Gramercy Court.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
Compared to 67 California facilities with a similar number of beds.
RCFE · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better performance on inspection record. Source: California Dept. of Social Services · Community Care Licensing.
among peers to rank.
Rankings based on 36-month CDSS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.
Citation history, plotted month by month.
9 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
9 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
The rules that apply to this facility.
State requirements with the exact regulation citation, plain-language explanation, and a question to ask on tour. Rules this facility has been cited for appear first.
Plain language
Because a facility markets dementia or Alzheimer's care, state law mandates higher training standards: 12 hours of initial dementia training (6 hours before a staff member works independently with residents, 6 more within the first 4 weeks), 8 hours of annual dementia in-service every year thereafter, and an administrator must include 8 hours of dementia-specific continuing education in every 2-year recertification cycle. Training must cover individualized care plans, behavioral expressions, appropriate supervision, and the facility's dementia care philosophy.
Ask on tour
“Can you show me each direct-care staffer's most recent dementia training certificate, and tell me when their next refresher is due?”
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
17 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Plain-language summaries open first — click into any row for the full citation text.
2026-07-27Other VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 7/27/2026, Licensing Program Analyst, (LPA) Kimberly Viarella made an unannounced visit to this facility to amend a report. LPA identified herself upon arrival, stated the purpose of the visit and asked to meet with the Designated Facility Administrator, Janessa Reyes. LPA explained to Reyes that the LPA amended the D page of the report for complaint investigation #27-AS-20251113084659 delivered on 07/15/26. This amendment did not change the deficiency or its plan of correction. LPA reviewed the report again with Reyes, collected the original and provided a new copy for their records. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no deficiencies were observed or cited during today's visit, a copy of this report was provided and an exit interview was conducted with Reyes.
2026-07-15Other VisitType B · 2 findings
“Based on a review of photos, the above requirement was not met when the facility used tape to secure the countertop in the bathroom of R1's room. This posed a potential threat to the health, safety and/or personal rights of residents in care.”
“Based on record review of 17 out of 53 shower logs, the above requirement was not met when staff did not complete shower logs for the residents in their care. This posed a potential threat to the health, safety, and personal rights or residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 07/15/26, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Viarella made an unannounced visit to this facility to conduct a case management visit as a follow-up to delivering the findings for complaint #27-AS-20251113084659 on 07/15/26. LPA identified herself upon arrival, stated the purpose of the visit and asked to meet with the Designated Facility Administrator. LPA met with Administrator Janessa Reyes and a brief meeting followed. LPA reviewed photographs of R1's room showing that the bathroom vanity countertop was being held together with an 8-10 inch strip of tape. LPA viewed the room today during a walkthrough and it has since bee repaired. This deficiency has been cited on the LIC 809D page and has also been cleared. During the course of this investigation, this LPA reviewed shower logs. LPA reviewed a total of 53 shower logs from October through December of 2025. Out of the 53, 17 were incomplete. 8 did not have skin assessments completed, 5 were not signed by care staff, 6 did not have residents names or room numbers for identification purposes, and 3 did not have the required medication technician signature present if a resident refused a shower. This deficiency was cited on the LIC 809D page. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no other deficiencies were observed during today's visit, a copy of this report was provided along with APPEAL RIGHTS and an interview was conducted with Administrator Reyes.
2026-07-15Complaint InvestigationType B · 2 findings
“Based on interviews with the ED, the AIT, and Housekeeping staff, R1's room was cleaned 2X daily due to them dropping things including their ostomy pouch demonstrating that they could not care for the medical appliance independently. This posed a potential threat to the health, safety and personal rights of residents in care.”
“Based on record review R1 never received an updated appraisal even though it was observed that they could not care for their ostomy pouch. This posed a potential threat to the health, safety and personal rights of residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 07/15/26, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Viarella made an unannounced visit to this facility to conduct a case management visit as a follow-up to delivering the findings for complaint #27-AS-20251107134505 on 07/13/26. LPA identified herself upon arrival, stated the purpose of the visit and asked to meet with the Designated Facility Administrator. LPA met with Administrator Janessa Reyes and a brief meeting followed. In the above complaint this LPA learned when the resident (R1) was admitted, their care plan stated that they were able to take care of their own ostomy appliance. Over time it was observed by staff that the dexterity in R1's hands was not enough to perform the tasks associated with utilizing their ostomy appliance on their own and accidents were happening that created an unsanitary environment. These observations should have been documented and should have triggered a reappraisal. A new care plan should also have been developed to meet the resident's needs. These deficiencies have been cited on the LIC 809D page. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no other deficiencies were observed during today's visit, a copy of this report was provided along with APPEAL RIGHTS and an interview was conducted with Administrator Reyes.
