Lynne & Roy M Frank Residences
RCFE · Memory Care
A Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) is a non-medical residential care home licensed by California CDSS under Health & Safety Code §1560. Residents receive help with daily living activities such as bathing, dressing, and medication management. An RCFE with a Memory Care designation is additionally required by California Title 22 (§87705 and §87706) to provide specialized staff training in dementia care, individualized care plans for residents with cognitive impairment, and appropriate supervision protocols — requirements that go beyond a standard RCFE license.
One Avalon Avenue · San Francisco, 94112
Quick facts
Inspection comparison
Updated May 1, 2026Compared to 90 California RCFE memory care facilities of similar size, over the last 36 months.
Source: California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division. View raw inspection records →
Peer comparison
Percentile vs 90 similar California CA / rcfe_memory_care / xl beds facilities · higher = better
Weighted citations per bed
Repeat deficiencies as share of total
Deficiencies per inspection
Tick mark at 50% = peer median
Citation severity over time
stableWeighted severity score per month · 24 months
Weighted score (24mo)
0
Finding distribution
2 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
The rules that apply to this facility
California Title 22 requirements for this facility, with the specific regulation and a suggested question for each.Rules this facility has been cited for are shown first.
What dementia-care training must staff complete?Cited Dec 202222 CCR §87705 / HSC §1569.625
Because this facility markets dementia or Alzheimer's care, state law mandates higher training standards:
- 12 hours initial dementia training — 6 hours before a staff member works independently with residents, 6 more within the first 4 weeks.
- 8 hours annual dementia in-service — required every year thereafter.
- Administrator CE — the administrator must include 8 hours of dementia-specific continuing education in every 2-year recertification cycle.
Training must cover individualized care plans, behavioral expressions, appropriate supervision, and the facility's dementia care philosophy.
Ask on tour: Ask how dementia training records are kept — families may request documentation.
How many staff must be on duty overnight?22 CCR §87415
Based on 220 licensed beds:
1 awake caregivers on duty overnight, one on-call caregiver physically on premises, and one additional on-call caregiver.
State law adds one awake caregiver for each 100 residents above 200.
Violation pattern to watch for:A facility that documents a staff member as "on call" but with that person physically off-site — when the law requires on-premises presence — is in violation of this section.
Ask on tour: Ask the facility to walk you through their overnight staffing plan and confirm whether on-call staff are on premises or off-site.
What health conditions can this facility legally accept or refuse?22 CCR §87612–87615
Restricted — allowed with physician order + care plan
- Supplemental oxygen
- Insulin and injectable medications
- Indwelling or intermittent catheters
- Colostomy / ileostomy
- Stage 1 and Stage 2 pressure injuries
- Wound care (non-complex)
- Incontinence
- Contractures
Prohibited — facility must refuse or discharge
- Stage 3 or Stage 4 pressure injuries
- Feeding tubes (PEG, NG, or J-tube)
- Tracheostomies
- Active MRSA or communicable infections requiring isolation
- 24-hour skilled nursing needs
- Total ADL dependence with inability to communicate needs
A hospice waiver (HSC §1569.73) can allow continued care for residents on hospice who would otherwise fall into a prohibited category.
Ask on tour: Ask whether your loved one's specific care needs are restricted or prohibited, and what the facility's process is if needs change after admission.
What must this facility report to the state — and how fast?22 CCR §87211 / WIC §15630
- ImmediateElopement, fire, epidemic outbreak, or poisoningImmediately
- 2 hoursAbuse with serious bodily injury2-hour phone report + 2-hour written report — to the California Department of Social Services (CDSS), Adult Protective Services, and law enforcement
- 24 hrsAbuse without serious bodily injuryWithin 24 hours
- Next dayDeath of a residentPhone by next working day; written within 7 days
- Next dayInjury requiring medical treatment beyond first aidPhone by next working day; written within 7 days
- WrittenBankruptcy, foreclosure, eviction, or utility shutoff noticeWritten notice to CDSS and residents — $100/day penalty (max $2,000) for failure
Your enforcement lever:Incidents that aren't reported on time are themselves a separate violation. If you believe a reportable event wasn't filed, you can submit a complaint directly to the California Department of Social Services (CDSS).
How 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 citationsQuestions to ask on your tour
Based on Lynne & Roy M Frank Residences's state inspection record.
The facility has 2 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?
11 complaints are on file with CDSS — were any substantiated, and what remediation did the facility take in response to substantiated findings?
The February 4, 2026 inspection is the most recent on record — can you provide the deficiency notice from that visit and walk families through the corrective actions completed for any cited items?
