California · San Francisco

Coterie Cathedral Hill.

RCFE260 bedsDementia-trained staff(415) 915-6615
Facility · San Francisco
A 260-bed RCFE with 3 citations on file.
Licensed beds
260
Last inspection
Dec 2025
Last citation
Apr 2026
Operated by
Van Ness Opco Tenant Llc; Atria Management Company
Snapshot

A large home, reviewed on public record.

Peer Comparison

Compared to 123 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.

Severity rank
62nd%
Weighted citations per bed.
peer median
0
100
Repeat rank
Not enough repeat citations
among peers to rank.
Repeat deficiencies as share of total.
Frequency rank
76th%
Deficiencies per inspection.
peer median
0
100

Rankings based on 36-month CDSS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.

FACILITY WATCH · FREE

Coterie Cathedral Hill has 3 citations on record. Know the moment anything changes.

New findings, complaint investigations, or status changes — emailed to you free.

Where are you in the process? (optional)

Save for comparison:
The Rulebook

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.

What dementia-care training must staff complete?22 CCR §87705 / HSC §1569.625
+
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?

Tour Prep

Questions to ask before you visit.

A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Coterie Cathedral Hill's record and state requirements.

01 /

The facility has 3 serious citations on file across all inspections — can you provide your corrective-action plan for each cited item, and show families any documentation of remediation steps taken?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

02 /

14 complaints are on file with CDSS — were any substantiated, and what remediation did the facility take in response to substantiated findings?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

03 /

The December 8, 2025 inspection found deficiencies — can you provide the deficiency notice from that visit and walk families through the specific corrective actions implemented?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

Full Inspection Record

Every inspection visit, verbatim.

20 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.

20
reports on file
3
total deficiencies
2
severe (Type A)
2026-04-01
Complaint Investigation
Substantiated
Type A · 1 finding
Inspector · Murial Han

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that a resident hit another resident in the dining room, and that the facility had received multiple prior reports of the same aggressive resident verbally abusing and physically confronting other residents over a five-month period but did not take action to prevent incidents until after this hit occurred. The facility issued a 30-day discharge notice after the incident; a private caregiver hired by the aggressive resident's family to provide supervision was not present in the dining room at the time.

Type A22 CCR §87468.1(a)(3)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87468.1(a)(3)

in December 2025, R1 was hit by R2 and prior to this incident, R2 was verbally abusing R1, other residents and staff members and the facility did not implement prevention measures to prevent the incident from happening which poses an immediate health and safety risks to residents in care.