2026-01-16Other VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
A review of hospice documentation revealed consistent follow up of R1’s condition and updates to physician orders as well as communication with facility staff. Facility progress notes further revealed on-going follow up of R1’s blisters and rashes and other conditions as well as acknowledgement of all physician orders. A review of medication log sheets indicates R1 was assisted with prescribed medications consistently which included topical creams and oral medications to address skin conditions and pain. Interviews conducted did not reveal any corroborated evidence of staff not ensuring care needs for residents in care. An observation by LPA conducted on 12-18-2025 revealed staff attending to various resident needs in a timely and appropriate manner. As a result, although R1 has experienced skin and other conditions during R1’s stay at facility, there is not a preponderance of evidence to conclude staff is not ensuring care needs are met, therefore the above allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. A finding of unsubstantiated means the allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted with wellness nurse and a copy of this report was provided. LIC 811 and Appeal rights provided.
2025-11-26Other VisitType A · 1 finding
“Based on interviews and record review, the licensee did not ensure the confidentiality of record contents and made available confidential information which poses an immediate Health Safety or Personal Rights risk to persons in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
rights to persons in care. This deficiency has been cited on the LIC 9099 D page. Due to time constraints, this LPA will conduct a walkthrough of the facility during the opening of a complaint investigation which will take place immediately following this visit. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no other deficiencies were observed or cited during this visit. A copy of this report was provided along with APPEAL RIGHTS and an exit interview was conducted with Designee Blackburn.
2025-11-24Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
“Based on record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above when 2 staff (S1 and S2) did not have their background clearances completed and were not associated to the facility. This posed/poses an immediate health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 11/24/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Viarella made an unannounced visit to this facility to conduct a case management visit regarding deficiencies observed during the last visit when this LPA opened a complaint investigation (complaint # 27-AS-20251113084659) on 11/14/25. LPA identified herself upon arrival, stated the purpose of the visit, and asked to meet with Designated Facility Administrator/Executive Director (ED). LPA met with Toni Jones and a brief meeting followed. On 11/14/25, this LPA observed that there were 2 staff member, (S1 and S2) who were not associated to the facility as required by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22. Due to time constraints, this LPA was unable to conduct the case management that day, but is citing for this deficiency today on the LIC 9099 D. An immediate civil penalty for $1,000.00 for caregiver background clearance was also assessed today. This LPA to open a complaint investigation following this visit and observations from a facility walkthrough will be documented at that time. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no other deficiencies were cited during this visit, a copy of this report was provided and an exit interview was conducted with Toni Jones.
2025-08-11Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 8/11/2025, Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Arvin Villanueva arrived at this facility unannounced to conduct a case management-continuation visit to continue the annual inspection initiated on 8/7/2025. LPA met with Administrator Toni Jones and stated the purpose of the visit. Initial Observation: Upon arrival, LPA observed some residents participating in a morning exercise led by staff on duty. LPA observed the room temperature at 75 degrees Fahrenheit. Today's visit, LPA conducted 5 staff record reviews. Advisory was provided to ensure staff providing resident care have at least their first aid training updated. LPA reviewed 2 residents' medication. Medications were observed locked and inaccessible to residents in care. LPA conducted review of facility's Infection Control Plan and Emergency Disaster Plan. Advisory was provided to Administrator to review their plans at least annually or as needed and ensure to document every review. Per review, facility conducts drills at least quarterly. Last drill was 7/3/2025. Last Fire Marshal inspection was conducted on 8/5/2025. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no deficiencies were observed or cited during today's visit. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided.
