Lytton Gardens Community Care
RCFE
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 assistance with daily living activities such as bathing, dressing, meals, and medication management in a home-like setting. RCFEs are not hospitals or skilled nursing facilities — they do not provide round-the-clock medical care.
649 University Avenue · Palo Alto, 94301
Quick facts
Quality snapshot
Updated April 25, 2026Compared to 15 California RCFE 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
Severity36thWeighted citations per bed
Repeats100thRepeat deficiencies as share of total
Frequency43thDeficiencies 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
Lytton Gardens Community Care scores B−. Better than 60% of comparable California RESIDENTIAL CARE ELDERLY facilities. Severity: 36th percentile. Repeats: top 0%. Frequency: 43th 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_general / medium beds (15 facilities).
Citation severity over time
↓ improvingWeighted severity score per month · 24 months
Weighted score (24mo)
26
Last citation
Mar 26
Finding distribution
4 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 must this facility report to the state — and how fast?Cited Jul 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).
What training are all staff required to complete?22 CCR §87411
All direct-care staff must complete:
- 10 hours initial training within the first four weeks of employment.
- 4 hours annual in-service every year thereafter.
- Administrator certificate from a CDSS-approved program — 80 hours for first-time, 40 hours renewal every 2 years.
Ask on tour: Ask when the last staff training was completed and how it's tracked.
How many staff must be on duty overnight?22 CCR §87415
Based on 55 licensed beds:
One awake caregiver must be on duty, plus one additional caregiver on call who can respond within 10 minutes.
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
- 430701864
- License type
- RESIDENTIAL CARE ELDERLY
- License status
- LICENSED
- License expires
- Not yet indexed
- Licensed beds
- 55
- Operator
- Community Housing Inc.
Inspections & citations
21
reports on file
7
total deficiencies
2
Type A (actual harm)
Other visitMarch 5, 2026Type B1 deficiency
Plain-language summary
During a complaint investigation visit, inspectors found that the facility's resident emergency alert system acknowledgment form directed residents to call 911 in life-threatening emergencies, rather than first alerting facility staff who could provide immediate assistance. This created a violation of state regulations governing how emergency procedures should be communicated to residents. The facility was required to revise the form to ensure residents understand the proper protocol for reporting emergencies at the facility.
View full inspector notes
During complaint investigation visit, LPA Jeung observed deficiency of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22. Deficiency appears on a following page. Residents were given a REsident Pull Cord Acknowledgement Form, which states that by signing the form, they understand and acknowledge that "in case of a life-threatening emergency, I/we should call 911."
Regulation
BASIC SERVICES Basic services shall...include care and supervision as defined in Section 87101(c)(3) & HSC 1569.2(c)...the facility assumes responsibility for, or provides or promises to provide... ongoing assistance with ADLs without which the resident's physical health,
Inspector finding
mental health, safety, or welfare would be endangered. This requirement is not met, as evidenced by Acknowledgement Form given to clients, which states that clients should call 9-1-1 in case of a life threatening emergency. Licensee cannot absolve itself from responsibility to meet safety needs of clients.
Other visitFebruary 4, 2026No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
On February 4, 2026, the state visited the facility to confirm that a staff member subject to an exclusion order was no longer working there. The facility's administrator confirmed the person had never been employed at the facility and was not listed in their records. No violations were found.
View full inspector notes
On 2/4/2026, Licensing Program Analyst(LPA) John Calandra arrived at the facility to follow up on a Decision and Order(exclusion) of S1. LPA Calandra was greeted by Anahi McKane, Manager of Assisted Living/Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. According to the Administrator, S1 has never worked at the facility and is not associated on Guardian. No deficiencies cited during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report provided.
Other visitJanuary 30, 2026No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
On January 30, 2026, state licensing staff conducted a follow-up visit to verify that a staff member subject to an exclusion order was no longer working at the facility. The facility confirmed the staff member had never actually been employed there and took steps to remove any association with them from their records. No violations were found.
View full inspector notes
On 1/30/2026, Licensing Program Analyst(LPA) John Calandra arrived at the facility to follow up on a Decision and Order(exclusion) of S1. LPA Calandra was greeted by Anahi McKane, Manager of Assisted Living/Administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. According to the Administrator, S1 has never worked at the facility. During the visit, the Administrator spoke to Human Resources who stated they would disassociate S1 from the facility on Guardian. LPA requested copies of the current LIC 500-Personnel Summary Report and current staff schedule. No deficiencies cited during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report provided.