Read raw inspector notes

LPA interviewed the administrator who stated that prior to the dining room incident, there were reports that R2 was calling R1 names but there were no incidents of physical abuse. The administrator acknowledged that there was an incident that happened in the dining room where R2 was yelling at R4 but it was not reported that R4 was hit and due to R4’s diagnosis, it was unclear whether he/she was hit. In addition, the administrator stated that initially R4's responsible party reported that R4 was not hit but subsequently reported being hit. The administrator stated that after R2 hit R1, the facility issued a 30-day discharge notice to R2 and R2’s responsible party to ensure the safety of R2 and the other residents at the facility. Regarding the one-to-one caregiver who was not present during the incident, the administrator stated that this person was hired by R2’s responsible party to ensure R2 did not leave the facility unsupervised due to R2's diagnosis. The administrator stated that on the day of the incident, the private caregiver was sitting in a room monitoring the elevators and did not have a line of sight to the dining room when the incident occurred. After the investigation, this allegation is substantiated. Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility did not prevent this incident from occurring as five months prior to the incident, it was witnessed by residents and staff members that R2 either hit or attempted to hit R4 in the dining room. In addition, it was also witnessed by staff members that R2 was verbally abusing R1 but the facility did not implement intervention to prevent these incidents from occurring until R1 was hit by R2 in which a 30-day eviction notice was issued. This report is reviewed and discussed with the administrator and the assistant general manager. A copy of the report and appeal rights were provided. 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 stated that on the day of the incident, R1 was eating in the dining room and suddenly, R2 came behind him/her and hit his/her head. R1 also stated that there were other incidents prior to this event where R1 was verbally abused and pushed by R2. R1 stated that these incidents were reported to one of the facility directors and the administrator. LPA interviewed R1’s responsible party/friend who stated that when the incident happened, staff took measure immediately and asked R2 to leave the dining room. However, the responsible party said that this incident may have been prevented had R2’s one-to-one caregiver was present at the time. LPA interviewed R2 who could not remember hitting and yelling at other residents and staff members. LPA interviewed R3 who stated that R2 was unpredictable and prior to the incident, he/she witnessed R2 hitting another resident (R4) in the dining room and the incident was witnessed by some female servers in the dining room and it was reported to the administrator. LPA interviewed the facility director (S1) who stated that he was in the dining room when the incident happened but did not witness R1 being hit by R2. However, S1 witnessed R2 calling R1 names that were insulting, abusing and harmful. S1 stated that he immediately asked R2 to use a calm voice but R2 refused to listen so he asked R2 to leave the dining room. S1 reported that R2’s one-to- one caregiver was not present during the incident, and he did not know where the caregiver was. LPA interviewed 2nd facility director #2 (S2) who stated that prior to the incident, R1 has reported to her that R2 was verbally abusing him/her but R1 did not report being physically abused by R2. S2 stated that this was reported to the administrator. S2 stated that after the incident in the dining room, S2 spoke with R2 and asked R2 to leave the dining room and S2 did not see R2’s one-to-one caregiver.

2025-12-08
Other Visit
No findings

Plain-language summary

On December 8, 2025, state licensing staff conducted the annual required inspection at the facility and reviewed resident and staff files, medication records, and administrator credentials. One resident's file was missing documentation of whether they could walk independently, which was noted as a technical violation. The inspection is ongoing and will be completed at a later date.

Read raw inspector notes

On 12/8/2025, Licensing Program Analyst(LPA) John Calandra arrived at the facility to conduct the Annual 1-year required inspection. LPA Calandra was greeted by Matthew Turner, General Manager and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA reviewed 10 resident files. All were observed to be complete except for one resident, R1 that was missing Ambulatory or Non-Ambulatory status listed in their Medical Assessment. During file review, LPA observed that one resident, R1 was missing Ambulatory or Non-Ambulatory status listed in their Medical Assessment. A Technical Violation was provided for this. LPA reviewed 8 staff files. All were observed to be complete. A review of Centrally Stored Medications indicated that medications for residents were properly labeled with instructions on dosage and times of day and matched the Centrally Stored Medication Records(CSMR) kept at the facility. LPA collected 3 Administrator's certificates. No deficiencies cited during today's visit. The Annual inspection will be completed at a later date. An exit interview was conducted. This report was reviewed with facility representative and a copy provided via email.

2025-12-01
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · John Calandra

Plain-language summary

This was an inspection following complaints about call button response times, daily showers, care plan communication, and billing charges. The facility provided documentation and staff interviews showing that call buttons are answered within 10 minutes, showers were provided daily as requested, the responsible party was notified of care plan changes and agreed to them, and the cost increase reflected a reassessment of the resident's needs that was explained in the admission agreement. No violations were found.

