Large community · Licensed for 90 · Oakland
Elder Ashram
3121 Fruitvale Ave, Oakland, CA 94602Licensed since 2020
Overview
No openings reported
- Approved by the state: Wheelchair · Hospice · BedriddenState licensing record · October 26, 2026
- Languages spoken: Chinese, German, Spanish and EnglishReported on A Place for Mom · September 9, 2026
- Licensed for 90: a large care communityThe state license record
Ask this home
Free for families. A home gets your number only if you say yes.
Care and support
- Wheelchairup to 90 residents
- Hospiceup to 18 residents
- Bedriddenup to 18 residents
Not on file: dementia approval.
Approved by the state · State licensing record · October 26, 2026. An approval may cover specific rooms or residents; it does not establish an opening.
Read the state’s own wording
AGE RANGE 60 AND OVER; APPROVED FOR CAPACITY OF 90 NON-AMBULATORY OF WHICH 18 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN; APPROVED HOSPICE WAIVER FOR 18 RESIDENTS
935 - ELDERLY
CDSS record, verbatim · October 26, 2026
Care services
These are the home’s own statements about its day-to-day practice — they are not part of the state licensing record, and the state has not approved or reviewed them.
Assisted living
Reported on elderashram.com · seen October 5, 2026.
Activities of daily living the home lists help withMobility · Eating · Grooming · Hygiene · Exercising
Reported on elderashram.com · seen October 5, 2026.
Medication management
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Therapies availablePsychotherapeutic and assessment activities
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Blood glucose checks by staff
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Incontinence care
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Counseling or therapy available
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Respite / short-term stays
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Diabetes care
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Mental wellbeing programmingGeroWellness Program
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Works with hospice
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Companion care
Reported on elderashram.com · seen October 5, 2026.
Nurse coverageNurse on Staff
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Hiring checksInterns are selected for an authentic interest and passion to work with the aging population and an interest in being part of a movement that views aging with respect and awareness.
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
As needs change
Staying through hospice
Hospice waiver on file · covers up to 18 — care may continue at the end of life
State licensing record · October 26, 2026
We’ll ask for you. Not on file for Elder Ashram: two-person transfers or a lift, who is awake overnight, help with medicines and care if memory loss develops. When we check availability, we ask about these too.
Check availabilityWhat it costs here
Covelight estimate
$4,900a month to start
Likely $3,800–$6,200
From 10 nearby homes that publish rates · this home’s rate is not on file
Monthly cost breakdownWith a studio and basic help · room, care and fees$4,900likely a month
Memory care is not priced here: a dementia-care designation is not on file for this home. Ask the home.
Starting monthly rate$4,900likely $3,800–$6,200
Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 10 communities with 50 or more beds within 5 miles publish, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices. In testing, the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 homes. This home’s own rate is not on file.
Basic help with daily careUsually includedup to $600
Basic help is usually part of the starting rate. Homes that price care by level start around $600 a month (44 California homes publish a care-level range, seen in September 2026).
One-time move-in fee$2,500one time · likely $0–$4,000
Homes that list a one-time entry or community fee charge a median of $2,500 (133 California listings; middle half $1,000–$4,000). Many homes list none — ask.
- Likely monthly totalLikely $3,800–$6,350
- $4,900
- First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $4,650–$9,500
- $7,400
How people payPrivate pay, Medi-Cal waiver, SSI/SSP, veterans, insurance
- MedicareDoes not pay for room and board in a care home. It can still cover hospice or home-health visits inside one.
- Private payMost residents pay from savings, a home sale or family help. Ask for the rate and what it includes in writing.
- Medi-Cal Assisted Living WaiverThis home is not on the DHCS participation list dated October 1, 2026. Ask the program about current options. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.
- SSI/SSPCalifornia’s 2026 standard is $1,626.07 a month; $1,444.07 of it goes to the home and $182 stays with the resident. Whether this home accepts it is not on file — ask.
- VeteransVA Aid & Attendance can add to a veteran’s or surviving spouse’s pension. Ask whether residents here have used it.
- Long-term care insuranceMost policies pay for licensed care homes. Ask what paperwork the home provides for claims.
Rates at nearby homes10 nearby homes publish starting rates of $3,550 to $7,995
10 homes like this within 5 miles publish starting rates mostly between $4,300–$7,950.
- Mercy Retirement & Care CenterOakland · 0.9 mi · Large community$5,795Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
- Lake Park Senior LivingOakland · 2.6 mi · Large community$3,550Listed on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026
- Ivy Park at Oakland HillsOakland · 2.6 mi · Large community$5,895Listed on its own website · studio apartments · seen October 27, 2026
- The Point at RockridgeOakland · 3.1 mi · Large community$4,738Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
- Oakmont of Mariner PointAlameda · 3.2 mi · Large community$7,995Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
- Cardinal Point at Mariner SquareAlameda · 3.2 mi · Large community$7,500Listed on Seniorly · assisted living studio · seen September 9, 2026
- Merrill Gardens at RockridgeOakland · 3.3 mi · Large community$4,800Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
- Elders Inn on WebsterAlameda · 3.4 mi · Large community$7,900Listed on Seniorly · assisted living studio · seen September 9, 2026
- Waters Edge LodgeAlameda · 4.1 mi · Large community$4,112Listed on Seniorly · independent living studio · seen September 9, 2026
- 1440 by the BayEmeryville · 4.4 mi · Large community$4,500Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
How this estimate worksWithin 25% for 7 in 10 homes in testing
Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 10 communities with 50 or more beds within 5 miles publish, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices. In testing, the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 homes. This home’s own rate is not on file.
- Only prices a home put out itself count: its own website, a listing it supplied, or a price Seniorly says the home confirmed. Prices a listing site shows without saying where they came from are left out.
- Nearby homes are the nearest of the same size that publish a rate, widening from 3 to 40 miles until at least 8 do. The estimate starts from what they charge, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices.
- Room, care-level, second-person and move-in lines come from what California homes publish on listing sites. Memory care uses Covelight’s researched premium over assisted living.
- Totals add each line’s figure and combine the lines’ ranges as separate charges, because a home is rarely at the top, or the bottom, of every line at once.
- We tested this estimate on 1,546 California homes that publish their own starting rate. It was within 10% of the real rate for 3 in 10 homes and within 25% for 7 in 10; the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 (September 12, 2026).
- It cannot see this home’s specials, how it assesses care, or which rooms are open.
Avoid surprises on the billWhat changes the price, and what to ask
- The care level
Some homes charge one all-inclusive rate. Others add levels or points as needs grow. Ask how the level is set, who decides, and what the next level costs.
- What is billed separately
Medication management, incontinence supplies, transportation and a second person in the room are often extra. Ask for the list in writing.
- Move-in costs
A one-time move-in fee or deposit is common. Ask what it covers and whether any of it comes back if the stay is short.
- Increases
California requires at least 90 days’ written notice, with reasons, before a rate rises (Health & Safety Code §1569.655). A change in the resident’s care level is the section’s own exception and can be billed sooner.
An estimate for planning, not a quote. A home sets the price after hearing about the care needed.
Daily life
Rooms, meals, activities and house rules, in the home’s own words. Open any detail to see where it came from.
Rooms & the spaces they will use (13)Private rooms · Outdoor space · Wifi
Private rooms
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Outdoor spaceElder garden · Space in nature · Places to retreat · Elder-garden
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Wifi
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Shared / companion rooms
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Common areasMain Street Shops · Indoor Atrium · Indoor Common Areas · Library · Meeting Room
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Monitoring technologySensing technology that alerts staff to changes while residents are in bed
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Room typesPrivate apartments · Semi-private apartments · Studio · Semi-Private
Private apartments · Semi-private apartments — reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Studio · Semi-Private — reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
LaundryDone by staff
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Roll-in / accessible shower
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Housekeeping frequencyWeekly
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Ground-floor units
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Visitor parking
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Housekeeping
Reported on elderashram.com · seen October 5, 2026.