ComplaintDecember 29, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
On December 29, 2025, the state investigated a complaint by confirming that a staff member in question is no longer working at the facility. The administrator showed inspectors work schedules and personnel records from August through December 2025, which confirmed the staff member was not on the schedule. No violations were found.
View full inspector notes
On December 29, 2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Murial Han conducted a case management - other visit to confirm staff # 1 (S1) is not working at the facility. LPA met with the administrator and explained the purpose of today's visit. During today's visit, LPA toured the facility with the administrator who confirmed that S1 does not work at the facility. Based on the facility's monthly master work calendar for August, Septometer, October, November and December of 2025 and the LIC 500 (Personnel Report), LPA observed S1 was not on the schedule. No deficiency is cited today. This report is reviewed and discussed with the administrator. A copy is provided.
InspectionNovember 12, 2025· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Murial Han
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
This was a routine inspection that looked into a complaint about odors and hygiene in a resident's room. Staff explained that the resident preferred to manage their own care independently, including when to change beddings and dispose of personal items, and the resident confirmed that staff were courteous and providing needed care. The investigator found no violation.
View full inspector notes
LPA interviewed S1 and S2 and they stated that they have observed an odor in R1's room because R1 preferred to pile up a lot of soiled pull-ups in the trash can before allowing them to empty it and they were only allowed to change R1's beddings when R1 asked them to do so. They stated that R1 managed his/her own care and R1 wanted to do everything independently. LPA interviewed R1 who stated that for the most part, staff members are courteous and they are providing the care and services that R1 needs. After the investigation, this allegation is deemed to be unsubstantiated. Although the above investigations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.
InspectionAugust 18, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
During a routine annual inspection on August 18, 2025, inspectors found the 41-resident facility clean and well-maintained, with properly functioning safety equipment, adequate meals and dining areas, organized medications, and complete resident records. All resident rooms had appropriate furnishings and bathrooms had required safety features like grab bars and non-slip flooring. No violations were cited.
View full inspector notes
On August 18, 2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kiran Jain arrived unannounced at the facility to conduct a Required 1-Year Annual inspection. LPA met with the Manager, Anahi McKane, and disclosed the purpose of the inspection. The facility consisted of one building with two floors for assisted living units. The Manager informed the LPA that the facility had 41 residents in care at the time. LPA initiated a walk-through of the facility, accompanied by the manager. LPA inspected randomly selected five (5) resident rooms. The rooms were found to be clean, well-lit, and equipped with the required furniture. LPA inspected the private bathrooms in random rooms. The bathrooms contained soap, grab bars, towels, a trash can, and non-slip flooring. The hot water temperature at the sink faucets measured between 112.8°F and 116.6°F. LPA inspected the main food serving area and dining area and found it clean. All meals at the facility are prepared in a third party kitchen, Morrison Living, which is located next to the facility. The meals are brought from Morrison Living kitchen to the facility and are served in the dining area at the facility. The refrigerator was observed to contain milk, creamers, juices, yogurt, bread, and butter. The freezer was observed to contain ice cream. Cereal boxes and fresh fruits were observed on a table in the serving area. A weekly dining menu and an alternate fixed menu was available to residents. LPA inspected the fire extinguishers mounted on the hallway walls and found them fully charged, with the last service tag dated January 30, 2025. Continued on 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 The smoke detectors are tested quarterly by a third-party vendor, CodeRed Communications Inc., with the last service completed on 07/11/2025. The fire sprinklers testing is performed quarterly by Nor-Cal fire protection Inc., with the last service completed on 08/14/2025. The manager tested the carbon monoxide detector in the main hallway in LPA’s presence, and it was found to be functional. LPA inspected an auditorium on the first floor and observed 6 residents participating in workout activities. The auditorium and souyer room on the second room are used for resident activities. Activity calendar was posted one month is advance for the residents. All common areas were free from obstructions, and hallways were well-lit. LPA toured the outside courtyard and patio areas and found passageways in good condition, free of obstructions, and without any blocking or tripping hazards. These areas had patio tables, chairs, and shaded area/umbrellas for residents’ use. No accessible bodies of water or hazards were observed. LPA observed and inspected a locked centrally stored medication cart in the medication room. Medications were organized separately for each resident. Narcotics were locked. All medication bottles and bubble packs were properly labeled. Centrally Stored Medication Records were reviewed and found to be complete. LPA reviewed six (6) staff personnel records and five (5) resident records. The LPA observed that 5 of 5 residents had the Admission Agreement, Physician's Report, Appraisal Needs and Services Plan, and CSDMR. 5 of 5 residents didn't not receive routine annual medical assessment. LPA observed that 6 of 6 staff members had LIC 508 Criminal Record Statements and LIC 503 Health Screening and confirmed that 6 of 6 staff members were associated with the facility. LPA inspected the first aid kit and found it fully stocked. Emergency Drill Logs were reviewed, and it was observed that Emergency Disaster Drills were conducted quarterly, with the most recent drill completed on 05/15/2025. The following updated forms are requested to be submitted to CCLD by 08/25/2025: 1) LIC 500: Personnel Report 2) LIC 308: Designation of Facility Responsibility Continued on 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 3) Certificate of Liability Insurance 4) Administrator Certificate(s) No deficiencies were cited during today's visit. An Advisory note was given. An exit interview was conducted with the Manager. A copy of this report was provided to the Manager,Anahi McKane, whose signature on this form confirms receipt of the report.