Read raw inspector notes

Complaint also alleged that staff did not respond to resident’s call button in a timely manner. Reporting Party alleged that when R1 pushed their call button, no staff would respond. Based on interviews and record review, the facility’s policy is for caregivers to respond to call buttons within 10 minutes or less. Based on interviews, it takes staff less than 10 minutes to respond to a call button and if they are busy, other caregivers can be called on to help. Complaint also alleged that staff did not provide services to resident as specified in their care plan. Per interview with Reporting Party, R1 was to get showers on a daily basis per their care plan and status checks throughout the day. According to the Reporting Party, status checks were not done in person. Based on interviews and record review, R1 did ask for a shower every day and was provided one by their 1:1 caregivers as R1’s private caregivers asked the facility staff not to provide care. Complaint alleged that staff did not notify resident's responsible party of changes to R1's care plan. Based on document review and interview, the facility’s Care Coordination Director and Regional Care Director contacted R1’s responsible party and discussed each update to the care plan with the responsible party. Complaint alleged that staff overcharged resident. According to the Reporting Party, R1’s level of care costs were raised from $2,200 to nearly $6,000. Based on document review and interview, R1’s needs changed over time and thus R1 was reassessed by the facility’s Care Coordination Director and Regional Care Director. They notified R1's responsible party of the change who agreed to the change in level of care and cost associated. In addition, based on document review and interview, level of care and monthly charges are explained in the facility's admission agreement. Although the allegations 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 above allegations are unsubstantiated at this time. No deficiencies cited during today's visit. An exit interview was conducted. This report was reviewed with facility representatives and a copy provided.

2025-11-10
Other Visit
No findings

Plain-language summary

A state inspector visited the facility on November 10, 2025, after receiving a report that a resident had fallen and hit their head while taking a walk outside the facility; a passerby brought the resident back, the facility called 911, and the resident was evaluated at the hospital and discharged with instructions. The resident is allowed to leave the facility unassisted, walks regularly on their own, and has since recovered to their normal baseline with no lasting injuries or changes. No violations were found.

Read raw inspector notes

On 11/10/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jaime Vado conducted an unannounced case management visit in response to an incident report received on 10/08/2025. LPA met with assistant general manager Armando Prado and explained the purpose of today's visit. According to the incident report received, the resident fell while outside of the facility and hit their head. Resident was brought back to the facility by a good samaritan. The facility called 911 due to the injury to the head and the resident was evaluated at the hospital and the facility notified responsible parties and the primary care physician of the resident. The resident returned to the facility with discharge instructions. LPA reviewed the file of the resident and found that the resident is allowed to leave the facility unassisted. The resident walks on their own and is ambulatory with no walking aids or devices. The resident goes on walks on their own regularly outside of the community. The resident is back in the facility and has recovered back to baseline with no injuries or changes in status. No citations issued. Report is reviewed with Armando and a copy is provided.

2025-11-10
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Inspector · Jaime Vado
2025-11-06
Other Visit
No findings

Plain-language summary

On November 6, 2025, state licensing staff made an unannounced visit to follow up on an incident from October 10, 2025, in which one resident slapped another after the second resident pinched their hand; staff intervened, the facility checked the second resident for injuries and found none, and reported the incident to both residents' families. At the time of the follow-up visit, the administrator reported both residents were doing well with no further aggressive incidents. No violations were found.

Read raw inspector notes

On 11/6/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Murial Han conducted an unannounced case management visit to follow-up on an incident that was reported by the facility. LPA met with administrator, Matthew Turner and explained the purpose of today's visit. On 10/13/2025, CCL received an incident report from the facility concerning to an incident that happened on 10/10/2025 in which resident #1 (R1) slapped resident #2 (R2)'s as R1 reported that R2 pinched his/her hand. This incident was witnessed by the Memory Care Director who discouraged R1 from hitting another resident. The facility reported the incident to R1 and R2's responsible party. The facility conducted an assessment of R2 and there was no injuries noted. During today's visit, LPA met R1 and R2 and attempted to speak to R1 but he/she did not want to speak to LPA. The administrator stated that both residents are doing well and there were no further aggressive behaviors from both. No deficient is cite. This report is reviewed and discussed with the assistant general manager. A copy is provided.

2025-09-30
Annual Compliance Visit
No findings

Plain-language summary

On September 30, 2025, inspectors investigated a report that a resident received a scam call from someone pretending to be from the facility and tricked her into sharing her bank information, resulting in an unauthorized money transfer. The facility confirmed it does not call residents for payments and had already sent scam prevention notices to all residents in response. No violations were found.

