrator, Diane Atkinson. During today's visit, LPA and LPM observed the following posters: personal rights, if you see something say something, ombudsmen, and resident right to counsel posted. Resident Admission Agreement and Death and Loss policy is available for the public to review upon request. LPA and LPM reviewed 13 resident files and 13 staff files. Facility staff are fingerprint cleared and associated to the facility. Resident files all consist of Admission Agreement, Medical Assessment with TB Information, Consent Forms, Care Plans, Safeguard for Personal Properties and Valuables, and Personal Rights. Staff files all consist of Personal Record, Health Screening with TB Information, and Criminal Record Statement. Component III is being waived because applicant has been a facility administrator since 11/1986. No issues noted during this pre-licensing inspection. LPA and LPM observed the facility is ready to be licensed. However, this report will be submitted to the Central Application Bureau (CAB) and a final review of the application will be conducted. This facility is not yet licensed and is subject to final approval by CAB. Additional requirements may still be required. This report was reviewed with Diane Atkinson, Administrator and a copy of this report provided.
ComplaintAugust 20, 2021No deficiencies
Inspector: Christine Dolores
Plain-language summary
This was a pre-licensing visit to a facility with assisted living and memory care units. Inspectors toured the building and found apartments were clean and properly furnished, bathrooms had safety equipment like grab bars, medications were stored securely in locked cabinets, food storage temperatures were appropriate, and fire safety equipment was in place. The inspection is ongoing and will continue on another day.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Christine Dolores and Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Jackie Jin arrived unannounced to conduct a pre-licensing visit. LPA and LPM met with Diane Atkinson, Administrator. There is currently residents living at the facility. The facility has three floors in assisted living, one floor memory care, and one transition memory care unit. The facility has an approved fire clearance for 199 non ambulatory and 15 bedridden residents. LPA toured the facility inside and outside including the apartments, bathrooms, kitchen, and common areas. Resident apartments were equipped with proper furniture and lighting. Resident apartment temperature was maintained between 75 to 77 degrees Fahrenheit. Bedding and linens are available to the residents and observed clean. Bathrooms are equipped with grab bars, nonskid floors, hygiene supplies, and toiletry. Facility is equipped with cups, plates, utensils, and cooking supplies. Hot water temperature was measured between 105.4 to 114.2 degrees Fahrenheit in resident apartment bathrooms. The facility has designated medication rooms with locked medication cabinets. LPA and LPM reviewed centrally stored medication records with residents medications. LPA observed first aid kit with the following supplies: bandages, scissors, tweezers, and thermometer. LPA and LPM observed locked medications, sharp objects, and cleaning supplies. Continue 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 LPA observed 2 days worth of perishables and 7 days worth of nonperishable. Refrigerator temperature was maintained at 37 degrees Fahrenheit. Freezer temperature was maintained at 0 degrees Fahrenheit. Facility is equipped with smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detector, and fire extinguisher. Hallway and passageways were observed free of obstruction. LPA and LPM will return another day to complete pre-licensing visit. This report was reviewed with Diane Atkinson, Administrator, and a copy of this report is provided.
Federal summary
CMS Care CompareNot a CMS-certified facility
California RCFEs (residential care facilities for the elderly) are licensed by the state, not by CMS. CMS data only applies to skilled nursing facilities or to CCRCs that operate a licensed SNF wing.
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
No published reviews yet. Use the button above to share your experience.