ComplaintJanuary 15, 2025· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Kiran Jain
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint was investigated into food quality, temperature, and hygiene, as well as roach issues at the facility. Interviews with residents and staff, along with observations during lunch service on December 19, 2024, found that staff wore gloves while serving, food temperatures were checked before service, residents received their meal choices, and no resident reported spoiled food. Pest control visits in November and December 2024 found no roach activity in November and one apartment with cockroaches in December, with the facility hiring a pest control company that visits every two weeks and has placed baits in resident rooms.
View full inspector notes
LPA interviewed (3) residents (R1-R3). R1 stated they had not had any complaints about the quality, temperature, or hygiene of the food served at the facility, and if the food had not been warm, they had asked the staff to microwave it. R1 stated they had been given plenty of meal preferences, their requests had been met, and they had no complaints. R1 stated that the dining staff had worn gloves. R2 stated that the quality of the food had been fair but could have been better; sometimes the soup had been too hot, and the creamers and milk had not been spoiled. R2 stated that dining servers had worn gloves. R3 stated that the quality of the food had been alright and that they could customize options available from an alternate menu. R3 stated they had picked up food and brought it to their room, had warmed food in the microwave if necessary, and had never received any spoiled food. R3 stated they were not sure if staff had worn gloves in the dining area, as they had not eaten in the dining area. LPA interviewed (3) staff members (S1-S3). S1 stated they had passed around the food, had not touched the food, had always worn gloves, and had thrown the gloves in the trash bin. S1 stated the food temperature had been checked by the server in the kitchen before it was put on the table in the kitchen, and they had served coffee as well. No resident had complained to them about the food quality, and they had checked the milk expiration date. S1 stated they had been placed at the facility by an agency and that they had held a CNA license. S2 stated they had been a caregiver, had helped in the dining area, had always worn gloves, and had thrown the gloves in the garbage. S2 stated the server from the kitchen had always checked the temperature and had put it on the counter when the food was hot and in a little cooler when the food was cold. S2 stated they had not made or handled food but had just served the food, and they had verified what residents had ordered before giving it to them. They had never heard from any resident about spoiled food. S3 stated the residents had been given a weekly menu and an alternative options menu, and the residents had received what they had ordered. If residents had changed their minds, they had tried to accommodate. S3 stated that they had used a third-party vendor to prepare food for the residents and that the server responsible for food quality and temperature checks had come from the vendor only. They had never had issues with the quality or the temperature of the food. S3 stated the staff had stored their food in the staff refrigerator and not in the resident-use refrigerator. LPA reviewed S4's certification and in-service records. S4 had a ServSafe California certificate that had been issued on 12/27/2024 and was valid for three years, a Food Safety and Quality Assurance in-service training dated 9/19/2024, a Food Handling and Temperature in-service training dated 10/7/2024, an Associate Food Safety in-service training dated 10/16/2024, a Hand Washing in-service training dated 10/31/2024, and a Hand Hygiene in-service training dated 11/22/2024. Continued on 9099-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 On 12/19/2024, LPA observed the dining area during lunchtime service, where the server (S4) had been standing behind the counter, putting food on the counter for the staff to serve. Two staff members (S1 and S2) were observed serving the food. S1 and S2 had been wearing gloves while serving food to the residents at the dining tables in the dining area. Residents were observed eating and enjoying their lunch. LPA observed a standing refrigerator in the dining area that contained milk and juices for the residents. LPA also observed and a freezer in the dining area that contained ice creams for the residents. Regarding the allegation “Staff have not addressed roaches in the facility”, the Reporting Party (RP) stated, “have roaches (they know about it and have pasted pictures regarding that too)”. LPA interviewed (3) residents (R1-R3). R1 stated they had not seen roaches too often and that bugs had been present when it was hot. R2 stated that a roach had been found in their closet the previous week, pest control had come and taken care of it, and they had not seen any roaches afterward. R3 stated that German roaches had started about seven months earlier, and a new pest control company had been hired by the facility. R3 further stated they had not seen a single roach in the last 10 days and that the facility had finally solved the problem. LPA interviewed (3) staff members (S1-S3). S1 stated they did not remember seeing any roaches. S2 stated they had roaches before, but not currently, as the company had come and sprayed. S3 stated the pest control company had been coming every two weeks, had last come on 12/11/2024, and had put traps on the