2025-08-07Complaint InvestigationNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 8/7/2025, Licensing Program Analyst, Arvin Villanueva (LPA) arrived unannounced at this facility to conduct their annual inspection visit. LPA met with Administrator Toni Jones and stated the purpose of the visit. Overview : Facility is licensed to serve up to 85 elderly adults. Each room was cleared to accommodate non-ambulatory residents. Facility can admit/retain up to 15 residents receiving hospice services. Facility consists of 2 Memory Care houses and 2 Assisted Living houses. Initial Observation: LPA met with Toni at one of the houses. Residents were observed to be in the activity area waiting for activity to start. There was a live music concert during this visit. Physical Inspection : Areas inspected include, but not limited to, resident bedrooms, resident bathrooms, living and dining room and outdoor areas. LPA observed the inside of the facility to be clean and in good repair at this time. LPA and Administrator inspected 5 resident bedrooms and were observed to be equipped with the required furniture and sufficient lighting throughout. LPA measured the hot water temperature in the 2 resident bathrooms to be at 107 degrees Fahrenheit. The 2 resident bathrooms were observed to be in clean and good repair at this time. Fire extinguishers were observed in the each of the 4 houses and were last inspected on 1/7/2025. Smoke and carbon monoxide detectors were observed throughout each houses. Per Administrator, food for the residents in the Memory Care and Assisted Living are prepared in the Skilled Nursing kitchen, which is a separate building but within the same compound. {Con't to 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 {Con't from 809} Outdoor area was inspected. LPA observed outdoor furniture for resident use. Ramps were observed to be in good repair at this time. Emergency walkways were observed to be unobstructed. No bodies of water was observed. Record Reviews: Review of 5 of 5 resident files (R1 - R5) was conducted, include review of Admission Agreement, Physician Reports, Needs and Services Plan, and Ambulatory Status. Based on today's visit, this annual will need a continuation visit. The Department will return at a later date to continue the annual inspection. Exit interview was conducted. A copy of the report was provided upon exit.
2024-12-17Other VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 12/17/24, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Viarella made an unannounced case management visit to this facility. The purpose of this visit was to follow up with this quarterly visit and inquire about the requirements that were laid out in an office meeting which took place on 3/19/24 . The LPA identified herself upon arrival, stated the purpose of the visit, and asked to meet with the Designated Facility Administrator. LPA met with Toni Jones and a brief interview followed. In summary the facility agreed to the following and will provide the department documentation of policy and procedure changes. Updated one on one supervision policy Documentation of most recent reporting requirements training and mandated reporter training to be completed every six months. Increased oversight of the facility by licensee as regional director will be on site once per month to ensure compliance. Facility completed TSP. LPA requested copies of the following: Updated one-on-one supervision policy Documentation of the most recent reporting requirement training and mandated reporter training Log of site visits by the regional director 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 LPA received the documents requested. LPA and Designated Facility Administrator conducted a tour of the facility. In memory care, LPA observed 6 staff in memory care: 4 caregivers and 2 medtechs. LPA observed a medication cart during the tour and checked to ensure that all medications were locked and inaccessible to residents in care. Memory care was free of odor and LPA observed 16 residents in the dining room preparing for lunch. In assisted living, LPA observed 10 residents listening to an entertainer singing. 3 other residents were sitting by the fireplace and all were being supervised by 2 carestaff. According the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, there were no deficiencies observed or cited during this visit. A copy of this report was provided. Exit interview.