California Title 22 §87705 requires a written dementia-care program for memory care facilities — can you provide that written program and explain how it guides the care approach for the 220 licensed beds here?
State records
California Dept. of Social Services · Community Care Licensing- License number
- 385601084
- License type
- RESIDENTIAL CARE ELDERLY
- License status
- LICENSED
- License expires
- Not yet indexed
- Licensed beds
- 220
- Operator
- Hebrew Home for Aged Disabled
Inspections & citations
23
reports on file
7
total deficiencies
2
Type A (actual harm)
1
dementia-care citations
ComplaintMarch 11, 2026No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
On March 11, 2026, the state investigated a complaint that a staff member handled a resident roughly. The facility self-reported the incident and cooperated with the investigation; no violations were found during the visit, though the state indicated it may conduct additional follow-up as needed.
View full inspector notes
On 03/11/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Yi Sam Jian conducted a case management incident visit at the facility regarding a self-reported incident involving an allegation of rough handling of resident R1 by staff S1. LPA met with Assistant Administrator, Gloria Vo and explained the purpose of the visit. During today’s visit, LPA conducted interviews with facility staff and collected documentation related to th e incident. LPA also reviewed facility documentation related to the incident report and the facility’s response. The Department will continue to review the information obtained . Additional follow-up may be conducted as needed. No deficiencies were cited during today’s visit. Report was reviewed with Assistant Administrator and a copy was provided.
Other visitFebruary 4, 2026· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Yi Sam Jian
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
The Department investigated complaints about residents leaving the facility unsupervised, staff failing to change soiled diapers promptly, staff not following residents' dietary plans, and a medication error involving a resident. Interviews with residents and review of facility records did not support any of these allegations. The Department determined there was not enough evidence to prove these complaints occurred.
View full inspector notes
Regarding the allegation that staff did not prevent residents from eloping from the facility, the Department conducted investigation. Interviews with residents did not indicate that residents left the facility without staff awareness or supervision. Facility records reviewed did not document any resident elopement incidents. Regarding the allegation that staff left residents in soiled diapers for a long period of time, the Department conducted investigation. Interviews with residents did not support the allegation, and residents did not report being left in soiled diapers or clothing. No documentation or additional evidence was obtained to corroborate the allegation. Regarding the allegation that staff are not following residents’ dietary plans, the Department conducted investigation. Document review and resident interviews did not identify evidence that residents’ dietary plans were not being followed. Residents interviewed did not report concerns regarding meals inconsistent with their dietary needs. The complaint alleged that client C1 was administered medications that did belong to another individual. The LPA determined there was conflicting information indicating that C1 did not reside at the facility, and there was insufficient corroborating evidence to substantiate the allegation. Although the above 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. This report is reviewed and a copy this report is provided to the administrator.
InspectionSeptember 5, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
On September 3, 2025, a resident was found unresponsive in their bed and died despite CPR efforts by nursing staff and emergency responders. The facility reported the death to the state and investigators reviewed documentation and interviewed staff during a follow-up visit on September 5, 2025. No violations were cited.
View full inspector notes
On 09/05/2025 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Yi Sam Jian conducted an unannounced case management visit to follow up on a death report submitted on 09/03/2025. LPA met with administrator Robert Sarison, purpose of the visit e xplained to administrator. The facility reported that on September 3, 2025, Resident R1 passed away and the immediate cause of death was not disclosed. According to the death report submitted to Community Care Licensing (CCL), on August 31, 2025, at approximately 6:45 AM, Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN) S1 found Resident R1 unresponsive and lying in a pool of emesis on the bed. S1 initiated CPR but was unable to revive the resident. Emergency services were called, and paramedics arrived and pronounced R1 deceased at the scene. During today’s visit, LPA revie wed and collected relevant documentation and conducted interviews with director of health and wellness S2. S1 was not available for interview at the time of the visit. The administrator stated that the facility will request a copy of the official death certificate once it becomes available. No citations issued. Report discussed with administrator.
Other visitAugust 14, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
This was the facility's required annual inspection on August 14, 2025. The inspector toured all five floors of the building, reviewed safety systems including emergency call buttons, fire equipment, and infection control practices, and checked that medications and hazardous materials were stored securely and out of residents' reach. No violations were found.