floors. LPA reviewed pest control reports for the past two months. The Ecolab Pest Eliminator invoice number 6995717, for a service date of 12/11/2024, with the Service Program of Cockroach/Rodent Program and Outside-In Large Fly Program, indicated the following Conditions Found/Action Taken: “No rodent activity was noted during the inspection and/or service, no ant activity was noted during the inspection and/or service, and cockroaches were noted in one apartment.” For invoice number 6790324, for a service date of 11/14/2024, with the Service Program of Cockroach/Rodent Program and Outside-In Large Fly Program, the Conditions Found/Action Taken indicated: “No rodent activity was noted during the inspection and/or service, no fly activity was noted during the inspection and/or service, and no cockroach activity was noted during the inspection and/or service.” Continued on 9099-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 On 12/19/2024, LPA visited three residents' (R1-R3) rooms and observed baits had been placed in R3’s room. No roaches were seen in any of these three rooms. LPA observed the dining area during lunchtime service, where baits had been placed, no roaches were seen, and no posted pictures regarding roaches were observed at the facility. Based on observations, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, the department has determined that the allegations may have happened or are valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred. Therefore, the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies were cited under the California Code of Regulations, Title 22. An exit interview was conducted with the Manager. A copy of this report was discussed and left with the Manager, Anahi McKane, whose signature on this form confirms receipt of this report.
ComplaintNovember 26, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Grace Donato
ComplaintNovember 26, 2024· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Grace Donato
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found no evidence that a resident was threatened with eviction—the allegation was determined to be false, as the resident lives in independent housing not governed by care facility regulations. A separate allegation that a resident was hit could not be substantiated; while the resident reported being struck, camera footage from the hallway showed no incident occurred, and the resident could not identify who was involved.
View full inspector notes
According to Provider Information Notice (PIN) 22-28-ASC, effective 9/26/2022, it states that If there are differing requirements between the most current CDC, CDPH, CDSS, CDDS, Cal/OSHA, and local health department guidance or health orders, licensees should follow the strictest requirements. For the allegation of resident was threatened with eviction, Resident is not part of assisted living but resides in the independent living area. The issue with eviction is not governed by title 22. Based on interviews & records review, the department has determined that that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis, therefore the allegations are UNFOUNDED. Report is reviewed and copy is 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 R1 did not say who attacked him/her. S2 was able to review cameras in the area and stated that nothing happened. R1 just came down to tell S1 that he/she was hit. S2 looked at the camera in the hallways on the fourth floor and nothing happened. Based on interviews, the department has determined that although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Report is reviewed and copy is provided. page 2 of 2
Other visitAugust 28, 2024Type A1 deficiency
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
During a routine annual inspection, regulators measured hot water temperatures in the facility's bathrooms and found that one resident unit had water at 161°F, which exceeds safe limits and poses a scalding risk. Water temperatures in other areas tested were within acceptable ranges. The facility was cited for this violation of state safety standards.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced Case Management - Annual Continuation visit and met with Donna Quick. During visit, LPA Marrufo measured the water temperature in the hallway bathroom near the facility entrance. LPA observed the water temperature in the bathroom sink to be 122 F. LPA measured the water temperatures in the bathroom sinks of 4 resident living units and the water temperatures were 161 F, 120 F, 122 F, and 124 F. LPA reviewed 5 staff records and found them to be complete. LPA Marrufo reviewed facility maintenance records and observed the fire sprinkler system was last tested on 08/19/2024. A deficiency was cited as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. See LIC809-D page for more information. This report was reviewed with Donna Quick and a copy of this report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
87303(e)(2) (e) Water supplies and plumbing fixtures shall be maintained as follows: (2) Faucets used by residents for personal care such as shaving and grooming shall deliver hot water. Hot
Inspector finding
water temperature controls shall be maintained to automatically regulate the temperature of hot water used by residents to attain a temperature of not less than 105 degree F (41 degree C) and not more than 120 degree F (49 degree C). This requirement was not met as evidenced by: the water temperatures in one hallway bathroom and 3 out of 4 observed resident living unit bathrooms were over 120 F, which poses an immediate safety risk to residents in care.