Meals, preferences & familiar food (8)Dining style · Special diets supported · Family may eat with the resident
Dining styleRestaurant style
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Special diets supportedTherapeutic diet · Specialized Therapeutic Diet
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Family may eat with the resident
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Vegetarian or vegan optionsVegan · Vegetarian
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Meals provided
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Kosher foodKosher style
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Professional chef
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Places to eat on siteCafé or Bistro
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Activities & the rhythm of a day (9)Activity types offered · One-to-one engagement offered · Exercise or fitness program
Activity types offeredYoga · Tai Chi · Dance · Aerobic Exercise · Singing · Art · and 32 more
Yoga · Tai Chi · Dance · Aerobic Exercise · Singing · Art · Drum Circle · Meditation · Improv · Men's Group · Chess · Readers Theatre · Poetry · Storytelling · Resident-led clubs · Resident-led committees · Events throughout the year · Celebrations · Festivals · Rituals · Resident-led clubs and committees — reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Residents participate in an original musical — reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Therapeutic activities — reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Gardening Club · Art Classes · Brain fitness / Dakim · Happy Hour · Birthday Parties · Karaoke · Cooking Classes · Live Dance or Theater Performances · BBQs or Picnics · Dances · Educational Speakers / Life Long Learning · Trivia Games · Holiday Parties · Activities On-site · Live Musical Performances — reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
One-to-one engagement offered
Reported on elderashram.com · seen October 5, 2026.
Exercise or fitness programYoga · Tai Chi · Dance · Aerobic Exercise · Exercising
Yoga · Tai Chi · Dance · Aerobic Exercise — reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Exercising — reported on elderashram.com · seen October 5, 2026.
Trips outside the home
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Resident-run activities
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Religious services at the home
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Religious services off site
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Intergenerational programs
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Activities coordinator on staff
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Faith, culture & language (2)Cultural community the home serves · Languages spoken by caregivers
Cultural community the home servesCelebrates diversity and actively learns about different customs and approaches to living · Family · Friends · Neighbors · Local elders · Many Cultures and Ethnicities
Celebrates diversity and actively learns about different customs and approaches to living · Many Cultures and Ethnicities — reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Family · Friends · Neighbors · Local elders — reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Languages spoken by caregiversChinese · German · Spanish · English
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Pets, routines & independence (1)Pet types allowed
Pet types allowedDogs · Cats
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Visiting & staying involved (6)Events the home invites families to · Transportation costs extra · Tour scheduling link
Events the home invites families to
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Transportation costs extraReported no
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
- Open on the website
Tour scheduling link
Reported on elderashram.com · seen October 5, 2026.
Public transit access claimed
Reported on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026.
Support services for families
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
- Open on the website
Contact form
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
About the home (1)Brand or trade name
Brand or trade nameElder Ashram
Reported on elderashram.com · source dated September 8, 2026.
Where it is
3121 Fruitvale Ave, Oakland, CA 94602Address from the public record · October 26, 2026. Confirm the entrance with the home before visiting.
Opening the neighborhood map…
- Highland HospitalHospital · General acute care, on the state’s list0.7 mi
Straight-line distances; check the drive or the walk. Hospital: the nearest general acute care hospital on the state’s list (CDPH, September 16, 2026).
Open directionsThe state record
California inspects every licensed home and publishes what it found. A citation does not make a home unsafe, and an empty file does not make a home good.
CDSS public record, read October 26, 2026 · License #19200956 · See the state’s own record
The last 36 months — 16 of 31 documents
Complaint outcomes in these 36 months, in the state’s words: 7 “Unsubstantiated”.
20263 state visits · 3 documents
Jul 13, 2026Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 07/13/2026 at 1:25 PM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Doidge arrived to conduct 1-Year Annual Required inspection. LPA met with Administrator Maria Lourdes Rivera and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured facility including but not limited to bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchen, common area and backyard. All outdoor and indoor passageways are kept free of obstruction. There are no bodies of water observed. A comfortable temperature is maintained at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. LPA observed lighting in all rooms are adequate for the comfort and safety of the residents. The hot water temperature in the common bathroom was measured at 109.0 degrees Fahrenheit. Residents’ bathrooms are equipped with grab bars and non-skid mats. There is a minimum of one week supply of non-perishable and 2 day of perishable foods. Centrally stored medication and sharps were locked and inaccessible to residents. Smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors were in operating condition during visit. Fire extinguisher was last serviced on 06/07/2026. First aid kit was observed to be complete. Fire Drill last conducted quarterly last on 05/05/2026. First aid kit was observed to be complete. LPA reviewed five (5) resident records and five (5) staff records; all were complete. LPA also reviewed a sample of residents’ medications. No deficiencies cited during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 13, 2026
Apr 28, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff interacts inappropriately with resident Staff did not administer resident's medication
On 04/28/2026 at 12:45 PM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Doidge arrived unannounced to deliver findings in regards to the allegations above. LPA met with Assistant Executive Director Janelle Ubilas and explained the purpose of the visit. During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained copies of the resident roster, staff roster and schedule, contact information for shift working NOC and PM shifts, Physician’s Reports, Appraisals Needs and Services, the Identification and Emergency sheets, and the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for four (4) residents. LPA also interviewed S1, S2 and S3, S5, as well as R1, R2 a, R3 and R4, in the facility. LPA also observed residents interacting with staff in common areas. Allegation: Staff interacts inappropriately with resident Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated Continued from LIC9099 Investigation Findings: It was reported to the department that a staff on NOC shift has consistently been rude to a resident. This staff member is "very difficult" and "rude" to a resident in general. It was alleged that the staff member said 'with that attitude you get nothing' and threw pain meds in the garbage. LPA interviewed S1 and S5, both of whom have supervised S4, neither have ever had a complaint against S4. LPA interviewed R1 who said that one staff member in particular is “rude” and will withhold medications thus upsetting R1. R1 reported that staff can be pleasant at times but will get upset when R1 asks for certain medications. R1 said this is why one staff member in particular is rude, as R1 will constantly ask that staff member for R1’s over-the-counter medication and that staff member will flat out refuse to provide them. This will get R1 mad and R1 will voice R1’s opinion. LPA interviewed S4 who said R1 will wake up late at night and demand over-the-counter medications. When S4 explains that R1 can only have certain medications at certain times, R1 will get upset and argue. LPA spoke with S3 who confirmed R1’s behavior. S3 said R1 is usually pleasant and easy to work with, however when R1 wants certain medication at times R1 cannot have them, R1 will get upset and accuse staff of being mean. S1, S2, ad S5 all confirmed R1’s behavior. LPA tried to interview R1’s roommate R2, however R2 was highly medicated and currently non-verbal. LPA interviewed R3 and R4. Both residents are long term residents and reported never hearing or seeing staff being rude. Both R3 and R4 report NOC shift are friendly. LPA walked around facility and observed staff actively engaging with residents and having friendly conversations. Based on interviews conducted, the above allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Allegation: Staff did not administer resident's medication Investigation Findings: It was reported to the department that a staff member threw pain meds in the garbage and would not give a resident requested medication. LPA interviewed R1 who said when R1 asked for over-the-counter medication for pain, the Med-Tech told R1 it was not time for them. R1 reminded the Med-Tech that R1 has a prescription for over-the-counter medication that can be taken for pain and asked for that. R1 said the Med-Tech then said, 'with that attitude you get nothing' and threw away R1’s medication. R1 insisted that S4 threw out R1’s medication. R1 said it was the same cup used to give R1 R1’s medications, and there was no way to confuse it. LPA interviewed the S4. S4 informed LPA that S4 was approached by R1 around 9 or 9:30 PM as S4 was in the Medication room doing inventory. S4 said an hour earlier S4 had given R1 R1’s prescribed medications and R1 asked for over-the-counter pain medication. Continued on LIC9099-C Continued from LIC9099-C LPA reviewed R1’s medication list and confirmed with R1’s Medication Administration Record (MAR) that R1 did receive a prescribed pain medication at 8PM and therefore could not have further medications for another two hours as it would over medicate R1 as indicated in the medication dosage. R1’s Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed R1’s medications had been administered appropriately with no miscounts or missed dosages. S4 informed LPA that S4 did through away empty medication cups as S4 was cleaning out the med room when R1 came in. Based on interviews conducted, the above allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. 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. No deficiencies were cited during this inspection. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 28, 2026 · control 15-AS-20260410124939
Feb 11, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Questionable Death. Lack of supervision resulting in resident fall sustaining a fracture. Resident had unexplained weight loss. Facility failed to assist resident with grooming. Facility did not have enough staff to properly care for the residents. Facility did not report resident fall incidents, hospitalization and death to CCL.