View full inspector notes
On 08/14/2025 Licensing Program Analyst(LPA) Yi Sam Jian arrived at the facility to conduct the Annual 1-year required visit. LPA was greeted by administrator, Robert Sarison and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured facility and grounds, consisting of studio, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom units on 5 floors. 1st floor had Assisted living rooms, kitchen, common use rooms for the assisted living residents--lounges, dinning rooms, theater, performance center, cafe, salon, and fitness center, including locked indoor pool. 2nd, 3rd, 4th floor had assisted living room and memories care rooms. 5th floor had assisted living rooms only. In each of the memory care units, there is at least one dedicated dining room and outdoor space. The building accommodates residents, including non-ambulatory, and hospice residents. Rooms are equipped with emergency call systems, which can be activated from bathrooms and bedrooms. Basement parking lead to emergency generator. 2 outdoor courtyards, accessible from 1st floor, had no accessible body of water. Kitchen and food supplies are inspected. Infection control practices are reviewed. PPE supply is adequate. Medications, toxins and sharps are stored appropriately and inaccessible to clients, a comfortable temperature is maintained, hot water temperature inspected to be compliant, and lighting is sufficient for comfort and safety. Fire safety equipment checked and fully charged. Facility van's first-aid kit and fire extinguisher inspected and complete. Criminal record clearances or exemptions for facility staff or other individuals who have client contact have been reviewed. No deficiency cited today. The report is reviewed with administrator and a copy is provided.
InspectionJune 5, 2025No deficiencies
Plain-language summary
An inspector made an unannounced visit to deliver an updated complaint report to the facility's Assistant Executive Director. No violations were found. The facility management confirmed they understood the amended report.
View full inspector notes
On this day Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Yi Sam Jian conducted an unannounced case management visit to deliver an amended complaint report. LPA met with Gloria Vo - Assistant Executive Director during today's visit. LPA explained the amended report delivery and the reason it was amended. She confirmed that she understood the amended report. No citations issued. Report reviewed with Assistant Executive Director.
ComplaintMarch 19, 2025· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Yi Sam Jian
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Other visitSeptember 19, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: Yi Sam Jian
Plain-language summary
This was a routine inspection of the entire facility, including all five floors with assisted living and memory care units, common areas, kitchens, and outdoor spaces. Inspectors checked emergency call systems, medication storage, fire safety equipment, infection control practices, staff clearances, and other safety and health standards, and found no deficiencies. The facility includes dedicated dining and outdoor spaces in memory care units, accessible accommodations for residents with varying mobility needs, and emergency equipment like first-aid kits and fire extinguishers.
View full inspector notes
LPA Yi Sam Jian and Dominic Tobola toured facility and grounds, consisting of studio, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom units on 5 floors. 1st floor had Assisted living rooms, kitchen, common use rooms for the assisted living residents--lounges, dinning rooms, theater, performance center, cafe, salon, and fitness center, including locked indoor pool. 2nd, 3rd, 4th floor had assisted living room and memories care rooms. 5th floor had assisted living rooms only. In each of the memory care units, there is at least one dedicated dining room and outdoor space. The building accommodates residents, including non-ambulatory, bedridden and hospice residents. Rooms are equipped with emergency call systems, which can be activated from bathrooms and bedrooms. 2 outdoor courtyards, accessible from 1st floor, had no accessible body of water. Kitchen and food supplies are inspected. Infection control practices are reviewed. PPE supply is adequate. Medications, toxins and sharps are stored appropriately and inaccessible to clients, a comfortable temperature is maintained, hot water temperature inspected to be compliant, and lighting is sufficient for comfort and safety. Fire safety equipment checked and fully charged. Facility van's first-aid kit and fire extinguisher inspected and complete. Criminal record clearances or exemptions for facility staff or other individuals who have client contact have been reviewed. No deficiency cited today. The report is reviewed with administrator Edwina Tang and a copy is provided.
Other visitAugust 9, 2024No deficiencies
Inspector: John Calandra
Plain-language summary
On August 9, 2024, state licensing analysts conducted an unannounced visit to investigate a report that had been submitted to the Department. The analysts reviewed care records and spoke with facility management, and no violations were identified. A copy of the inspection findings was provided to the facility.
View full inspector notes
On August 9, 2024, Licensing Program Analysts(LPAs) John Calandra and Dominic Tobola arrived at the facility at 4:28 PM to conduct an unnanounced Case Management regarding an SOC 341 and Incident Report submitted to the Department. LPAs Calandra and Tobola requested the following documents: -LIC 602 -Care Notes/Needs and Services Plan -Notes from staff An exit interview was conducted. This report was reviewed with Michelle Delos Santos, Business Office Manager, Sandra Peret, Director of Health and Wellness, and Rob Saraison, Assistant Executive Director . No Appeal rights were provided. A copy of the report was left at the facility.