Other visitAugust 27, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
This was a routine annual inspection visit where the inspector toured the facility, checked the kitchen and food supplies, reviewed emergency exits, first aid kit, and resident records. The inspector found no violations during this visit, though the inspection was not completed due to time constraints and will continue at a later date. The facility administrator was informed of the findings.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced Required 1 Year visit and met with Administrator Anahi McKane. During visit, LPA Marrufo toured the facility inside and out. LPA toured the facility kitchen and dinning areas. LPA observed a perishable food supply of at least two days and a non-perishable food supply of at least seven days. LPA reviewed the first aid kit and found it to be complete. LPA toured the outside exits and found them to be clear of obstructions. LPA reviewed 5 resident records and 5 Centrally Stored Medication and Destruction Records and found them to be complete. Due to time constraints, this annual inspection visit will need to be continued at a later time. No deficiencies were cited at this time as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Administrator Anahi McKane and a copy of this report was provided.
Other visitJuly 29, 2024Type A2 deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
On June 30, 2024, a resident reported that their private duty caregiver was yelling and cursing at them and hit them in the lower right leg; staff heard the disturbance and recorded audio but did not enter the resident's room to intervene. The facility reported the incident to the state two days later, but the administrator had not filed a required unusual incident report at the time of the state's July 22, 2024 inspection visit. The state cited the facility for deficiencies related to this incident.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced Case Management visit and met with Administrator (ADM) Anahi McKane. The purpose of the visit was to cite the facility for deficiencies related to an incident that occurred on 06/30/2024 around 8 PM and that the facility reported to the Department via SOC341 Suspected Adult/Elderly Abuse Form on 07/02/2024. On Sunday 06/30/2024 at 8 PM, staff S1 heard sounds coming from the living unit of resident R1 that sounded like R1's Private Duty Care Giver (PDCG1) was verbally abusing R1 and throwing around objects in R1's living unit. Staff S1 stood outside of R1's living unit and made video recordings that captured the sounds of PDCG1's voice while PDCG1 was verbally abusing R1 and the sounds of objects being thrown around in the living unit. The SOC341 stated that R1 reported to facility staff that PDCG1 hit R1 in the lower right leg. During visit on 07/22/2024, LPA Marrufo reviewed three video recordings that Administrator Anahi McKane stated R1 took while standing outside of R1's living unit while PDCG1 was inside. LPA Marrufo could hear the sound of someone yelling and cursing from inside R1's living unit. LPA Marrufo interviewed R1 during visit. R1 stated during interview that PDCG1 was yelling and cursing at R1 and hit R1 in the lower right leg. R1 stated that staff did not come into R1's living unit to stop PDCG1 from yelling at R1. During interview on 07/22/2024, Administrator (ADM) Anahi McKane stated that on 06/30/2024, R1 called ADM and reported the incident of PDCG1 verbally abusing R1 and of loud sounds coming from R1's living unit. ADM stated that R1 reported to ADM that after 8 PM, PDCG1 went on a work break. ADM stated that PDCG1 returned to R1's living unit after PDCG1's break and continued to provide care to R1 until 3PM on 08/01/2024. ADM stated on 07/22/2024 and stated to have not yet submitted an LIC624 Unusual Incident/Injury Report to the Department. Deficiencies were cited as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. See LIC809-D for more information.This report was reviewed with ADM Anahi McKane and a copy of this report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (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,
Inspector finding
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 requirement was not met as evidenced by: Licensee did not ensure that resident R1 was free from abuse and initimidation from R1's Private Duty Care Giver, which poses an immediate safety risk to residents in care.