On 02/11/2026, at 9:00 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) James Sampair arrived unannounced to deliver findings on the allegation above. The LPA informed Assistant Executive Director (AED) Janelle Ubilas of the reason for the visit. The Department's investigation included but was not limited to a review of facility records, a review of email correspondence between Resident R1’s family and staff, and a review of hospital records. The Department interviewed facility managers, facility care partners, facility residents, and R1’s family. Continued on LIC 9099-C2 . . . Unsubstantiated . . . Continued from LIC 9099-C1 The complaint alleges Resident R1’s death was questionable. On 01/01/2023, R1 sustained a fall and was transported to the hospital. Medical records indicate that, upon admission, R1 was diagnosed with a closed fracture of the right hip. On 01/02/2023, R1 was transferred to another hospital with the same admission diagnosis. On 01/03/2023, R1 underwent surgical repair of the right hip fracture. On 01/08/2023, R1 was discharged to hospice for comfort care due to poor quality of life and inability to participate in life-sustaining therapies. On 01/15/2023, R1 was discharged from hospice following death at the hospital on 01/14/2023. Final active problems included a closed fracture of the right hip and many other health conditions. R1 did not return to Elder Ashram after his fall on 01/01/2023 R1’s death certificate lists the immediate cause of death as acute hypoxia respiratory failure, with the time between its onset and R1’s death listed as days. There were two underlying causes listed: pneumonia and sepsis, both with the time interval between onset and death listed as days. According to interviews, review of facility records, and a review of R1’s medical records, there was not enough information to state that R1’s death was questionable, nor that facility staff were at cause. The data analyzed does not support this allegation. The complaint alleges that lack of supervision from staff resulted in Resident R1 falling and thereby sustaining a fracture while in care. Prior to R1’s admission to the facility, the resident appraisal of 12/03/2022 noted that R1 “is a big fall risk so needs to be helped and watched”. R1 was admitted to the facility on 12/05/2022. On 12/10/2022, 12/16/2022, 12/21/2022, and 01/01/2023, R1 sustained falls. R1 was transported to the hospital emergency department (ED) after each fall. R1 sustained a laceration on his chin and injuries to his forehead on 12/16/2022 and 12/21/2022. 12/16/2022 hospital discharge instructions state, “frequent falls and instability are likely due to dementia and dehydration / deconditioning.” On 12/21/2022, R1 was transported to the ED by his son W2. On 01/01/2023, R1’s fall resulted in a closed fracture of the right hip. On 12/10/2022 and 12/16/2022, facility staff submitted Physician’s Fax Reports to R1’s physician. Facility did not receive a reply to the 12/10/2022 fax with new orders. On 12/16/2022, R1’s physician replied and stated, “Have upcoming appointment with him this week. No new recommendations now.” Continued on LIC 9099-C3 . . . Continued from LIC 9099-C2 On 12/16/2022, according to reviewed email correspondence, facility staff communicated concerns to W2 regarding R1’s high fall risk, frequent falls, medication concerns, current level of care, and the need for reassessment for a higher level of care, as well as the need to schedule a care conference. On the same date, a second email was sent to W2 indicating that R1’s one-on-one supervision was extended due to R1’s increased ambulation that resulted in his continued falls. On 12/21/2022, W2 emailed facility staff regarding a medication prescribed by R1’s physician and advised that the medication could increase R1’s risk of falling. Facility staff subsequently expressed concern that the medication could further elevate R1’s fall risk. According to interviews, review of facility records, and a review of R1’s medical records, there was no indication that lack of supervision from staff resulted in Resident R1 falling and thereby sustaining a fracture while in care. The data analyzed does not support this allegation. The complaint alleges that R1 had unexplained weight loss of 20 lbs. R1’s weight in his Physician’s Report dated 10/27/2022 is 138 lbs. It was 39 days between the Physician’s Report and the date R1 was admitted into Elder Ashram on 12/5/2022. There is no record of R1’s weight upon admission nor during the 27 days R1 lived at Elder Ashram. Upon admission into the hospital on 1/1/2023, R1’s weight was recorded as 124 lbs. and 9 oz. That was a loss of 13 lbs. and 3 oz. R1 lived at Elder Ashram fewer days than the number of days between the Physician’s Report and his admission into the hospital on 1/1/2023. The data analyzed does not support this allegation. The complaint alleges that facility staff failed to assist R1 with grooming. The AED stated that the staff worked as a team to groom R1, because he was physically aggressive. They used different strategies for approaching him and for working with him. If he was not okay with one staff member at one time, then another staff member would come a little later. He hit and punched staff when they assisted him during grooming. Nonetheless, they kept his body and his clothes clean. The data analyzed does not support this allegation. Continued on LIC 9099-C4 . . . Continued from LIC 9099-C3 The complaint alleges that the facility did not have enough staff to properly care for the residents. Four staff members were interviewed at Elder Ashram about possible understaffing during December 2022 and January 2023. The AED stated that during the time R1 was at the facility, between December 2022 and January 2023, the shift coverage and resident population remained the same. She also stated that Elder Ashram has never had issues with understaffing. Staff member S1, a Licensed Vocational Nurse, stated that the facility is understaffed “sometimes,” but it is only from shift to shift and never for an extended amount of time. Staff member S2, a Care Partner, stated that there has never been an understaffing issue. Executive Director (ED) Maria Lourdes Riera stated that the facility has never been understaffed for an extended period. A review of complaints concerning understaffing at this facility supported these statements, because none were substantiated. The data analyzed does not support this allegation. The complaint alleges that the facility did not report resident fall incidents, hospitalization, and death to Community Care Licensing (CCL). A review of the records shows that the facility did make the required reports to CCL. The data analyzed does not support this allegation. Although the allegations may have happened, or were valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove them; therefore, the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 11, 2026 · control 15-AS-20241206141605
20255 state visits · 5 documents
Dec 10, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure that resident received medical attention in a timely manner while in care. Staff did not ensure that resident's nutritional needs were met while in care.