ComplaintAugust 8, 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 about staffing levels was investigated through interviews with staff and review of facility schedules and records. Staff reported that call-outs are covered and residents are fed without issues, with each caregiver assigned four to five residents; the facility also has additional floaters and a nurse on shift. The investigation found insufficient evidence to substantiate the complaint.
View full inspector notes
LPA interviewed four staff members. All mentioned that there is no issue with regards to staffing in the facility. A staff, S3, mentioned that if there are call outs it still gets covered. Staff are also able to manage feeding without issues. Each staff interviewed has 4 to 5 residents assigned under their care. S2 also mentioned that if needed, calls another person for additional assistance. During the interview, S1 also mentioned that there is a resident (R1), has been slow in responding and can't balance anymore, eats a little bit and slowly eats or chews. S2 also confirmed that R1 is a non-verbal resident, a slow eater and has difficulty in feeding. R1 used to attend activities before and sometimes participates depending on the condition. S5 stated that there are floaters who can work both in memory care and assisted living. They are cross trained in case needed. Based on records review, the facility provided the schedule in memory care unit there is currently 4 neighborhoods where residents live. For each neighborhood there are two to three caregivers (depending on the number of residents). Aside from that there is also a nurse on shift, three med techs, two floaters and activity coordinators. LPA also checked the progress notes and meal logs for R1 and it showed that R1 is eating less and less. Records also show that facility reached out to responsible party regarding R1’s slow decline and referral to hospice. Based on interviews & records review, the department has determined that 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, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Report is reviewed and copy is provided.
ComplaintMarch 25, 2024· MixedType B2 deficiencies
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that training records for caregivers in the memory care unit were incomplete. Two newly hired caregivers lacked documentation showing they received required dementia training, and one caregiver had only 5.5 hours of required annual dementia training instead of the 8 hours needed; additionally, there was no information available about what dementia training an agency staff member had received.
View full inspector notes
Staff training records for 3 caregivers in memory care unit 3 are reviewed today. This does not include one agency staff, for which there is no information about what dementia training was received. Two staff were required to have at least 12 hours of dementia specific training, as part of initial training. One caregiver was required to have at least 8 hours of dementia specific training, as part of annual continuing training. There is no documentation to verify that two new staff received 12 hours of dementia specific training, and there was documentation of just 5.5 hours of annual continuing dementia training for one caregiver. Deficiencies of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22 are cited on a following page.
Regulation
OBSERVATION OF THE RESIDENT The licensee shall ensure that residents are regularly observed for changes in physical, mental, emotional and social functioning and that appropriate assistance is provided when such observation reveals unmet needs... the licensee shall ensure that such changes
Inspector finding
are documented and brought to the attention of the resident's physician and the resident's responsible person, if any. This requirement was not met, as client #1 did not receive timely medical intervention when pressure ulcers were observed, which poses a potential health, safety or personal rights risk to clients.
Regulation
PERSONAL RIGHTS OF RESIDENTS IN ALL FACILITIES Residents in all RCFEs shall have...the following personal rights: To have their representatives regularly informed by the licensee of activities related to care or services, including ongoing evaluations, as appropriate to
Inspector finding
their needs. This requirement was not met, as responsible parties of client #1 were not notified when staff observed pressure injuries on client #1. Licensee failed to ensure that responsible parties of client #1 received timely report that pressure injuries were observed, which posed a potential health, safety or personal rights risk to clients.
ComplaintSeptember 19, 2023· SubstantiatedCitation on file
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Substantiated — CDSS found a violation and issued a citation. Full citation details are on file with the state.
ComplaintJuly 10, 2023· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint alleged that a resident was not receiving the required three showers per week; the facility's records showed the resident received three to seven showers monthly during the period reviewed, and refused to shower at least four times, with staff offering sponge baths as alternatives though these were not documented. The investigation could not confirm whether the resident's care needs were not being met, and staffing levels appeared adequate during the review period. The complaint was unsubstantiated.
View full inspector notes
As per November 2021 care plan for client #1, he was to receive assistance with showers 3 times per week. Upon review of facility's ADL Reports Logs for May, June, July 2022, caregivers assisted client to shower 3 times in May, 6 times in June, and 7 times in July, and he refused to shower at least 4 times. LPA was advised that when client refused to shower, a sponge bath was offered as an alternative, but not documented by staff. It cannot be confirmed that client's needs were not met by staff. Based on review of memory care units staffing in May, June, July 2022, no staff shortages were apparent. In July 2022, there were 43 clients residing in 4 memory care units/neighborhoods. AM shift averaged 6.57 caregivers in May, 6.58 in June, and 6.93 in July; PM shift averaged 6.64 caregivers in May, 6.23 in June, and 7.2 in July; NOC shift averaged 5.25 caregivers in May, 6.0 in June, and 6.03 in July. Although the allegations may have occurred or are valid, there is not enough evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur.