Regulation
87211 Reporting Requirements (a) Each licensee shall furnish to the licensing agency such reports as the Department may require, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) A written report shall be submitted to the licensing agency and
Inspector finding
to the person responsible for the resident within seven days of the occurrence of any of the events specified in (A) through (D) below. This report shall include the resident's name, age, sex and date of admission; date and nature of event; attending physician's name, findings, and treatment, if any; and disposition of the case. (D) Any incident which threatens the welfare, safety or health of any resident, such as psychological abuse of a resident by staff or other residents, or unexplained ab…
InspectionJuly 22, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
On a follow-up visit in July 2024, inspectors reviewed a report that a private caregiver hired by a resident had yelled, cursed, and hit the resident in the leg on June 30, 2024; the inspector watched video recordings and heard yelling from the resident's room, and the resident confirmed the caregiver's behavior during an interview. The facility had reported this incident to state licensing, and no deficiencies were cited during this inspection.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced case management visit and met with Administrator Anahi McKane. The purpose of the visit was to follow up with an SOC341 Suspected Adult/Elderly Abuse report submitted by the facility to CCL on 07/01/2024. The SOC341 report stated that on Sunday 06/30/2024 at 8 PM, staff S1 heard sounds coming from the living unit of resident R1 that sounded like R1's Private Duty Care Giver (PDCG1) was verbally abusing R1 and throwing around objects in R1's living unit. The SOC341 stated that R1 reported to facility staff that PDCG1 hit R1 in the lower right leg. During visit, LPA Marrufo reviewed three video recordings that Administrator Anahi McKane stated R1 took while standing outside of R1's living unit while PDCG1 was inside. LPA Marrufo could hear the sound of someone yelling and cursing from inside R1's living unit. LPA Marrufo interviewed R1 during visit. R1 stated during interview that PDCG1 was yelling and cursing at R1 and hit R1 in the lower right leg. During visit, LPA obtained copies of R1's Emergency Contact and Information Form, LIC602 Physician's Report, Resident Functional Evaluation, and the internal Incident Report submitted by R1 to Administrator Anahi McKane. LPA Marrufo requests that the facility submit copies of PDCG1's contact information and Home Care Organization documentation by 07/29/2024 No deficiencies were cited at this time as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Administrator Anahi McKane and a copy of this report was provided.
ComplaintAugust 24, 2022· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that COVID notification postings in Chinese and Russian had been removed from the facility. The investigator found COVID notices posted in English, Chinese, and Russian in various areas of both buildings, and determined there was insufficient evidence to prove the complaint either did or did not occur.
View full inspector notes
of out 2 interviewed staff stated to have observed COVID postings in Chinese and Russian translations, and then later observed that the Chinese and Russian postings were missing. The other interviewed staff stated COVID notices were posted on all the residents’ doors in the facility, including both Assisted Living and Independent Living residents. LPA Marrufo toured both the Lytton I and Lytton II buildings, and observed there to be COVID notification postings in various areas in each building in English, Chinese, and Russian. The Department does not have regulations or Provider Information Notices (PINs) that specify how facilities are required to notify residents about new COVID cases in the facility or require facilities notify residents in languages besides English. Based on information from interviews conducted with staff, records reviewed, and observations, although the allegation listed above may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. No Deficiencies cited under California Code of Regulations Title 22 This report was reviewed with Anahi McKane and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.
ComplaintAugust 24, 2022· SubstantiatedType B1 deficiency
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
An investigator found that a dead tree near the facility entrance was leaning at a 33-degree angle toward the walkway with its root ball pulling out of the ground, posing a safety hazard. The facility's work order logs did not show any tree maintenance was performed before the tree was removed between late June and late July 2022. All ten residents interviewed said they had not observed or experienced problems with hazardous trees at the facility.