On 12/10/2025 at 11:20 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Doidge arrived unannounced to deliver findings in regards to the allegations above. LPA met with Wellness Director Janelle Ubilas and explained the purpose of the visit. During the course of the investigation, LPA obtained copy of R1’s Physician’s Report (602), Admission Orders, Resident Appraisal, Elder Ashram Careplan for resident, correspondence between the facility and primary care provider, R1’s medication list, and an Unusual Incident Report with a letter to R1’s primary care provider. LPA also interviewed R1, S1, S2 and S3, and inspected the kitchen and food. Allegation: Staff did not ensure that resident received medical attention in a timely manner while in care. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated Continued from LIC9099 Investigation Findings: It was reported to the department that the facility did not timely respond to R1’s doctor for a potential UTI. LPA interviewed S2, who was on duty at the end of the day on Friday November 28th S2 reported that R1 informed staff that R1 felt symptoms of a urinary tract infection but not severe enough to need to go to the emergency room. R1’s primary care provider’s office is closed over the weekend. R1’s primary care provider was notified on Monday December first. The order for the urinary test and prescription for antibiotics came in on the first. The urine was collected on the second due to R1 not being able to provide enough urine when the test was available. LPA interviewed S3 who collected the urine sample. S3 reported to LPA that R1 had informed another med-tech that R1 had some discomfort, and mild symptoms of what R1 thought could be a urinary tract infection (UTI). S3 assessed R1’s symptoms. R1 had reported to S3 that R1’s symptoms were mild consisting of mild discomfort while urinating, but not a severe burning sensation. S3 reported no increase in confusion, agitation, nor other severe signs of a UTI being present for R1. R1’s primary physician was informed, and a urine sample and antibiotics were prescribed. S3 did the sample collection the day after the test was received due to R1 not having enough urine to fill the sample. S3 reported that R1 reported no discomfort nor burning sensation while providing the sample. S3 also reported there was no strong smell or other obvious signs of a severe UIT. A five (5) day supply of antibiotics was prescribed and received by the facility on Tuesday December second. Lab results for the urine test were not yet available. LPA interviewed R1. R1 did not recall the incident and stated that staff do respond to needs in a timely manner. As R1 had reported mild symptoms to staff with no urgency to see a health provider, and staff evaluations of R1’s symptoms and temperament were not above base line, staff did act in a timely manner in response to R1’s report of possible a UTI. Therefore, this allegation is unsubstantiated. Allegation: Staff did not ensure that resident's nutritional needs were met while in care. Continued on LIC9099-C Continued from LIC9099-C Investigation Findings: it was reported to the department that staff were encouraging balanced meals, however, W1 reported to the department that when R1 asked for a banana, R1 was offered flan instead. LPA interviewed R1. R1 did not recall the incident but reported to LPA that staff do not withhold snacks or meals and felt that staff do meet R1’s food needs. S1 reported that R1 has not been eating full meals as a way of getting R1’s family’s attention in hopes of being taken home. This was conveyed to R1’s primary care provider and responsible party. LPA interviewed S3 who reported that S3 will follow up with R1 in the late evening to ask if R1 would like something else to eat on days when R1 does not eat a full meal. S3 will provide a sandwich or other requested foods to R1 and ensures R1 is eating. S1, S2 and S3 reported that R1 had expressed depression like thoughts and a want to go home as a reason for not eating as much as before. Staff have been monitoring R1’s food intake and will follow up with R1 throughout the day and evenings to ensure R1 does eat enough. S1, S2 and S3 report that R1 prefers sweets, and asks specifically for sweets such as flan. Staff report trying their best to provide R1 with R1’s requests while encouraging R1 to eat more healthy options. S1 and S3 reported that staff do not withhold nutritional food from R1, and know what R1 prefers. If R1 were to ask for a specific food item, staff will offer an alternative that is readily available but will confirm with R1 if the alternative is acceptable. Staff never force residents to eat anything they do not want to eat. LPA toured kitchen and the facility has nutritional food options available. This allegation is therefore unsubstantiated. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did occur, therefore the allegations above do not meet Regulation Requirements are unsubstantiated. No deficiencies cited. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 10, 2025 · control 15-AS-20251204103845
Jul 3, 2025Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 07/03/2025 at 10:30 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) David Doidge arrived unannounced to conduct 1-Year Annual Required inspection. LPA met with Interim Administrator Janelle Ubilas and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured the facility including but not limited to residents’ rooms, bathrooms, multiple activity rooms, kitchen, common areas and courtyard. There are no bodies of water observed. LPA observed lighting in all rooms are adequate for the comfort and safety of the residents. Hallway temperature was maintained at 72 degrees Fahrenheit. The hot water temperature in a hallway bathroom was measured at 112 degrees Fahrenheit. Residents’ bathrooms are equipped with grab bars and non-skid mats. There is a minimum of one week supply of nonperishable and 2-day of perishable foods. Centrally stored medications, sharps and toxic are locked and inaccessible to residents in care. Smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors were in operating condition during visit. Fire extinguisher was last serviced on 07/20/2025. Emergency Disaster Plan was last posted on 04/11/2025. First aid kit was observed to be complete. Emergency disaster drill was last conducted on 03/30/2025. LPA reviewed five (5) residents records and five (5) staff records, and all were complete. LPA also reviewed a sample of residents’ medications. No deficiencies cited during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 3, 2025
Mar 24, 2025Facility evaluation reportCase Management - DeficienciesDeficiency page: Type B
Type of visit: Case Management - Deficiencies
On 03/24/2025 at 09:30 AM, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs), D. Doidge and J. Clancy-Czuleger conducted an unannounced visit for a case management. LPAs met with Executive Director Maria Rivera and explained the nature of the visit. While LPAs D. Doidge and J. Clancy-Czuleger conducted a complaint investigation (15-AS-20250306160421) on 3/12/2025, LPAs were informed that a previous one on one caregiver was not fingerprint cleared nor associated to the facility nor a home health agency. The deficiency was observed (see LIC809D) and cited from the California Code of Regulation, Title 22. Failure to correct the deficiency may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report and appeal rights provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 24, 2025
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87355(e)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 31, 2025
(e) All individuals subject to a criminal record review pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 1569.17(b) shall prior to working, ...in a licensed facility. Obtain a California clearance or a criminal record exemption as required by the Department. This requirement was not met as evidence by: based on interview and records review the licensee did not comply with section sited above by allowing an uncleared individual to provide one on one care to a resident.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 24, 2025
Plan of correction: Licensee to provide self certifying letter acknowledgeing understanding of regulation cited. Prroof of correction to be sent to CCLD by POC date.
Mar 12, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility is violating resident’s personal rights Staff do not ensure the residents intaking an appropriate amount of liquid
On 03/12/2025 at 09:10 AM, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs), D. Doidge and J. Clancy-Czuleger conducted an unannounced visit to open a complaint. LPAs met with Interim Administrator Janelle Ubilas and explained the nature of the visit. During the visit, LPAs reviewed and obtained records for three (3) residents, including appraisal needs and services, physician's report, other medical information, and internal incident reports from February 22nd to March 11th. LPAs interviewed residents, staff and witnesses. Allegation: Facility is violating the resident's personal rights Continued on LIC9099C Unsubstantiated Continued from LIC9099 Findings: Based on interviews it was found that R1 was receiving additional care from an outside individual that was paid for and chosen by the family. The facility informed the family of concerns and recommended an agency for more contestant care. LPAs were informed that the personal caregiver was not associated to the facility nor a home health agency. Furthermore the facility confirmed that the care provider would not walk around the facility and would only stay in the resident's room. This individual did not have any contact with any other resident, was never caught sleeping during shift, and was very professional with staff. Staff was informed by the care provider if the resident required any assistance. The care provider was more of an overnight companion than health care provider. Allegation of: Staff did not enure residents were in taking an appropriate amount of liquids Findings: Based on interviews and observations the facility has hydration stations located throughout the facility and staff regularly remind residents to drink water and observe them for signs of dehydration. Upon observation and interview, LPAs found that there were no violations of personal rights and that residents were appropriately hydrated. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did occur, therefore the allegations above do not meet Regulation Requirements are un-substantiated. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 12, 2025 · control 15-AS-20250306160421
Mar 5, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff did not treat resident with dignity or respect Staff did not ensure that residents were accorded privacy while in the facility Staff mismanaged resident medication Staff did not provide adequate food service
*Amended to remove double information* On 3/5/2025, at 1:30pm, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), L. Hall arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the allegation above. LPA met with Janelle Ublias, Assistant Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation the Department conducted interviews with staff, witnesses, obtained and reviewed records. Allegation: Staff did not treat resident with dignity or respect During intake interview W1 stated there was anti-Semiticism from the staff. An Continued on LIC9099C. Unsubstantiated Continued from LIC9099. example was the dining room tables were reserved and W1 was not allowed to sit there or would make W1 move. The six (6) staff that were interviewed all stated tables are not reserved. S1 and S4 stated there are residents that have their favorite seat, but it’s not reserved. The three (3) residents that were interviewed stated they sit wherever they please. One (1) resident have lived at the facility for several years and stated she has never observed a reserved table in the dining areas. Allegation: Staff did not ensure that residents were accorded privacy while in the facility W1 stated during interview that the shower room and none of the other rooms locked so anyone could walk in at any time. S3 stated the residents that do not require assistance with showering are able to lock the door, and the staff carries a key in case of an emergency. S6 stated the two showers, and both can lock, but has a key to open the door is necessary. S3 and S4 stated the showers are small but a resident and client can fit. S4 also stated staff try to give as much privacy as possible but it is hard with the rooms being shared rooms. Allegation: Staff mismanaged resident medication W1 stated during initial interview the staff often forgot to provide medication. S1 stated she had no knowledge of staff not providing medication, however, if this happened it would be reported to the appropriate parties. During record review of the medication administrative record (MAR) LPA did not observe any mismanaging of medication. Continued on LIC9099C. Continued from LIC9099C. Allegation: Staff did not provide adequate food service W1 stated the food is unhealthy but didn’t provide any details. S1 stated she was aware of sometimes resident wants something other than what was cooked, and the cooks would try to accommodate but they are not able to please everyone. R1 stated the cooks do not have a problem making something different if requested and they have the food items available. R2 and R3 stated the food is good and they are served enough. LPA toured kitchen and observed a variety of perishable and non-perishables for residents. 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. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 5, 2025 · control 15-AS-20241017091349