ComplaintJune 30, 2023· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint was investigated regarding a resident's care and living situation. The investigation found insufficient evidence to prove whether the complaint was valid or not, though the resident's medical records confirmed she had memory problems and confusion that required close monitoring. The resident was ultimately able to leave the facility in March 2023 to return home with 24-hour companions when she was ready to do so.
View full inspector notes
Following the October meeting, DPOA arranged to have client's private home cleaned and set up for safety. This included sorting through mail, tax and financial docume nts, unpaid bills, clearing dirty laundry, clothing and clutter, as well as retaining a private care manager and hiring and scheduling 24 hour companions. Pre-placement appraisal completed prior to client's RCFE admission states that client has poor short-term memory and confusion. Facility's care plan identified that client was disoriented, forgetful and repetitious. As per MD reports dated 10/27/21--prior to admission--1/31/23, and 2/9/23, client has mild cognitive impairment and prior alcohol dependency. Most recent MD report states that 24 hour monitoring is needed due to intermittent confusion. Former resident acknowledged that in order for her to return home, she had to be fully able to access and manage the stairs in and outside her private residence. When she recovered from her injury, she expressed her desire to return home, and Ombudsman was instrumental in facilitating this in March 2023, with 24 hour companions. Her personal right to leave facility was not violated and the length of time she lived at facility was not a concern. Due to client's intermittent confusion, forgetfulness and short-term memory loss, this allegation cannot be determined to be substantiated or unfounded. Although the allegation may have occurred or is valid, there is not enough evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur.
ComplaintMay 12, 2023· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Jaime Vado
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Other visitMay 12, 2023No deficiencies
Inspector: Jaime Vado
Plain-language summary
A state licensing analyst conducted an unannounced visit to review the facility's admission policies and how they determine who is responsible for making placement decisions for new residents. The facility has admission practices in place and works with family members to identify the responsible party, relying on legal documents like power of attorney when available. The facility is updating its admission policies to clarify these procedures, and no violations were found.
View full inspector notes
On this day Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jaime Vado conducted an unannounced case management - other visit to discuss admission policies of the facility. LPA met with executive director Edwina Tang and assistant executive director Robert Sarison. LPA explained the purpose of today's visit. The facility does have admission policies and practices regarding determining responsible party for admission. LPA was provided a copy of the current admission practices for memory care. Per the facility placement in the facility is determinant on who is the responsible person for the resident being admitted in. It was discussed that the facility does work with the family member(s) on who is responsible for the placement. If the resident does have a durable power of attorney (DPOA) they rely on the documentation received. The facility is continually adjusting the admission practices and is in the process of updating the admissions policy for clarity and to ensure that the facility is taking the right steps in regards to resident admission practices. Report is reviewed with the executive director Edwina Tang. No citations are issued.
Other visitDecember 5, 2022Type A2 deficiencies
Inspector: Murial Han
Plain-language summary
On November 4, 2022, a resident in the memory care unit exited through a delayed-egress door that was supposed to delay for 30 seconds but malfunctioned and opened immediately; the resident made it to the building's roof before staff found and returned them to the unit. During a follow-up visit in December 2022, inspectors found that the facility had not documented regular maintenance checks of the door before the incident and staff did not check the stairwell after the alarm sounded, though the door was repaired afterward and staff monitoring procedures were put in place. A violation was cited, and the facility was required to correct it by a specified deadline or face a civil penalty.