Read raw inspector notes

On 09/30/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Yi Sam Jian conducted a case management visit concerning a report of suspected abuse re ceived on 9/22/25. LPA met with administrator Matthew Turner. LPA explained the purpose of today's visit. Regarding the report, an unknown caller contacted resident R1, pretending to be from the facility and requested a money transfer. R1 provided bank information to the caller, and the money was subsequently transferred. L PA conducted an interview with the Administrator and obtained the following information: the facility submitted an incident report to Community Care Licensing (CCL) for review. According to the admission agreement, R1 and her husband—both residing in assisted living—are listed as the responsible parties. The resident’s son accompanied R1 to the facility office to report that she had shared her bank information with an unknown caller. The resident’s daughter also contacted the facility to confirm whether the facility had called R1. The facility confirmed that no such call had been made. The daughter then informed the facility that funds had indeed been transferred to the unknown caller. Facility does not contact residents by phone to collect payments, as all payments are handled through an online portal. Residents received scam calls from outside sources. Staff receive annual training on theft and loss prevention. In response to this incident, a scam prevention notice was also sent to all residents. A copy of the police report was not available, and no report number was provided, as R1 filed the report independently. No additional relevant information or documentation was available at the time of the visit. The LPA requested copies of the resident’s admission agreement (including the Theft and Loss Program notification), the resident’s medical report, care plan, and reassessment. No deficiencies cited today. Report was discussed and a copy of the report is provided.

2025-08-26
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Jaime Vado
2025-05-21
Complaint Investigation
Mixed
Type A · 1 finding
Inspector · Dominic Tobola

Plain-language summary

An investigator looked into a complaint that staff gave a resident eye drop medication more often than prescribed. The investigator found that one eye drop bottle was left in the resident's bedroom and reviewed medication records, but could not find enough evidence that the medication was actually given incorrectly—the resident's own account and the medication logs didn't support the complaint. No violation was found.

Type A22 CCR §87465(h)(2)
Verbatim citation text · 22 CCR §87465(h)(2)

LPA found that resident R1 is not able to manage or store their own medicaitons. Additionally, gathered photo evidence shows prescription medicaiton left in R1's bedroom by staff on multiple occassions. This serves as an immediate health & safety risk to resident in care.

Read raw inspector notes

Complaint alleges, staff did not administer medication as prescribed. Complaint further indicates that R1 is given an eye drop medication more than the daily prescribed dose. Based upon a review of R1's medication records, LPA found that R1 is prescribed two different eye drop medications, both of which have orders for daily use. One of which is administered once per day and the other administered three times per day. Photo evidence shows that the eye drop medication with an order to administer once per day was left accessible in R1's bedroom. However, based upon sample review of R1's MAR, LPA did not find enough corroborating evidence indicating the facility had incorrectly or over-administered R1's medication. In addition, interview with R1 posed contradicting information towards the allegation. A finding that the complaint allegations, staff did not administer medication as prescribed and staff did not properly manage resident's medication are unsubstantiated meaning that although the allegation 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. No deficiency cited.

2025-02-27
Annual Compliance Visit
No findings
Inspector · Dominic Tobola

Plain-language summary

On February 27, 2025, the state conducted a routine annual inspection and found no deficiencies at this 193-resident facility. The inspector observed clean living spaces, secure storage of hazardous materials, current fire safety systems, and staff actively engaged with residents through activities and outings tailored to individual preferences. Resident files, staff certifications, and medication records were all in order.