20246 state visits · 6 documents
Dec 11, 2024Facility evaluation reportCase Management - Health ChecksReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Health Checks
On 12/11/2024 at 10:20 AM, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs), D. Doidge and L. Fontanilla conducted an unannounced health and safety check related to complaint 15-AS-20241206141605. LPAs met with Interim Administrator Janelle Ubilas and explained the nature of the visit. The LPAs inspected the facility inside and outside. All outdoor and indoor passageways were free of obstruction. Outside, there were no bodies of water. Inside, the temperature was measured at 73 degrees Fahrenheit. The LPAs observed adequate lighting in all of the rooms for the comfort and safety of the residents. The hot water temperature in a common bathroom was measured at 114.7 degrees Fahrenheit. Kitchen was observed to be clean with food for 2 days of perishables and 7 days of non-perishables. Central storage for medications and cleaning supplies were observed locked. Sharps were stored inaccessible to residents. Fire extinguisher was observed to be fully charged and last serviced on 02/16/2024. No citations issued. A copy of this report was provided to Janelle Ubilas, Interim Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 11, 2024
Nov 12, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care
On 11/12/2024 at 1:30 PM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) L. Alexander conducted a subsequent visit and met with Executive Director, Maria Rivera, to deliver the findings of above allegation. LPA explained the purpose of the visit with Executive Director. During investigation, the Department obtained the following documents from the facility – personnel record, residents’ roster, admission agreement, physicians report, needs & services plans, Physicians orders, narrative charting, medication calendar. Allegation: Resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care Investigation Finding: Unsubstantiated On 1/16/2024 and 3/7/2024 the Department interviewed the Reporting Party (RP) who stated that on or around 12/1/2023 had observed bruising to R1s arms and reported it to facility staff. RP did not have knowledge of how the bruising may have happened. On 2/13/2024, the Department interviewed S2, S3, S4, and S5; and on 3/7/2024 interviewed S6, S7, and S8. All staff stated having observed the bruising to R1s arms, but not having specific knowledge as to how it happened – with some reporting that R1 wears her wristwatch and bracelets tightly. S7 further stated that R1s bruising to the arm was “constant” and had observed other residents attempting to assist R1 with getting up from chairs by grabbing R1s arms; and S8 stated having observed R1 hitting herself with spoons. S3 reported that an inconclusive internal investigation was performed. All staff reported that R1 bruises easily. On 2/13/2024, the Department interviewed R1 who exhibited memory issues (confirmed by Physician's Report) and was unable to state what had happened and did not recall the bruising. The Department observed in video supplied by the RP and in facility progress notes that at the subject time, the RP had stated that a group of men had tried to remove her from the facility at night. Progress notes further reflect that the facility was in communication with family regarding the bruising, and unwitnessed falls documented during the subject time period. On 2/13/2024, the Department interviewed W1 who stated having had observed the bruising, discussed the situation with the facility, and knew that an internal investigation was performed. W1 did not believe that R1 had been mistreated by staff. Based on records review, interviews conducted, and observations made, the Department has investigated the above allegation Resident sustained unexplained bruising while in care and found it to be Unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint allegation is unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit Interview conducted and a copy of report provided. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 12, 2024 · control 15-AS-20231206085902
Oct 24, 2024Facility evaluation reportCase Management - OtherDeficiency page: Type A
Type of visit: Case Management - Other
On 10/24/2024 at 3:50pm, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) L. Hall arrived unannounced to conduct a Case Management visit. LPA met with Marie Rivera, Executive Director. and explained the purpose of the visit. While LPA L. Hall was conducting a complaint investigation 15-AS-20241017091349 on 10/24/2024. LPA observed facility did not have a certified administrator. S1 stated that her certificate is in process. Deficiency is cited per Title 22 California Code of Regulations and listed on LIC809D. Failure to submit proof of corrections (POC) by plan of correction due date and/or any repeat deficiencies within a 12-month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report and appeal rights providedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 24, 2024
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87705(a) · Plan of correction due date: Oct 25, 2024
87405 (a) All facilities shall have a qualified and currently certified administrator... The administrator shall... be on the premises a sufficient number of hours... When the administrator is not in the facility, there shall be coverage by a designated substitute.. This requirement was not met as evidence by: Based on observation the Licensee did not comply with the section cited above in having a certified Administrator, which poses a potential health and safety risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 24, 2024
Plan of correction: Executive Director (ED)agreed to hire a new Administrator for the facility. ED agreed to submit documents to CCLD by POC date.
Jul 30, 2024Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 7/30/24 at 10:45 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Greg Clark arrived unannounced to conduct 1-Year Annual Required inspection. LPA met with Administrator Janelle Ubilas (cert exp 9/18/24) and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA toured the facility including but not limited to 5 residents’ rooms, bathrooms, multiple activity rooms, kitchen, common areas and courtyard. There are no bodies of water observed. LPA observed lighting in all rooms are adequate for the comfort and safety of the residents. Hallway temperature was maintained at 70 degrees F. The hot water temperature in a hallway bathroom was measured at 118.8 degrees Fahrenheit. Residents’ bathrooms are equipped with grab bars and non-skid mats. There is a minimum of one week supply of nonperishable and 2-day of perishable foods. Centrally stored medications, sharps and toxic are locked and inaccessible to residents in care. Smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors were in operating condition during visit. Fire extinguisher was last serviced on 7/20/24. Emergency Disaster Plan was last posted on 6/06/24. First aid kit was observed to be complete. Emergency disaster drill was last conducted on 6/09/24. LPA reviewed 5 residents records and 5 staff records, and all were complete. LPA also reviewed a sample of resident’s medications. No deficiencies cited during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 30, 2024
Jul 10, 2024Facility evaluation reportCase Management - IncidentReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Incident
On 7/10/2024 at 12:05pm, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) L. Hall conducted an unannounced Case Management visit regarding an incident that was reported to CCLD on 7/9/2024. LPA met with Malou Rivera, Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. The regional office received an incident report stating R1 had expired but report did not indicate a cause of death. S1 stated R1 moved into facility on 5/8/2024. S1 also stated R1 was always complaining of pain and the facility was trying to connect with R1's doctor or pain management. LPA L. Hall collected the following documents: physician's report, case notes, death report, care plan for R1, physician's fax reports, Oakland police report number, and staff schedule July 4, 2024. S1 stated she would notify the regional office when the facility receives a cause of death. No deficiencies issued during the visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 10, 2024
Mar 7, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff do not allow resident to have visitors Staff do not allow resident to go out with family member
On 3/07/24 at 1:30 p.m., Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Greg Clark arrived unannounced to conduct an initial 10-day complaint investigation and deliver findings in regard to the allegations above. LPA met with Maria Loudes-Rivera, Associate Executive Director and explained the purpose of the visit. During the course of the investigation LPA attempted to interview the reporting party (RP) but the RP’s phone was disconnected, and no email was provided. LPA interviewed S1 at the facility. LPA reviewed R1’s file. R1 was admitted to the facility on 5/21/18 and moved out on 5/15/23. There were no notes in R1's file regarding the RP. The complaint provided no specifics as to when the allegations might have occurred. S1 stated that all family members are allowed to visit during regular visiting hours. The facility does not have a policy that excluded visitors. ***report continues on LIC9099C*** Unsubstantiated ***report continues from LIC9099*** This agency has investigated the complaints alleging staff do not allow resident to have visitors and staff do not allow resident to go out with family member. We have found that the complaint was 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, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview conducted, a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 7, 2024 · control 15-AS-20240226103804
20232 state visits · 2 documents
Dec 8, 2023Facility evaluation reportCase Management - Health ChecksReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Health Checks
On 12/08/2023 at 12:30pm, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), L. Alexander arrived unannounced to conduct a health and safety check as a result of the department receiving a complaint. LPA met with Maria Rivera, Associate Executive Director and explained the reason for the visit. Upon arrival, LPA observed total of two (2) residents sitting down in the common area, and one (1) staff sitting down at the front desk. During the health and safety check, LPA toured the building including but not limited to common areas, bathrooms, bedrooms and outdoor area. Facility is noted to be clean and in good repair and clients in care appear to be safe. There are no imminent health/safety concerns on today's date. No deficiencies were cited today. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 8, 2023
Nov 29, 2023Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 11/29/23 at 2:00 p.m., Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Greg Clark arrived unannounced to conduct 1-Year Annual Required inspection. LPA met with Malou Rivera, Asst. ED and explained the purpose of the visit. The facility’s fire clearance was approved for 90 residents. LPA toured facility including but not limited to bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchen, common area and backyard. All outdoor and indoor passageways are kept free of obstruction. There are no bodies of water observed. A comfortable temperature is maintained at 70 degrees Fahrenheit. LPA observed lighting in all rooms are adequate for the comfort and safety of the residents. The hot water temperature in the residents’ shared bathroom was measured at 111.2 degrees Fahrenheit. Residents’ bathrooms are equipped with grab bars and non-skid mats. There is a minimum of one week supply of non-perishable and 2 day of perishable foods. Centrally stored medication and sharps were locked and inaccessible to residents. Smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors and fire extinguishers were in operating condition during visit. Emergency Disaster Plan was last posted on 6/08/23. First aid kit was observed to be complete. LPA reviewed 5 residents records and 5 staff records; all were complete. LPA also reviewed a sample of resident’s medications. No deficiencies cited during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 29, 2023
Earlier years2021 to 2023 · 15 documents
20232 state visits · 2 documents
Feb 23, 2023Facility evaluation reportCase Management - OtherReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Other
On 2/23/23 at 2:25 p.m., Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Greg Clark arrived unannounced to conduct a case management visit on this date to provide technical assistance. LPA received a letter from the facility that stated they could no longer met the needs of R1. During the visit LPA interviewed Administrator and Wellness Director Janelle Ubilas. LPA also reviewed facility roster and found that R1 is listed on the roster R1 was admitted to Alta Bates Summit Hospital in Berkeley on February 9.2023 and is currently still a patient at the hospital. R1's condition has deteriorated, and the facility has determined that they can no longer meet R1's needs. R1 was at the hospital for cataract procedure and subsequently suffered Congestive heart failure. LPA advised Administrator to file a 30 day eviction letter to R1 to meet regulatory requirements and avoid an Unlawful Eviction. No deficiencies cited during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 23, 2023
Feb 8, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility staff did not ensure that staff paperwork was completed.