View full inspector notes
On 12/5/2022, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Murial Han conducted an unannounced case management visit to follow up on an incident that was reported by the facility. On 11/4/2022, facility reported resident #1 (R1) eloped through the delayed egress door, took stairwell and was found by staff on the 5th floor roof top. On 11/7/2022, the assistant administrator stated that R1 resides in the 3rd floor memory care unit and exited through the delayed egress door which triggered the alarm and subsequently the over head paging system announcing that the delayed egress door was opened. Staff witnessed the door opened which triggered a head-count and discovered R1 was missing. Staff started searching, and found R1 on the 5th floor roof and escorted R1 back to the unit. The assistant administrator also stated that the delayed egress door is 30 seconds delayed. On 11/7/2022, LPA inquired about staff response time after the alarm went off as the delayed egress door is 30 seconds delayed to prevent elopement while maintaining life safety. The administrator stated that during the incident, the delayed egress door was malfunctioned, therefore, the door opened right away and staff did not check the stairwell that is outside of the door. In addition, the administrator stated that the delayed egress door was routinely checked but there was no documentation provided of such checks. However, since the incident, the door was repaired and during the repair, a staff was assigned 24 hours a day to monitor the door/exit until it was fixed. In addition, the facility started to document the preventive maintenance checks twice a day. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 During today visit, LPA and the administrator checked the delay egress door which was properly functioning and staff responded to the alarm appropriately. In addition, administrator provided documentation of staff monitoring the delayed egress door and staff in-service sign-in records. Based on interview, and record review during the course of the investigation, the facility was not able to proof that the delayed egress door was in good repair and staff did not check the stairwell after the door was opened. Deficiency cited today under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8 follows on LIC 809D. If cited deficiency is not corrected by the due date, a civil penalty may be assessed. This report was reviewed and discussed with administrator. Appeals Rights were given. A copy of report was provided.
Regulation
87303 Maintenance and Operation(a) The facility shall be clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair at all times. This requirement is not met as evidenced by the delayed egress exit door for the memory care
Inspector finding
unit was malfunctioned and R1 eloped the unit throught this exit and was found on the 5th floor roof top which poses an immediately health and safety risk for residents in care.
Regulation
87705 Care of Persons with Dementia (c) Licensees who accept..residents with dementia shall be responsible for ensuring the following:.(3) In addition to the on-the-job training requirements..(A) Dementia care including, but not limited to, the environment,..
Inspector finding
This requirement is not met as evidenced by after R1 eloped the unit through the delayed egress door, the alarm went off and the staff did not checked the exit/stairwell that was led to the roof top where R1 was found poses a potential health and safety risks to resident in care.
InspectionSeptember 30, 2022No deficiencies
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Plain-language summary
During a routine annual inspection, the facility reported no current COVID cases among staff or residents, and the inspector toured the facility and reviewed staffing schedules and resident records. No violations were found.
View full inspector notes
LPA Jeung met with executive director and obtained information about COVID cases that were reported to CCLD by email on 9/22/22. There are no new staff or residents infected with COVID. LPA also toured facility as part of annual inspection. See Facility Evaluation Report (LIC809). Staff work schedule for the week and client rosters by name and room number are given to LPA. No deficiencies observed today.
Other visitSeptember 30, 2022No deficiencies
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Plain-language summary
This was a routine inspection of a memory care and assisted living facility with multiple units across five floors. The inspector found the facility operating in compliance with state regulations, with appropriate safety features including delayed-exit doors in memory care units, emergency call systems in resident rooms, secure medication and supply storage, adequate infection control practices, and proper staff clearances. The facility was asked to submit updated licensing documentation by the deadline specified.
View full inspector notes
LPA Audrey Jeung toured facility and grounds, consisting of studio, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom units on 5 floors. Currently, the 4th floor memory care unit is vacant. There are residents in the third floor memory care unit--where there are 30 units--and part of the 2nd floor memory care unit. All are equipped with 30 second delayed egresses: one is tested and operates as required. In each of the memory care units, there is at least one dedicated dining room and outdoor space. The rest of the building accommodates assisted living residents, including non-ambulatory, bedridden and hospice residents. Rooms are equipped with emergency call systems, which can be activated from bathrooms and bedrooms. There is a large dining room for assisted living residents on the ground level, which accesses an outdoor courtyard. On the ground floor, there are common use rooms--lounges, theater, performance center, cafe, salon, and fitness center, including indoor pool. Kitchen and food supplies are inspected. Infection control practices are reviewed: entry procedures, staff training and policies, resident monitoring, containment strategies, environmental preparation and cleaning. PPE supply is adequate. Medications, toxins and sharps are stored appropriately and inaccessible to clients, a comfortable temperature is maintained, and lighting is sufficient for comfort and safety. Liquid soap is available in common bathrooms and private bathrooms of assisted living bathrooms. Handwashing reminder signs are posted appropriately. Staff and residents are checked daily for COVID symptoms and temperature checked and documented. First-aid kit is inspected and complete. Criminal record clearances or exemptions for facility staff or other individuals who have client contact have been reviewed. Edwina Tang is a certified RCFE administrator (x 11/23) that oversees facility operations. The following updated licensing forms or information are requested to be submitted to CCLD BY 10/10/22: - Administrative Organization (LIC309) - Personnel Report (LIC500) - Proof of liability insurance Infection Control Plan is provided to LPA today. This may have been submitted to CCLD previously. No deficiencies of the CA Code of REgulations, Title 22 are observed. FAcility is operating in substantial compliance with Title 22 RCFE regulations. See Technical Advisory Note for additional information.