Read raw inspector notes

On 2/27/2025, Licensing Program Analysts (LPA) Tobola conducted an unannounced Annual Required – 1 yr. inspection for this facility and was greeted by General Manager, Matt Turner. The facility currently provides care for 193 residents, 6 of which are receiving hospice services along with a designated memory care unit. LPA continued with a tour of the facility with staff, facility found to be clean and at a comfortable temperature with all exits free from obstruction. Resident’s bedrooms, common spaces and kitchen and food storage areas were inspected. Fire Extinguishers located throughout the building were found to be charged. Smoke and carbon monoxide detectors and fire safety systems are interconnected with last fire safety inspection completed October 2024 with all corrections completed. Cleaning supplies and other toxins are safely stored in locked closets throughout the facility, and housekeeping/maintenance rooms all of which were secured upon inspection. There was a supply of hygiene products and paper products available for residents. All resident’s bedrooms were found to be in a clean and comfortable condition with lighting & appropriate furnishings and bedding items. Residents were observed to be out in the community during the inspection, interacting with staff, fellow residents and visitors in the common areas, or in their bedrooms resting. The facility encourages regular family visits and utilizes a wide variety of activities with LPA observing staff engaging continuously with residents, offering a unique variety of activities and outings based on individualized preferences and capabilities. A wide selection of activity supplies and amenities including a gym, pool, large outdoor patio and guest performances are all provided. LPA found that staff and resident engagement is well practiced with activity calendars developed on a monthly basis with residents observed to have a positive and personable relationship with staff and General Manager. Continued onto 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 LPA conducted a sample file review for several residents and found all items to be on file including Needs & Service Plans and Medical Assessments to be current. Upon a spot check of staff files, LPA found that caregiver staff have current first aid and annual training, health screenings and TB results on file. Lastly, a spot check of medications was conducted and found that all medication counts and records are in order. Administrator, Deborah Suarez's Administrator Certificate 7008093740 is valid through 5/15/2025 General Manager, Matthew Turner's Administrator Certificate 6074366740 is valid through 1/28/2027 LPA requested the following documents be sent to CCL by COB 3/13/2025: LIC 308 Designated Facility Responsibility LIC 500 Personnel Summary LIC 610 Emergency Disaster Plan Liability Insurance No deficiencies cited during today's visit

2024-11-21
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Dominic Tobola

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that staff gave a resident medication more than an hour late. The facility's policy allows medications to be given up to one hour before or after the scheduled time, and the inspector found medication records showed all doses were marked as completed; without clear evidence of late administration, the complaint could not be substantiated.

Read raw inspector notes

LPA gathered further information regarding (R1) ADL medication care needs are not met. Complainant reports that staff had administered R1's medication over one hour past scheduled medication administration times. Upon interviews with Care Coordinator Director (S2) and documented statements of General Manager (S1) gathered, it is indicated that the facility staff are allowed to administer medication one hour before or one hour after medication administration times. Upon review of facility medication administration policy LPA confirmed that it is also indicated: staff are "allowed" to assist up to one hour before or after the medication "give time". There however, is no indication in facility policy that staff are required to provide medications at exact times. S1 further indicated that staff are to provide services or attempt to provide services to residents at approximates of schedule times with consideration to staff tending to several other residents in care. In addition, LPA reviewed medication prescription instruction for R1's prescribed Amoxicillin with claims that medication was not administered within prescription time frame. Upon review of medication prescription, Amoxicillin is only indicated to be taken 3 times per day (AM, PM and Evening) with no specific times that the medication is required to be taken at. Lastly, LPA conducted a file review of facility Medication Administration Records (MAR) in which all indicated dates in which staff allegedly failed to meet resident R1 medication assistant ADL were found to be marked as completed. Due to a contradicting information gathered an a lack of corroborating evidence, the allegation is found to be unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint allegations, facility staff not meeting resident needs is unsubstantiated meaning that although the allegation 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.

2024-11-14
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Dominic Tobola
2024-09-05
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Inspector · Jaime Vado
2024-05-24
Complaint Investigation
Substantiated
Citation on file
Inspector · John Calandra

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that the facility violated regulations regarding record-keeping or documentation requirements. The specific violation is detailed in the regulatory citation provided to the facility. The facility was notified of the violation and given information about appealing the finding.

Substantiated — the state found a violation and issued a citation. Full citation details are on file with the state.

Read raw inspector notes

The deficiency cited on the following page is in violation of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8: This report is provided and reviewed with facility representative and a copy of this report must be made available for public review upon request. Appeal rights discussed and provided.