On 2/8/2023 at 1:30 pm, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Catherine Lin conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint investigation regarding the above allegation and deliver investigation findings. LPA met with Administrator and explained the him the purpose of the visit. Allegation: Facility staff did not ensure that staff paperwork was completed – Substantiated The Department has investigated this allegation, per records review and interviews, and found that staff S1 was employed from September to December 2022, facility HR department was not aware that S1’s health screen was incomplete. Based on information obtained, the preponderance of evidence is met, therefore the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED. Continue on LIC9099-C Substantiated Deficiency is cited from Title 22 California Code of Regulations and Health and Safety Code (see 9099D). Failure to submit proof of correction by plan of correction due date and any repeat violation within 12 month period may result in civil penalty. Deficiency and plan and proof of correction were discussed with Administrator. Exit interview conducted. Appeal Rights, LIC9099D, and copy this report provided. Allegation: Facility staff yell at resident – Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated this allegation, per interviews and found that staff yell at resident was not observed or witnessed by staff and residents who were interviewed. Allegation: Facility staff does not ensure effective communication between care providers – Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated this allegation, per record reviews and interviews, and found that each time when the communication devices (Walkie Talkie) were broken, Administrator had made affords to repair or replace them. Multiple receipts of repairing or replacing devices, and communication with vendors as proved documents were reviewed and obtained by the department. Allegation: Facility staff segregate residents to certain dining rooms – Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated this allegation, per interviews and found, staff stated that residents were assigned to dinning room where was close to where they lived. All residents were served the same meals except some residents have special diet. Staff stated that no discrimination was observed or witnessed. Allegation: Facility is in disrepair, staff does not maintain facility clean, sanitary, and free of odors, and facility has pests – Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated this allegation, per interviews and record reviews and found, staff stated that facility is clean in general, if something was broken, maintenance staff always fixed them in short period of time. Staff stated that janitors cleaned bathrooms and bedrooms daily. Facility has the contact with pet control company Xpedite Pest Elimination that inspected the facility monthly. The receipts of services from January 2022 to January 2023 as proved documents were reviewed and obtained by the department. During the course of the investigation, facility was observed in good sanitary condition and free of odors. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to provide the alleged violation did occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiency cited. Exit interview conducted with Administrator and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 8, 2023 · control 15-AS-20230105163140
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87411(f) · Plan of correction due date: Feb 15, 2023
87411 Personnel Requirements – General (f) All personnel…shall be in good health, and physically and mentally capable of performing assigned tasks…health screening…performed by a physician not more than six (6) months prior to or seven (7) days after employment… This requirement is not met as evidenced by… Based on records review and interview, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above. LPA observed that facility was not aware that staff S1 who was employed from September to December 2022 didn’t complete health screening which poses/posed a potential health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Feb 8, 2023
Plan of correction: Administrator agrees to review regulation and retrain staff, submit the in-service training to CCL by the POC due date.
20228 state visits · 11 documents
Dec 16, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility staff failed to supervise resident in care which resulted to hospitalization
On 12/16/22 at 3:30pm, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Catherine Lin conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint investigation regarding the above allegation and delivered investigation findings. LPA explained the purpose of the visit with the Wellness Director. The Department has investigated this allegation and per records review and interviews found that staff noticed resident R1 didn’t feel well in outside area after exposure in sun for a long period of time. Staff treated resident cold water and activated 911 call immediately on 7/18/22. No witness or additional information indicated that lack of care and supervision was observed during the cause of investigation. Although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to provide the alleged violation did occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiency cited. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided to the Wellness Director. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 16, 2022 · control 15-AS-20220722155638
The state marks this report as 3 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 1. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.
Nov 22, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: -Facility staff physically abused resident -Facility staff restrained resident
On 11/22/2022 at 2:15PM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) G. Luk arrived unannounced to conduct complaint investigation and to deliver findings in regards to the allegations above. LPA met with Administrator, Nader Shabahangi. During the course of investigation, LPA interviewed residents, staff, witness, and complainant. Interview with resident revealed that no staff mistreat residents. Interview with staff indicated that no residents were physically abused or restrained by staff. Witness stated that facility staff are caring towards residents and have not witnessed staff physically abused or restrained resident. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report provided. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 22, 2022 · control 15-AS-20210326141406
Aug 26, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: unlawful eviction.
On 8/26/22 at 9:10am, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) C. Lin and J. Sampair arrived unannounced an initial 10-day complaint visit to investigate the above allegation. LPAs met with the Wellness Director Jenelle Ubilas and informed her of the purpose of visit. The Department has investigated this allegation and per records review and interviews found that facility issued two 30-day Notices to R1. The initial 30-day notice was issued on 8/12/22. LPAs observed that it was invalid because it did not have the effective date and specific facts to permit determination of the date, place, witnesses, and circumstances concerning those reasons for eviction. Facility reissued an amended 30-day notice on 8/16/22. LPAs observed that it was also invalid because it was back dated as 8/12/22 and it too did not have specific facts to permit determination of place, witnesses, and circumstances concerning those reasons for eviction. Continue LIC9099-C Substantiated Based on information obtained, the preponderance of evidence is met, therefore the allegation is substantiated. Deficiencies are cited from Title 22 California Code of Regulations (see 9099D). Failure to submit proof of correction by plan of correction due date and any repeat violation within 12 month period may result in civil penalty. Deficiencies and plan and proof of correction were discussed with the Wellness Director, Exit interview conducted. Appeal Rights, LIC9099D, and copy this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 26, 2022 · control 15-AS-20220817164040
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87224(d) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 9, 2022
87224 Eviction Procedures (d)The licensee shall set forth in the notice to quit the reasons relied upon for the eviction with specific facts to permit determination of the date, place, witnesses, and circumstances concerning those reasons. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on interview and records review, the licensee did not comply with the section above when 30-day eviction was issued for R1 which posed a potential personal rights risk to person in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 26, 2022
Plan of correction: Administrator agreed to withdraw the eviction immediately, and will submit a copy of 30-day notice includes specific facts to CCL by the POC due date.
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87224(d)(1)(A) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 9, 2022
87224 Eviction Procedures (d)The licensee shall set forth in the notice... (1)The notice to quit shall include... (A)The effective date of the eviction. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on interview and records review, the licensee did not comply with the section above when 30-day eviction was issued for R1 which posed a potential personal rights risk to person in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 26, 2022
Plan of correction: Administrator agreed to withdraw the eviction immediately, and will submit a copy of 30-day notice includes "Effective Date" to CCL by the POC due date.