2024-12-17Complaint InvestigationSubstantiatedType B · 1 finding
“The above regulation was not met as evidenced by: Based on a review of hospital discharge paperwork and shower logs along with interviews with S3 and S1, R1 had a change of condition (the rash) and should have been sent to the hospital for evaluation. This posed an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
LPA requested shower logs/sheets for 2 months. LPA was told that shower sheets were only kept for 1 month. LPA informed staff that the shower sheets were part of the residents' care and thus a part of their permanent file. The information does not need to be kept in their regular file, but should be stored and accessible if requested. 11/27/24 Shower sheet for R1 was completed by staff (S6) who wrote "yes" for observing a rash and a bruise but did not indicate where. 12/02/24 Shower sheet was completed by staff (S5) who checked "yes" for bruise and reddened area and put an "X" next to rash. There was also a note that the resident refused a shower. 12/04/24 Shower sheet was completed by staff (S6) who checked off that there was a bruise and a rash and that the skin was intact. 12/11/24 Shower sheet was completed by staff (S7) who wrote "Yes" for rash and reddened area and highlighted 4 areas on R1's upper and lower legs. On 12/12/24, LPA interviewed R1 and R1 stated their legs were itchy. LPA suggested the nurse assess R1's legs. The nurse later reported to the LPA that R1's legs were covered in a rash and R1 was being sent out for further evaluation. From 11/27/24 - 12/12/24, R1 received 3 showers. During an interview with S3, this LPA learned that it was not standard practice to have the shower sheets reviewed and signed off by a Medication Technician, Care Coordinator, or Nurse to ensure that they were being completed thoroughly and that all showers and skin checks were being conducted as scheduled. LPA reviewed hospital discharge notes dated 11/27/24. On page 1 it stated, "Found to have scabies; treated with..." Based on the document review and the information gathered from interviews with S3 and S1, th e standard for the preponderance of evidence has been met and the department found the allegation, "Staff did not ensure that resident was treated for a scabies infection," SUBSTANTIATED. 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 According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, this deficiency is cited on the LIC 9099D page. No other deficiencies were observed or cited during todays' visit. A copy of this report was provided along with APPEAL Rights and an exit interview was conducted.
2024-09-16Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2024-08-29Other VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 8/29/24 at 2:00pm Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kevin Gould conducted an unannounced Case Management inspection at Gramercy Court to address and incident report from 4/1/23 where it was disclosed a resident had sexually harassed another resident in the facility. LPA met with administrator Veronica Morales and together discussed the reported incident and obtained additional information. LPA Gould conducted an interview with one resident. Based on the interviews and information gathered during today's inspection, the department will conduct additional interviews and file review before making a determination regarding the reported incident. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was left a the facility.
2024-08-28Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
This is an amended report to correct a typo observed after LPA Gould final printed report. On 8/28/24 at 9:00am Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kevin Gould conducted an unannounced Case Management inspection at Gramercy Court to address and incident report from 4/1/23 where it was disclosed a resident had sexually harassed another resident in the facility. LPA met with administrator Veronica Morales and together discussed the reported incident and obtained additional information. LPA Gould reviewed three resident files and requested copies of resident appraisals, physician reports, ID and emergency information, admission agreement, any incident reports/SOC 341 and any progress notes for the identified residents on our about April 2023. LPA Gould conducted interviews with two staff member and one resident. LPA attempted to interview another resident but was enjoying a preferred activity and did not with to converse with LPA at the time of inspection. Based on the interviews and information gathered during today's inspection, the department will conduct additional interviews and file review before making a determination regarding the reported incident. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was left a the facility.
2024-08-09Other VisitType B · 1 finding
“Based on record review, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above in 2 out of 3 resident files as they were missing current (re)appraisals which poses/posed a potential health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care. POC Due Date: 08/30/2024 Plan of Correction 1 2 3 4 Administrator stated that an audit of the assisted living resdient files would be completed and submitted to kimberly.viarella@dss.ca.gov by 08/30/24. An audit of the memory care resient files will be submitted by 09/20/24.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
An unannounced Annual Inspection visit was made by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Viarella to this facility on 08/09/24. LPA identified herself, explained the purpose of the visit, and asked to speak with Designated Facility Administrator (DFA). LPA met with Veronica Morales, the Residential Care For the Elderly (RCFE) Administrator. LPA observed that the Designated Facility Administrator's certificate, # 6002544735 expired on 05/05/26. LPA began by comparing the LIC 500 staff roster with the Guardian roster to ensure that all staff were appropriately cleared and that their background checks had been completed. All staff were in compliance at the time of inspection. LPA conducted a walkthrough of the facility. LPA inspected 3 resident rooms. All had the required furniture, furnishings and lighting to be in compliance at this time. LPA also observed 5 residents playing cards memory care. LPA noted soap, grab bars and non-skid surfaces in the showers. LPA measured the hot water and it was 107.3 degrees Fahrenheit and in compliance. LPA observed the fire extinguishers were last serviced on 01/03/24 Sentinel Fire Co. were also in compliance. The exterior of the facility was inspected by the LPA. There were no bodies of water present and the yard was completely fenced in. LPA observed that all screens and gutters were in good repair. There was 1 storage shed with a lock that contained yard equipment and storage items. There was also a covered patio area for residents to enjoy. LPA observed facility van taking 6 residents to Walmart. The LPA observed medication carts in the dining rooms of assisted living and memory care. LPA checked to ensure they were locked and medications were inaccessible to residents in care. LPA reviewed storage, 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 dosing, and destruction procedures. A review of the First Aid kit by the LPA found it to be complete and in compliance. LPA was informed that each medication cart had first aid items and each medication room had full first aid kits at the time of inspection. A file review was completed by the LPA. 2 of 3 of the resident files reviewed were missing current LIC 602s (Physicians Reports) and updated care plans. Due to time constraints, this LPA reviewed 2 staff files and found them to be in compliance at the present time. LPA interviewed 3 residents who stated they were happy at Gramercy Court, liked the food, and enjoyed the activities provided. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, the following deficiencies were observed and cited on the LIC 809 D page. A copy of this report was provided along with APPEAL rights and an exit interview was conducted with the Designated Facility Administrator.