InspectionJuly 1, 2022No deficiencies
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Plain-language summary
This was a routine inspection that reviewed how the facility handled an incident from June 2022 involving a private companion and a resident. The inspectors confirmed that the facility worked with the San Francisco Ombudsman to resolve the matter, provided the companion with training on feeding techniques, and had the companion sign required acknowledgment forms before resuming care. The inspectors recommended the facility add a personal rights form to the documents private companions must sign, but found no violations.
View full inspector notes
LPAs Jeung and Varilla met with assistant executive director and director of health and wellness to obtain details of incident of 6/11/22 that was reported to CCLD. LPAs reviewed file for client #1 and private companion, who was removed from facility on 6/11/22. LPAs were advised that SF Ombudsman met with facility staff, private companion, and daughter of client to discuss incident. As a result--and based on wishes of DPOA/daughter--private companion is allowed to resume companionship to client as of 6/17/22. Private companion was provided with training by hospice agency on feeding strategies on 6/23/22. Facility documents for private attendants--acknowledgement, indemnification, guidelines--were signed by private companion; copies are obtained. Requirements for Private Duty Attendants and Home Health Agency Personnel and Rules of Conduct of Attendants are also reviewed, but it cannot be confirmed that these documents were given to or acknowledged by private companion of client #1. LPAs recommended that Personal Rights forms LIC613C/LIC613C2 be added to forms that private attendants be required to acknowledge when providing services to facility. No deficiency cited.
Other visitApril 21, 2022Type B1 deficiency
Inspector: Murial Han
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced follow-up visit on April 21, 2022, inspectors found that the facility gave a resident a flu shot without written consent from the resident's responsible party. The administrator acknowledged this occurred. The facility was cited for failing to obtain proper consent before administering medical care.
View full inspector notes
On 4/21/2022, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) Murial Han conducted an unannounced case management visit to deliver the findings in reference to complaint # 14-AS-20220218123922. LPA met with the administrator and explained the purpose of the visit. According to the reporting party of complaint # 14-AS-20220218123922., the facility administered a flu shot to resident #1 (R1) without R1's responsible party's consent. LPA interviewed the administrator who acknowledged that the facility gave R1 a flu shot without a written consent from the responsible party. Based on the complaint investigation, the facility failed to ensure a consent is obtained from R1's responsible party prior to administering the flu shot. Deficient is cited under California Code of Regulations, Title, 22 cited on the LIC 809D. Failure to correct the deficiencies may result in civil penalties. Report was discussed with the administrator. A copy of this report and the Appeal Rights is provided.
Regulation
Personal Rights of Residents...(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights:(8) To have their representatives regularly informed by the licensee of activities related to care...
Inspector finding
the facility administered R1's flu shot without a consent from R1's responsible party which posed a potential health and safety risks to residents in care.
ComplaintApril 21, 2022· MixedType A1 deficiency
Inspector: Murial Han
Plain-language summary
A complaint inspection on February 28, 2022 found that the facility did not provide adequate staff supervision in the Memory Care unit—a staff member working in the kitchen could not see two residents watching TV in an adjacent room separated by a wall. The facility also administered a flu shot to a resident without the family's written consent. A separate allegation about a resident falling unattended could not be confirmed based on available evidence.