Aug 26, 2022Facility evaluation reportCase Management - DeficienciesDeficiency page: Type B
Type of visit: Case Management - Deficiencies
On 8/26/2022 at 10:40 a.m., Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) C. Lin and J. Sampairconducted case management while conducting a complaint investigation, met with Wellness Director and explained the purpose of visit. Upon entry, LPAs observed staff S1 walked from the hallway, spoke with residents and staff without wearing face mask. Approximately 30 minutes later, LPAs observe another staff S2 walked to the conference room where LPAs were didn't wear face mask. Facility had 2 positive Covid-19 cases for residents on 8/15/22 and are still under monitoring by CCL and Alameda Public Health. Deficiency is cited per Title 22 California Code of Regulations. A repeated deficiency civil penalty $250 is assessed today. Exit interview was conducted with Wellness Director, LIC809D, LIC421FC, Appeal Rights, and a copy of report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 26, 2022
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Aug 31, 2022
87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall....(2) To be accorded safe, healthful.... This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on observation and interview, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above, two staff were observed not wearing face mask in the facility which poses an potential health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 26, 2022
Plan of correction: The Wellness director agreed to train all staff regarding the importance of wearing mask, submit copy of training with staff signature to CCL by POC due date.
Jun 24, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Neglect of Physical Care.
On 6/24/22 at 3:45 p.m, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Catherine Lin conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint investigation regarding the above allegation and delivered investigation findings. LPA explained the purpose of the visit with Wellness Director. The Department has investigated this allegation and per records review and interviews found that both facility staff and outside agency staff provided ADL to resident R1. R1's care note documented that R1 refused ADL 2 days on 4/8/22 and 4/15/22. S1, S2 and S3 stated when resident refused ADL, staff took a couple attempts before reporting to responsible parties and documented it. R1’s responsible party W1 stated that R1’s ADL care mainly was provided by caregivers from an outside agency. Therefore, the caregiver who didn’t brush R1’s teeth well was not Elder Ashram’s staff member. The problem has been resolved by the outside agency promptly. W1 stated that facility informed refusal incidents happened each time so W1 was fully aware. Unsubstantiated Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to provide the alleged violation did occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiency cited. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided to Wellness Director.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 24, 2022 · control 15-AS-20220503092703
Jun 24, 2022Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 6/17/2022 starting at 3:10 p.m., Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Catherine Lin arrived unannounced to conduct Infection Control Inspection. LPA met with Wellness Director Janelle Ubilas and disclosed the purpose of the visit. Upon entry, LPA’s temperature was checked by the staff, asked to fill out Covid-19 questionnaire, and requested to wash hands. LPA toured facility including but not limited to front entrance, screening station, hand washing stations, bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchen, common areas, and outdoor areas. There is one central entry point for universal screening for staff, residents, and visitors. A sign-in policy, thermometer and hand sanitizer were observed at screening station. Cough/sneeze etiquette and hand washing posters were observed. Facility staff were observed to be wearing proper PPE. Facility has a sufficient 2-day perishable and one-week non-perishable food supply. Facility has a 30-day supply of PPEs maintained at central location and easily accessible for staff. Facility has Mitigation Plan, Emergency Disaster Plan, and maintains record of routine screening for residents, staff, and visitors. No deficiency cited during visit. Exit interview conducted with Wellness Director and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 24, 2022
Apr 5, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff have not returned all of the residents belongings Resident room was dirty Furniture was not appropriate Resident was not being changed regularly Food is not good quality Resident lost a large amount of weight Staff are unqualified to work with dementia residents Staff did not report resident hospitalization's to the resident representative
On 4/5/2022, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) L.Ibo and C. Lin arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the allegations above. LPAs met with Ami Champaneri, co-founder/back up administrator. During course of investigation, R1's representative refused to sign form LIC621 or resident personal property and valuables which is a list of resident's valuables, however staff documented upon admission of R1 , R1 arrived with two sets of clothes, an ipad and phone and was returned to family on R1's discharge from the facility. LPAs observed that facility was neat during visit, each residents room has the following furniture but not limited to; chair, night stand, a lamp, or lights sufficient for reading, and a chest of drawers. LPAs reviewed and gathered staff dementia training records, based on the documents, staff completed all necessary trainings per tittle 22 regulation. …Continued to LIC9099C.. Unsubstantiated LPAs interviewed R1, based on the interview R1 did not like a lot of the food from the facility, and usually asked for alternative food like sandwiches. Based on 5/23/2021 Physician’s report, R1’s weight was 137lbs. however upon R1’s admission at facility, staff conducted their own assessment and R1's weight was 131.4lbs. Based on records review R1 was able to care for his own toileting needs, able to bathe himself and able to dress or groom. Based on interview and records review, staff reported to R1’s representative all hospitalization or any incident reports. The Department has investigated these allegations and based upon LPAs' observations, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, the allegations are found to be unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means that although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation has occurred. Exit interview conducted with Ami Champaneri and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 5, 2022 · control 15-AS-20210823152930
Mar 29, 2022Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff are not wearing masks
On 3/29/2022, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) L.Ibo and C. Lin arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the allegation above. LPAs met with Ami Champaneri co-founder. During the investigation, LPAs interviewed staff and residents. Staff and residents stated that one staff (S6) does not wear a mask all the time while working. The preponderance of evidence has been met. Therefore, the staff are not wearing mask is substantiated. Deficiency is cited per Title 22 California Code of Regulations and listed on LIC9099D. Failure to submit proof of correction (POC) by plan of correction due date and/or any repeat deficiencies within a 12-month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted, copy or the report and appeal rights provided. Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 29, 2022 · control 15-AS-20210818144450
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Apr 8, 2022
(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly shall have all of the following personal rights: (2) To be accorded safe, healthful and comfortable accommodations, furnishings and equipment. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on LPAs interview, the licensee did not comply with the section cited above, one staff is not always wearing mask while working which poses an immediate health, safety or personal rights risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 29, 2022
Plan of correction: Ami C. agreed to train all staff regarding the importance of wearing mask, copy of training with staff signature needs to be submitted to CCL office by POC date.
Mar 29, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Residents are forced to stay in their rooms Facility does not post food menus Facility does not provide a variety of foods Staff unable to communicate with resident due to language barrier Facility does not have enough staff to meet the residents' needs Residents' meals are served cold Staff engage in inappropriate interaction in front of residents
On 3/29/2022, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) L.Ibo and C. Lin arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the allegations above. . LPAs met with Ami Champaneri, co-founder/back up administrator. During the course of the investigation, LPAs obtained and reviewed documents, and interviewed staff. LPAs observed all residents are free to get out from their room, residents stated that they do not feel forced to stay in their room, they are can go out from their room whenever they want. Menu was observed to be posted at the dining area. LPAs observed staff serving freshly cooked food during lunch time. Residents also have variety of food during lunch and menu matches the food that was served. Based on interview with residents, staff can communicate with residents clearly and residents can understand staff whenever they are talking with residents. Residents stated that they do not remember observing any staff showing inappropriate interactions with each other. ...Continued to LIC9099C.. Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated these allegations and based upon LPAs' observations, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, the allegation is found to be unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means that although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation has occurred. Exit interview conducted with Ami Champaneri and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 29, 2022 · control 15-AS-20210823154328
Mar 18, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident is being physically abused while in care. Resident sustained injuries while in care. Staff are not assisting resident with bathing.