2024-08-02Other VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 08/02/24 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kimberly Viarella made an unannounced visit to this facility to conduct a quarterly case management visit. This visit was a follow up to a meeting conducted virtually with Community Care Licensing on 03/11/24. LPA identified herself upon arrival, stated the purpose of the visit, and asked to meet with the Designated Facility Administrator (DFA). LPA met with Veronica Morales and a brief interview followed. LPA reviewed the mandated reporting log from 2/23/24. The next training is tentatively scheduled for this August 2024. The DFA stated she was waiting to hear back from multiple agencies to confirm an exact date. Once the date is confirmed, Licensing will be notified. LPA and DFA discussed how the mandated reporting and reporting requirement training was implemented. The DFA stated she utilized videos, handouts and staff were also tested on the materials. LPA was provided a copy of the mandated reporting pre-test and handouts. Upon reviewing the materials, LPA noted that they needed to be updated to reflect the change in the law that occurred in January of 2024 which required incidents of abuse to be reported verbally within 2 hours to law enforcement, the local ombudsman, and licensing, and an SOC 341 should be submitted within 24 hours. The Licensee agreed to have additional oversight of the facility by having the Regional Director, Dan Bushnell, conduct on site reviews of operations monthly. When the LPA asked the DFA for the dates of these monthly inspections, she could not provide one. The DFA stated that the Regional Director makes unscheduled visits 2-3 times a month but she did not have those visits documented. The DFA added that the Regional Director schedules virtual meetings during the month to discuss concerns. The DFA also stated that she sends weekly reports on Fridays that include the current census, number of hospice, move outs/in, pending admissions, any incident reports, SOC 341s, or other concerns. LPA went on to review the 1-1 caregiver supervision policy created by the Skilled Nursing Administrator and the DFA. A copy of this document was emailed to Community Care Licensing. 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 and DFA discussed eviction procedures. DFA had previously contacted this LPA seeking guidance regarding evictions. LPA has reviewed all eviction notices to ensure compliance. As part of this visit, LPA and DFA conducted a walkthrough of the facility. LPA observed 10 residents in one of the two dining rooms of memory care along with 3 care staff and 1 med tech. The Olympics were on TV in the background. LPA walked through the assisted living building as well. LPA observed 5 residents in the dining area of assisted living. LPA did not observe any activities during this visit but was told that all residents were offered the opportunity to participate in a daily exercise class and the Activity Director conducted Bingo in memory care. In assisted living there was a movie accompanied by popcorn following their exercise class. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no deficiencies were observed or cited during today's visit. A copy of this report was provided. Exit interview.