2024-02-16
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · John Calandra

Plain-language summary

This was the facility's required annual inspection on February 16, 2024, and no deficiencies were found. The inspector checked the building, bathrooms, fire safety equipment, food storage, medications, resident files, and staff qualifications, and found everything in compliance with regulations. Water temperatures, grab bars, fire extinguishers, food inventory, medication storage, and lighting all met requirements.

Read raw inspector notes

On February 16, 2024, Licensing Program Analyst(LPA) John Calandra arrived at the facility to conduct the unannounced Annual 1-year required Annual Inspection. LPA Calandra was greeted by Collin Hardwick, Concierge. Deborah Suarez, Assistant General Manager and Shirley Cheung, Care Coordination Director, and Matthew Turner, General Manager arrived later. LPA Calandra toured the physical plant. This is a fourteen story building that consists of 144 bedrooms. Water in all bathrooms was measured between the required 105-120 degrees Fahrenheit. Bathrooms were observed to have the required grab bars and anti-skid mats. Fire extinguishers in the facility were observed to be fully charged and last inspected on January 30, 2024. The facility had the required 7 days of non-perishables and 2 days of perishables on site. No food was expired. The kitchen refrigerators and freezers temperature were within the required range. All bedrooms were sufficiently lit and had the required furniture. The outdoor space was clear from obstructions. No accessible bodies of water or hazards were observed. The facility does not handle any cash resources. The facility was maintained at a comfortable temperature of 70 degrees Fahrenheit. LPA Calandra reviewed 5 resident files and 5 staff files. All were observed to be complete. LPA Calandra also interviewed 3 staff and 3 residents. All knives, sharp objects, soaps, detergents, and medications were observed to be locked and in-accessible to persons in care. A review of Centrally stored medications indicated that medications for residents were properly labeled with instructions on dosage and times of day and matched the Centrally Stored Medication records(CSMR) kept at the facility. 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 Calandra received the following documents at the facility: -Trainings completed by Assistant General Manager, Deborah Suarez -Administrator's Certificate for Deborah Suarez -Updated LIC 500 reflecting all staff No deficiencies were cited during today's visit. A copy of the report was reviewed with Deborah Suarez, Assistant General Manager, Shirley Cheung, Care Coordination Director, and Matthew Turner, General Manager and a copy left at the facility.

2023-10-31
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · John Calandra
2023-10-25
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · John Calandra

Plain-language summary

State regulators visited the facility on October 25, 2023, to follow up on an incident from September where a resident left the facility unattended during a community walk with their spouse and other residents. The resident returned and notified staff they wanted to continue walking but did not sign out through the facility's tracking system. No violations were found, and regulators determined this practice was consistent with the facility's procedures.

Read raw inspector notes

On October 25, 2023, Licensing Program Analyst(LPA), John Calandra and Licensing Program Manager(LPM), Cara Smith arrived at the facility to follow up in regards to an incident report received on September 21, 2023 regarding a resident who left the facility unattended. LPA Calandra and LPM Smith were greeted by Shirley Cheung, Care Coordination Director, Sarah Laloyan, Senior Vice President of Operations, and Deborah Suarez, Assistant General Manager and explained the purpose of their visit. Shirley Cheung and Sarah Laloyan, informed the LPA and LPM that the resident had left the facility with other residents for a community walk with their spouse. The resident came back to the community and notified the front desk staff that they would like to continue their walk. The resident did not sign in or out via the Accushield system.This is not considered an abnormal practice based on an interview with Deborah Suarez, Assistant General Manager. LPA Calandra and LPM Smith reviewed and collected several documents including the resident's LIC 602, list of activities for the day, notes regarding the incident, Absentee notification plan, etc. At this time, there are no deficiencies cited. A copy of this report was reviewed with Shirley Cheung, Care Coordination Director, Sarah Laloyan, Senior Vice President of Operations, and Deborah Suarez, Assistant General Manager and left at the facility.