View full inspector notes
During visit on 06/29/2022, LPA Marrufo observed a tree near the ramp at the facility entrance that was leafless and had a branch that was hanging about 6 feet above the ground. LPA Marrufo did not observe breaks or dents in the branches. LPA Marrufo did not observe the branches to brittle, to pose any hazard, or to obstruct the walkway. 10 out of 10 interviewed residents stated to have not observed or experienced any hazardous trees or branches at the facility, including at the facility entrance. The Physical Inspection Summary Report does not contain any deficiencies or descriptions of hazards caused by trees or by untrimmed tree branches. The Work Order Log shows an entry on 04/15/2022 for “Stair way clean up and floor Grait clean up dirt applied to cement” under the category “Landscaping Lawn/shrubs/trees.” The log shows additional Landscaping entries for “Clean All Gutters” on 04/20/2022, and “Clean all storm drains in Lytton 2” on 05/20/2022 and 06/20/2022. LPA Marrufo did not observe any log entry pertaining to tree maintenance in the Work Order Log. LPA Marrufo attempted to conduct an interview with staff S2, the Director of Facilities, but LPA was unable to reach S2 for an interview. During visit on 07/28/2022, LPA Marrufo observed there to be a tree stump where the tree had previously been. LPA Marrufo interviewed Witness W1 who stated that the tree had been dead and was leaning at a 33 degree angle towards the walkway. W1 stated that the tree posed a safety hazard because it was leaning and the root ball had started being pulled out of the ground. Based on records review, interviews and observations there is preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did occur, therefore the allegation is substantiated. See 9099-D for deficiencies cited per the California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Anahi McKane and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided. Page 2 of 2
Regulation
87303(a) Maintenance and Operation: (a) The facility shall be clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair at all times. Maintenance shall include provision of maintenance services and procedures for the safety and well-being of residents,
Inspector finding
employees and visitors. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Licensee did not ensure that a tree near the a resident walkway was not leaning, posing a potential safety hazard to residents in care.
ComplaintAugust 4, 2022· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that a facility posting about a COVID case was being removed improperly. An investigation found that a resident had temporarily taken down the posting to make a copy and then returned it, but inspectors determined there was insufficient evidence to prove a violation occurred.
View full inspector notes
S2 states a resident has been taking the postings down. Based on interview with resident R1, it was confirmed that R1 did take down a posting of a notification of another COVID case to make a copy. R1 stated to have returned the posting after making a copy. The regulations do not state a time frame for making postings after a COVID case has been confirmed. The Department recommends as best practice to post a notice as soon as possible. Based on information from interviews conducted with staff and resident and review of records, although the allegation listed above may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. No Deficiencies cited under California Code of Regulations Title 22 This report was reviewed with Administrator Doris Lee and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintAugust 4, 2022· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint was investigated about COVID notices not being properly posted around the facility. The inspector found some postings were in place while others were missing or in only some locations, and learned that a resident had removed at least one posting temporarily to make a copy, then returned it; because there's no specific regulation about how quickly notices must be posted after a COVID case, the complaint could not be substantiated as a violation.
View full inspector notes
During interview, staff S1 stated to have placed copies of the posting on 2 out of 2 elevators in the Assisted Living Building Lytton II, left extra copies of the posting at the Front Desk, and posted them in 3 out of 3 elevators in the Independent Living Building I and in 3 out of 3 locked bulletin boards in Lytton I. During visit, LPA Marrufo observed the COVID Notice posted on the glass panel of the Front Desk in Lytton II, on 2 out of 3 locked bulletins, 1 Russian COVID Notification posting in 1 out of 3 elevators, and 3 out of 3 elevators had no English or Chinese postings. Administrator Lee, S1 and S2 stated that a resident has been removing the COVID postings. Based on interview with resident R1, it was confirmed that R1 did take down a posting of a notification in one of the Lytton I elevators to make a copy. R1 stated to have returned the posting after making a copy. The regulations do not state a time frame for making postings after a COVID case has been confirmed. The Department recommends as best practice to post a notice as soon as possible. Based on information from interviews conducted with staff and resident and review of records, although the allegation listed above may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. No Deficiencies cited under California Code of Regulations Title 22 This report was reviewed with Administrator Doris Lee and a copy of the report was provided.
InspectionAugust 4, 2022No deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
During a routine annual inspection, the facility was found to have adequate supplies including food for at least two days of perishables and a week of non-perishable items, a 30-day supply of protective equipment, and proper visitor screening and hygiene areas. No violations were cited.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted an unannounced Required 1 Year visit and met with Administrator Doris Lee. During visit, LPA Marrufo toured the facility inside and out. LPA Marrufo observed the facility to have a visitor screening area. The visitor bathrooms had available soap and paper towels and a hand washing sign. LPA Marrufo observed the food supplies to include a perishable food supply of at least 2 days and a non-perishable food supply of at least 7 days. LPA Marrufo observed a 30-day supply of PPEs. No deficiencies were cited at this time as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Administrator Doris Lee and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintMay 24, 2022· SubstantiatedType B2 deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that the facility failed to notify Independent Living residents about a COVID case in the Assisted Living section, even though residents share elevators and entrances; the facility did not post notices about the COVID case in these shared areas. The investigation also substantiated that staff gave a volunteer group resident names, apartment numbers, and phone numbers without authorization, allowing the volunteers to contact residents directly about an event. Both violations were confirmed through staff interviews, resident records, and facility observations.