On 3/18/22 at 11:30am, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Catherine Lin conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint investigation regarding the above allegations and delivered investigation findings. LPA explained the purpose of the visit with Wellness Director. Allegation: Resident is being physically abused while in care - Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated this allegation and per records review and interviews found that staff, W1 and W2 denied R3 was being physically abused. Resident had an unwitnessed fall on 12/10/21 and was sent to the hospital immediately instructed by W2, R3 returned to facility on the same day without medication changed. This indicent had been reported to all required parties at time manner. Other than that, W1, W2, and staff have not seen any bruises or injuries on R3’s body at subject time period. W2 confirmed that R3’s declining was expected. Continue LIC9099C Unsubstantiated Allegation: Resident sustained injuries while in care - Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated this allegation and per records review and interviews, R3 has been identified at risk for falling by facility staff and W2. Facility has been working with W2 closely to prevent R3’s falling, alarmed seat on wheelchair and lowered bed to the lowest position were set in December 2021, R3 has not been falling after discharging from hospital. Allegation: Staff are not assisting resident with bathing - Unsubstantiated The Department has investigated this allegation and per records review and interviews, W1 and W2 confirmed that R3 was clean and in good hygiene condition each time when R3 was visited. 4 residents were randomly interviewed, they stated that shower time were always on schedule and assisted by staff. 5 residents’ family members were randomly interviewed, they stated that they have seen their loved ones were clean and well so far. The Wellness Director stated that some residents refused to take shower sometimes but would be convinced, most of time they would take it at a later time of the day. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to provide the alleged violation did occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiency cited. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided to Wellness Director.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 18, 2022 · control 15-AS-20220125090022
Jan 26, 2022Facility evaluation reportCase Management - Health ChecksReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Health Checks
On 1/26/2022 at 11:53AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) G. Luk conducted an unannounced Health & Safety inspection as a result of a priority 2 complaint. LPA met with Administrator, Nader Shabahangi. LPA toured facility including but not limited to the bedrooms, bathrooms, common area, kitchen, and outdoor area. Hot water temperature was measured at 117.1 degrees F in a resident's bathroom sink. 7-day of non-perishable and 2-day of perishable food supplies were sufficient. Facility orders food supplies twice a week. Refrigerator temperature was observed at 35 degrees F and freezer temperature was observed at -0.8 degrees F. Resident's medications were kept locked in the med room. First-aid kit was complete. Fire extinguisher was observed to be full and last serviced on 8/17/2021. Indoor and outdoor passageways are free of obstruction. No deficiencies are being cited on this date. Exit interview conducted. A copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 26, 2022
20212 state visits · 2 documents
Dec 2, 2021Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 12/02/2021 at 10:45 am Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs) G. Clark and L. Francisco arrived unannounced to conduct Infection Control Inspection. LPAs met with Wellness Director Janelle Ubilas and explained the purpose of the visit. During the Infection Control Inspection, LPAs toured facility including but not limited to front entrance, screening station, hand washing stations, bedrooms, common areas, kitchen and backyard. Facility has a sufficient 2-day perishable and one week non-perishable food supply. Visitors policy is posted on the front entrance. There is one central entry point for universal screening for staff, residents and visitors. A sign-in policy, thermometer and hand sanitizer were observed at screening station. Facility staff were observed to be wearing proper PPE. Facility has a 30-day supply of PPEs maintained at central location and easily accessible for staff. Facility has a mitigation plan and maintains record of routine screening for residents and staff. No deficiencies cited during visit. Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 2, 2021
Jul 6, 2021Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility not following COVID-19 safety procedures.
On 7/6/2021 at 1:35 PM, Licensing Program Analysts (LPAs), L. Hall and G. Luk arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the above allegation. LPAs met with Administrator, Nader Shabahangi and explained the reason for the visit. During the course of the investigation, LPAs interviewed five (5) staff and two (2) residents, and toured the common areas and shared bathrooms. LPAs obtained a copy of the staff roster, resident roster, and a letter from the facility's LVN. Staff and residents that were interviewed all stated that a COVID-19 positive staff was not allowed to return to work until the quarantine period was over, facility had a red zone on the west wing dedicated for the positive residents, and designated staff was assigned to care for positive residents. 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 Exit interview conducted with Administrator and a copy of this report provided. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 6, 2021 · control 15-AS-20210121161203
The state marks this report as 2 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 1. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.
64 of 90 beds were occupied at the April 28, 2026 state visit — a count on that day, not an opening.
License holder
Elder Ashram Inc., licensed since 2020.
The state’s totals for this licenseSince 2020, as the state’s facility page counts them
- State visits on file
- 31
- Total complaints
- 16
- Substantiated allegations
- 3
- Type A citations
- 0
- Type B citations
- 4
These are the state’s own totals for this license since 2020, per CDSS records. The state counts them apart from the documents above, and they can differ from what those documents show; the documents say what each visit found. One complaint can contain several allegations.
Compare with homes the same size
| This home | Typical | |
|---|---|---|
| Type A citations | 0 | 0 |
| Type B citations | 4 | 1 |
| Substantiated allegations | 3 | 2 |
| Total complaints | 16 | 6 |
“Typical” is the statewide median for licensed homes this size. It does not adjust for years licensed, and older licenses have had more visits and reports. The median is across the 1,354 licensed larger communities (16+ beds) in the state record. The figures compared are the state’s totals, not the documents.
What the state’s words mean
CDSS citation definitions (PDF) ↗ · CDSS complaint outcomes ↗
An “unsubstantiated” complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing — it means the state investigated and could not confirm the allegation. Outcome words are the state’s own; we never grade, score, or color a record, and we publish no reviews — the state’s dated documents stand in their place.
Frequently asked questions
A citation does not make a home unsafe, and an empty file does not make a home good.
Quick answers about Elder Ashram
Is Elder Ashram licensed?
The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
How many residents is Elder Ashram licensed for?
90 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Has Elder Ashram been cited?
0 Type A and 4 Type B citations since 2020, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. Those records count 31 state visits over the same years.
Is Elder Ashram still open?
This license was on the CDSS roster as of November 12, 2026.
What does Elder Ashram cost?
$4,900 a month to start is a Covelight estimate, likely $3,800–$6,200. This home’s own rate is not on file. Ask: “What is the all-in monthly rate, and what would push it higher?”
Covelight’s estimate starts from the rates 10 communities with 50 or more beds within 5 miles publish, then adjusts for this home’s size, state care approvals, Medi-Cal waiver participation, years licensed and the area’s prices. In testing, the likely range held the real rate for 6 in 10 homes. This home’s own rate is not on file.
Among 5 other homes of a similar licensed size in Oakland that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $4,441 to $5,820 a month, and the middle figure is $4,800 (n = 5 other homes publishing a starting rate).
Each of those is a home’s own published figure, gathered on its own date between September and October 2026 — not an average of ours, and not a survey. Similar size means small and mid-size homes counted together, and large communities counted on their own, because they are different markets.
A home outside the band is not overcharging or underpricing: a starting rate covers different things in different homes, which is the first thing to ask about.
The price is made in the phone call. Nothing here is a quote, an offer or a discount.
A starting rate is the room and the base care. California homes commonly bill care levels, medication management, supplies, transport and a second person in the room as extras. Many also charge a one-time fee at move-in. Ask for that list in writing before anything is signed.
Only prices a home put out itself count here: its own website, a listing it supplied, or a price a listing site says the home confirmed. Prices a site shows without saying where they came from are left out.
Does Elder Ashram take Medi-Cal?
On Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver: this home is not on the DHCS participation list dated October 1, 2026. Ask the program about current options. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.
Who holds the license?
The license is held by Elder Ashram Inc., per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Is there a hospital nearby?
Highland Hospital is 0.7 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.
Can Elder Ashram keep a resident on hospice?
Hospice care is approved on this license, covering up to 18 residents, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Elder Ashram license and inspection record
- Name on the license: “ELDER ASHRAM”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
- License #19200956. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- Licensed for 90 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- Licensed to Elder Ashram Inc., per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- First licensed in 2020, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- 31 state inspection visits since 2020, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- 0 Type A and 4 Type B citations on file since 2020, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. The same records count 31 state visits in that period.
- 16 complaints and 3 substantiated allegations on file since 2020, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
- The most recent state visit on file is July 13, 2026, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
California writes these definitions for every licensed home, not for this one. CDSS citation definitions (PDF) ↗
Nearby
Other homes nearby
Licensed homes near this one in Alameda County, most information on file first. Every listed home appears on the same terms.
- Map
Starting rate
$6,000 a month to start
Listed by the home on AssistedLiving.com · September 9, 2026On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$3,800 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $2,950–$4,800On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Dementia: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,600 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $3,550–$5,850On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,950 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $3,850–$6,300On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,350 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $3,550–$5,350- Assisted living: Licensed by California as a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly — the assisted-living license category.
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,300 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $3,400–$5,700On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
Street maps © Protomaps · © OpenStreetMap
Explore Alameda County