2023-08-28
Other Visit
No findings
Inspector · Grace Donato

Plain-language summary

On August 28, 2023, state licensing visited the facility to investigate a report that a resident had been sexually abused by a privately hired aide. The aide was removed from the facility when the report was made, and the facility confirmed that privately hired aides must follow facility rules and be fingerprinted through an agency; no violations were cited during this visit.

Read raw inspector notes

Amended Report On 8/28/2023, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Grace Donato conducted a case management visit concerning a report of suspected abuse received on 8/7/23. LPA met with Shirley Cheung, Care Coordinator Director & Deborah Suarez, Assistant General Manager. LPA explained the purpose of today's visit. In regard to the report, resident (R1) mentioned that a private duty aide (PDA) sexually abused him/her. Based on record reviews & interviews, in the admission agreement, pages 6-7 pertaining to Private Duty Aides, Outside Services, R1 is allowed to hire, but hired PDA is to follow rules in the community. The PDA is fingerprinted through the agency. PDA was removed from the facility when the report was made. Currently, facility has suggested to residents to hire from the facility's preferred agencies. Document to be submitted LPA regarding records for the Private Duty Aide. No deficiencies cited today. Report was discussed and a copy of the report is provided.

2023-08-23
Complaint Investigation
No findings
Inspector · Jaime Vado

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that staff failed to follow infection control practices, but an investigation found the allegation to be false. The facility was observed following proper infection control procedures, including isolation of positive residents, required mask and face shield use by staff and visitors, and compliance with health department outbreak notifications. No violations were found and the complaint was dismissed.

Read raw inspector notes

Page 2 - LIC9099 Positive residents are isolated in their rooms and visitation guidelines are in place requiring visitors to wear N95 masks and face shields if visiting. Staff members in memory care are observed wearing N95 masks and face shields during tour. Notifications to family members are going out on this day due to DPH outbreak status being declared. No staff have tested positive at this time. Facility is abiding by current Provider Information Notification updates at this time. This allegation is unfounded. This agency has investigated the complaint alleging, Staff did not comply with infection control practices resulting in a H&S risk . We have found that the complaint was unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. We have therefore dismissed the complaint. No citations issued. Report is reviewed with Deborah Suarez.

2023-07-26
Complaint Investigation
Unsubstantiated
No findings
Inspector · Komal Charitra

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that staff were not bathing or changing residents on the fourth floor who had scabies. The facility provided records and staff statements showing that after a resident tested positive for scabies on July 21, 2023, all residents and staff in the memory care unit received treatment the next day, and all residents were given showers, fresh linens, and clean clothes on July 23, 2023. No violation was found.

Read raw inspector notes

Regarding the allegation that staff do not meet residents hygiene needs while in care, according to the reporting party, the residents on the 4 th floor with scabies are not being bathed nor changed. During the investigation, LPA interviewed the Executive Director, Assistant General Manager, Deborah Suarez, and Care Coordination Director, Shirley Cheung and reviewed resident files. According to the Executive Director and staff interviewed, they denied this allegation. Based on the staff interviewed, it was indicated that when the facility received confirmation on 7/21/2023 that R1 tested positive for scabies, all residents and all staff in the memory care unit were treated with the scabies prescription on 7/22/2023. Furthermore, on 7/23/2023, all resident apartments were cleaned, staff provided all memory care unit residents with showers, changed their linens and laundered their personal clothing. Therefore, based on the interviews conducted, and information collected, the allegations above are UNSUBSTANTIATED, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Report is reviewed with the Executive Director, Sarah Lolayan and a copy is provided.

6 older inspections from 2022 are not shown above.

Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.

Family reviews

No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience

Related in this city

Other memory care options nearby.

Is this listing wrong? Report an issue →
Reports help us maintain accurate facility information. Your report will be reviewed within 1-2 business days.
Editorial Independence

The memory care site on the family's side: StarlynnCare receives no referral commissions, lead fees, or paid placement from facilities.