2024-05-06Complaint InvestigationMixedType A · 1 finding
“Based on records review and interviews, the licensee admitted that R2 was given R1's medication, which poses an immediate health, safety, and personal rights risk to residents in care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
Continues from LIC 9099 Based on records review and information from the Reporting Party (RP), the facility administered medications for Resident 1 (R1) to Resident 2 (R2). Facility Staff, Staff 1 (S1), realized the error after checking the computer system. According to S1, S1 notified the Wellness Nurse Supervisor immediately after the error. It was confirmed by interviews with Designated Administrator, Wellness Nurse, and Staff 1 that R2 was provided the wrong medications. Per California Code of Regulations (CCR) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, deficiencies are being cited on the attached LIC 9099 - D page. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Continued from LIC 9099 The RP learned of the medication error after receiving an Unusual Incident Report (UIR) on 02/13/2024 from the facility. The UIR stated that the medication error occurred on 12/18/2023. According to the UIR, the staff contacted the "LN" (Lead Nurse), which then contacted emergency medical services (EMS). R2 was transported via Alpha One to the Emergency Room and came back the next day with no orders or discharge information. According to the RP, the incident occurred at or around 9:34 AM and the family was not spoken to until 11:42 AM. According to a review of the facility records, a note was written on 12/18/2023 at 09:36 AM. Note stated the following: "Resident was given the wrong medications by error. Residents' son and PCP notified. Alpha one called and resident sent to Kaiser ER for evaluation". According to an interview with Administrator Veronica, the facility usually writes the time of when people are contacted; however, during this incident, the times were not written. According to interviews with facility staff, all staff deny delaying a call to EMS. Based on interviews with staff, all staff state that EMS was contacted immediately after the incident. Staff also stated that they spoke to staff during the incident and after the incident had occurred According to a review of the facility records, a note was written on 12/19/2023 14:27 (2:27PM). Note stated, "Resident came back from the hospital around 1:52 P.M. with the daughter. Per RCC, there are no changes of medication and no discharge paper as well. Wellness Nurse and Administrator and Other RCC was informed, also faxed PCP." Based on all the information collected by the Department there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation occurred, therefore this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, and therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. Per California Code of Regulations (CCRs) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, no deficiencies cited regarding the above-mentioned allegation. An exit interview was held and a copy of report was left at the facility.
2024-03-19Other VisitNo findings
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
On 3/19/24 at 10:00am, Department representatives Kevin Gould (LPA), Kim Viarella (LPA), Czarrina Camilon-Lee (LPM), Stephen Richardson (LPM) and Stephenie Doub (RM) met with representatives from Gramercy Court to discuss recent compliance issues at the facility and the steps the facility is taking to address the department's concerns. Representing Gramercy Court is Dan Bushnell - Regional Director, Veronica Morales - Administrator, Nima Pourfathi - Administrator (Gramercy skilled nursing). Department and facility representatives recent concerns of non-compliance including reporting requirements. The department discussed concerns with reporting incidents that pose a danger to residents in a timely manner consistent with title 22 regulations. The facility has conducted reporting training and training on mandated reporting. The facility agreed to conduct training on mandated reporting and reporting requirements every six months. Department and facility representatives discussed re-evaluation and the facility following their own plan of operations and admission agreements regarding evictions when a resident may pose a danger to themselves or others. Facility representatives discussed steps taken including a new management team at Gramercy Court and the inclusion of facility nurse to assist in the evaluation and appraisal of residents prior to admission and regularly when present in the facility or there is a change in condition. The department also discussed the facility one on one supervision policy and requested an updated written policy be provided to the department. Additionally, the facility has increased licensee oversight with the regional director being on site monthly to ensure compliance. The department will also assist in expediting the administrator certificate for Veronica Morales. Report Continued on LIC 9099C 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 In summary the facility agreed to the following and will provide the department of documentation of policy and procedure changes. Updated one on one supervision policy Documentation of most recent reporting requirements training and mandated reporter training to be completed every six months. Increased oversight of the facility by licensee as regional director will be on site once per month to ensure compliance. The department has offered TSP support and the facility voluntarily accepted. Department will make TSP referral. Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22 there were no deficiencies cited during today's meeting. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was mailed to the facility for signature.
11 older inspections from 2021 are not shown above.
Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.
Other facilities in Sacramento County.
Other memory care facilities in Sacramento County with similar care offerings.
Tour Prep
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
Other memory care options nearby.
Abounding Peace Elderly Care
Sacramento
Abounding Peace Elderly Care II
Sacramento
Carlton Senior Living Sacramento
Sacramento
Carlton Senior Living Sacramento Atrium
Sacramento
The Chateau at River's Edge
Sacramento
Golden Legacy Elderly Care
Sacramento
Golden Legacy Elderly Care II
Sacramento
Abounding Love III
Sacramento
More options in neighboring cities
Licensed memory care in other cities within this county region — useful when your search radius crosses city limits.