View full inspector notes
Regarding to allegation of facility has insufficient staffing to meet residents' needs- during the initial 10-day complaint inspection on 2/28/22 at 11:15am, LPA and the assistant administrator entered the TV / Dinning room in Memory Care Unit 3B, LPA observed resident #2 (R2) and resident #3 (R3) were watching TV by themselves. Then, LPA observed a staff was going in and out of the kitchen that is located in the dinning room and the dinning is in the same room as the TV room but separated by a wall. LPA observed the staff who was going in and out of the kitchen did not have visual supervision of both residents as the wall was in between the 2 rooms. A few minutes later the same staff completed his/her tasks in the kitchen and left the dinning/ TV room while both residents continued to watch TV in the TV room. Based on observation and interview during the course of the investigation, this allegation is substantiated. Based on observation and interview during the investigation, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. Therefore, this allegations were determined to be substantiated. Deficiencies of the California Code of Regulations, Title, 22 cited on the LIC9099-D. Failure to correct the deficiencies may result in civil penalties. Report was discussed with Administrator, and Appeal Rights provided. A copy of this report is 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 During the initial 10-day complaint inspection on 2/28/2022, LPA observed R1 was in the Terrace room passively participating in an activity in the presence of an activity staff, R1's private caregiver and a few other residents. LPA interviewed the facility directors who denied this allegation. LPA interviewed 4 facitliy staff who provided care to R1 and they reported that R1 was not left unattended, R1 did not fall and sustained injuries. LPA observed the LIC624- Incident Reports from Jan 2022 and there was not reporting of R1 falling. Concerning facility administered a flu shot to R1 without R1's responsible party's written consent. The administrator acknowledged the flu shot was given without a consent. Therefore, this deficiency will be cited on a LIC809. Base on record review and interviews during the course of investigation, this allegation is 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. Exit interview conducted with the facility administrator. A copy is 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 LPA interviewed the facility director who denied the allegation. Based on interviews and observation during the course of the investigation, this allegation was deemed to be unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. This report is discussed and reviewed with the administrator and the assistant administrator. A copy is provided.
Regulation
87468.1 Personal Rights...(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights:(3) To be free from punishment, humiliation, intimidation, abuse....
Inspector finding
This requirement was not met as evidenced by: the facility failed to ensure R1 was free from punishment and abuse as R1 was handled roughly by a former staff who grabbed R1 and R1 sustained an injury which posed an immediate health and safety risks to resident in care.
ComplaintSeptember 20, 2021No deficiencies
Inspector: Audrey Jeung
Plain-language summary
This was a routine inspection of the facility's operations, safety systems, and infection control practices. The inspector found that the memory care and assisted living units meet state safety requirements, including proper emergency exits, call systems, medication storage, and infection control procedures, with no violations noted. The facility was asked to submit updated administrative and insurance documentation by late September.
View full inspector notes
LPA Audrey Jeung toured facility and grounds, consisting of studio, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom units on 5 floors. Thirty rooms comprise the memory care unit on the third floor, where there are 4 exits equipped with a 30 second delayed egress: one is tested and operates as required. This unit has 2 small dining rooms and an outdoor patio. There are 2 additional memory care units that are not yet in use--on the 2nd and 4th floors. The rest of the building accommodates assisted living residents, including non-ambulatory, bedridden and hospice residents. Rooms are equipped with emergency call systems, which can be activated from bathrooms and bedrooms. There is a large dining room for assisted living residents on the ground level, which accesses an outdoor courtyard. On the ground floor, there are common use rooms--lounges, theater, performance center, cafe, salon, and fitness center. The pool is not yet available to residents. Infection control practices are reviewed: entry procedures, staff training and policies, resident monitoring, containment strategies, environmental preparation and cleaning. PPE supply is adequate. Medications, toxins and sharps are stored appropriately and inaccessible to clients, a comfortable temperature is maintained, and lighting is sufficient for comfort and safety. Liquid soap is available in common bathrooms and private bathrooms of assisted living bathrooms. First-aid kit is inspected and complete. Criminal record clearances or exemptions for facility staff or other individuals who have client contact have been reviewed. Edwina Tang is a certified RCFE administrator (x 11/21) that oversees facility operations. The following updated licensing forms or information are requested to be submitted to CCLD BY 9/27/21: - Board Resolution designating Ms. Tang as facility administrator - Personnel Report (LIC500) - Proof of liability insurance - Written notification of facility public phone number and email address (to receive CDSS notifications) COVID Mitigation Plan is provided to LPA today. This may have been submitted to CCLD previously. No deficiencies of the CA Code of REgulations, Title 22 are observed. FAcility is operating in substantial compliance with Title 22 RCFE regulations.
ComplaintJune 4, 2021· UnsubstantiatedNo deficiencies
Inspector: Mohamed Filouane
Unsubstantiated — the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) investigated and did not find a violation.
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found no violation could be substantiated. The facility provided documentation including a letter from a responsible party and staff emails about an incident from May 2021, but there was insufficient evidence to prove the allegations either did or did not occur.
View full inspector notes
LPA requested and obtained the letter from the responsible party requesting to deny visitation and communication with the family member, the LIC 601, as well as emails from facility staff to facility management reporting about the event on 05/26/21. 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 allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. This report was reviewed and discussed with the Executive Director. This report will be emailed to the Executive Director due to technical difficulties.
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.