View full inspector notes
Administrator Lee stated that she did not notify the Independent Living residents of the COVID case because they do not mingle with the Assisted Living residents. She stated the Assisted Living and Independent Living residents do not share activity or dinning rooms. She stated the only portions of the facility that the Independent Living and Assisted Living residents share are the elevators and the facility entrance/exit. She stated there were no notices of the COVID case posted on the facility elevators or entrance/exit. During facility tour, LPA Marrufo observed that there were no postings on the facility elevators or entrance/exit. During interviews with S1 and staff S2, both stated that there was an incident in which facility staff S3 provided a listing of resident names, apartment numbers, and telephone numbers to a group of volunteers who had arranged an event at the facility. The group of volunteers then took the listing and knocked on residents' doors notifying them of the group's event. Based on records review, interviews, and observations, the Department determines that there is preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did occur. Therefore the allegations are substantiated. See 9099-D for deficiencies cited per the California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Anahi McKane and a copy of the report and appeal rights were provided.
Regulation
87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities: (a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (10) To be informed of the licensee’s policy concerning visits and other communications with residents,
Inspector finding
according to Health and Safety Code section 1569.313. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Licensee did not ensure that notices were posted in the elevators and entrances shared with Assisted Living to notify Independent Living residents that there was a positive COVID case in the facility, which posed a potential safety risk to residents in care.
Regulation
87506(c)(1) Resident Records: (c) All information and records obtained from or regarding residents shall be confidential.(1) The licensee shall be responsible for storing active and inactive records and for safeguarding the confidentiality of their contents. The licensee and all
Inspector finding
employees shall reveal or make available confidential information only upon the resident's written consent or that of his designated representative. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Licensee did not ensure that the confidentiality of resident information was safeguarded, which poses a potential safety risk to residents in care.
ComplaintOctober 29, 2021No deficiencies
Inspector: David Marrufo
Plain-language summary
This was a routine annual inspection where the facility was observed for compliance with state regulations. The inspector checked areas including visitor screening, bathrooms, COVID-19 safety measures, personal protective equipment supplies (at least 30 days on hand), food storage, kitchen, and common areas, and found no violations.
View full inspector notes
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Marrufo conducted a Required - 1 Year visit and met with Doris Lee and Anahi McKane. During visit, LPA Marrufo observed the visitor screening area. LPA observed the hallway bathroom near the entrance and observed there to be COVID-19 related posters and available soap and paper towels. LPA Marrufo observed more COVID-19 related posters throughout the facility. LPA observed the facility PPE storage and observed there to be a PPE supply of at least 30 days. LPA observed the kitchen area and observed there to be a perishable food supply of at least 2 days and a non-perishable food supply of at least 7 days. LPA observed the dinning area and two resident common areas. No deficiencies were cited as per California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Doris Lee and Anahi McKane and a copy of the report was provided.
ComplaintMay 7, 2021· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Christopher Hopkins-Clarke
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found no evidence that staff failed to deliver mail promptly, tampered with residents' mail, or damaged residents' personal property. Staff described procedures for mail delivery and confirmed that residents have individual mailbox keys and direct access to their mail. The allegations could not be substantiated.
View full inspector notes
Regarding the allegation of Facility staff are not giving resident's their mail in a timely manner, the Department investigation found the following: during interviews with staff, staff stated that there is a sign by the mailbox area reminding residents to check their mail daily. If residents receive a package that is too big for their mailbox, it is left on the front desk and staff bring the package to the residents room. Regarding the allegation of Facility staff are tampering with resident's mail, the Department investigation found the following: during interviews with staff, staff stated that each resident has their own mailbox key. The mailman is the one that puts the mail in the residents mailboxes, there is no way staff could tamper with residents mail. Regarding the allegation of Facility staff are damaging resident's personal property, the Department investigation found the following: during interviews with staff, staff stated that there has never been an incident of staff damaging residents personal property. One staff stated that if damage to residents personal property were to happen, their protocol would be to immediately notify the resident as well as the manager. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Doris Lee. A copy of this report was provided to Doris Lee via email, due to COVID-19 precautionary measures, with a "read receipt" to verify the LIC9099 and 9099-C was received. Doris Lee can print out the report and fax a signed copy to LPA at 650-266-8841 or email to LPA at Christopher.Hopkins-Clarke@dss.ca.gov .
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.