Brookdale Kettleman Lane is a residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Lodi, San Joaquin County, California — state license #397005466, licensed for 56 residents, listed as licensed in the CDSS record we retrieved August 2, 2026. It does not appear on the DHCS Assisted Living Waiver participant list checked August 9, 2026 — that list covers the state waiver only, not a home's own payment arrangements. California has 37 dated inspection and complaint documents on file for this home going back to 2021, the most recent dated June 25, 2026 — published below in full, verbatim and unscored.

See an error in this summary? Report it — free →

6 homes in view

Brookdale Kettleman Lane

No photo on file yet

No photo of this home is on file — we show real, attributed images only, never a stock photo of someone else’s building.

Residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) · Large community, 56 residents · Lodi, CA · San Joaquin County
LicensedWheelchairHospiceBedriddenMemory care not on file
No openings reportedBeds change hands in days ·
License #397005466, held since 2014 · read from the California state record on August 2, 2026 ·See on State Site →
2150 W Kettleman Ln · Lodi, San Joaquin County
Phone
(209) 333-8033
from the state licensing roster · August 2, 2026
No Google listing is on file for this home.
Website
None on file
Many small homes have no website — that says nothing about the care inside.
Contact facts come from the state roster, a county Area Agency on Aging roster, the home’s Google listing, or the operator — each labelled, never blended. Operators: add or correct yours, free →
Print tour sheet →

Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryApproved for 56 residents
Dementia / memory careNot on file — ask the home
Hospice careVerified in record
Bedridden careApproved for 15 residents

“Not on file” is not a no — approvals can be bed- or room-specific, so confirm current scope with the home on a tour. Where a number is shown it is the state’s own wording for how many residents the approval covers, not how many places are open today; where none is shown, the record simply does not state one.

Specific medical needs — insulin, oxygen, a catheter, an ostomy — aren’t in the state license record; ask the home directly. A feeding tube, tracheostomy, or advanced wound care usually needs skilled nursing →

See an error in these clearances? Report it — free →

What the state record says, word for word
LICENSED TO SERVE 56 NON-AMBULATORY RESIDENTS AGES 60 AND ABOVE. HOSPICE WAIVER APPROVED FOR 15 BEDRIDDEN RESIDENTS.State service designation935 - ELDERLYthe CDSS license record, verbatim · checked August 2, 2026

Since 2021, the state has visited this home 38 times and filed 37 documents. The most recent is a facility evaluation report, dated June 25, 2026.

Most recent state visit
June 25, 2026
Occupancy at the October 7, 2025 visit
44 of 56 beds

The state's published file for this home includes 5 documents with transcribed findings, dated August 4, 2021 to October 7, 2025. 5 of the 5 carry the state's recorded outcome word: “Substantiated” (1), “Unfounded” (1), “Unsubstantiated” (3). 5 include the transcribed allegation the state investigated, word for word.

Summary composed by computer from the 5 documents below — every count derives from them, and the documents themselves are the state's records, verbatim. We never grade, score, or color a record.

What the state’s words mean
Substantiatedthe state found the allegation more likely true than notUnsubstantiatedinvestigated, but couldn’t be confirmed either way — not a finding of wrongdoingUnfoundedthe state concluded it was false or couldn’t have happenedType A citationthe most serious: an immediate health-or-safety risk, usually fixed on the spot or on a short deadlineType B citationless serious, with a deadline to fix
The last 36 months — 22 of 37 documentsFull record on the state’s site →
20263 state visits · 4 documents
Jun 25, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Jun 25, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Apr 7, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Jan 28, 2026Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

20256 state visits · 7 documents
Oct 7, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnfounded

Allegation investigated: Facility does not employ adequate staff to meet the residents' needs. Residents do not received assistance from staff in a timely manner. Residents are left in soiled for extended period of time.

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kesha Lewis arrived at the facility unannounced to open a complaint for the above allegations. LPA was greeted by staff and explained the reason for the visit. Based on the information provided by the reporting party and the actual rooms in the facility this can not be a correct facility. There is a discrepancy in the room numbers provided in the complaint to the rooms that are in the facility. LPA did not observe a preponderance of evidence standard therefore the allegations are UNFOUNDED. Per California Code of Regulations (CCRs) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, no deficiencies are being cited. “This agency has investigated the complaint alleging the above mentioned allegations. We have found that the complaint was unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis.” An exit interview was held, and a copy of this report was given. Unfoundedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 7, 2025 · control 27-AS-20251003102613
Oct 1, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Jul 8, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Jul 8, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

May 13, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Apr 23, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Mar 5, 2025Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

20247 state visits · 8 documents
Dec 17, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Oct 16, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Sep 24, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Jun 12, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Jun 12, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Jun 11, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Apr 16, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Personal Rights Personal Rights Personal Rights Personal Rights

On 04/16/2024 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kesha Lewis arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the allegations noted above. the health and wellness dirsctor, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA attmepted to reach RP multiple times by phone and email, RP responded to emails but would not diclose the residents name the complaint was made for. Therefore, based on review of the facility, it is found that the complaint was unsubstantiated, meaning, 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. See 9099C. Unsubstantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Apr 16, 2024 · control 27-AS-20240319104407
Mar 20, 2024Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

20233 state visits · 3 documents
Dec 14, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated

Allegation investigated: Staff do not properly store food

On 12/14/23, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Renee Campbell made an unannounced visit to facility at approximately 12:45 pm. LPA Campbell discussed the purpose of the visit and the elements of the allegation with Assistant Executive Director Nicole Bacon. Regarding the allegation that staff do not properly store food, prepared desserts were observed by LPA Campbell to be stored uncovered in the refrigerator. Based on LPA’s observations and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Per California Code of Regulations (CCRs) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, the following deficiency is being cited on the attached 809-D during this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and copies of the report and appeal rights left. Substantiatedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 14, 2023 · control 27-AS-20230824115015
Nov 30, 2023Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Oct 25, 2023Facility evaluation reportReport on file

Report on file with the state — no findings text was published for this visit. The complete document is on the state’s site.

Beside homes the same size
Type A citations0typical 1
Type B citations1typical 1
Substantiated complaints1typical 2
Total complaints5typical 7
State visits on file38typical 19
“Typical” is the statewide median across the 1,244 licensed larger communities (16+ beds) in the state record — larger, longer-licensed homes accumulate more visits and reports, so compare like with like. One complaint can contain several allegations. Counts cover this license since 2014.
Year-by-year trend
YearVisitsDocumentsSubstantiated202634020256702024780202388120226702021330
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.Operate this home? Respond to or correct any document here, free. Respond or correct →

See an error in these counts? Report it — free →

$3,500$5,500 /mo
our estimate — San Joaquin County band, market research June 2026; not this home’s quoted price
$3,500 · statewide low$9,000 · statewide high
California’s public record holds no per-home price, so we never invent one. Ask the home for its rate sheet, or
Ways families pay here
Private pay — ask what the base rate includes and what’s billed separately.SSI/SSP — California’s board-and-care payment standard is $1,626.07/mo (2026): $1,444.07 to the home, $182 stays with the resident.Medi-Cal ALW — this home isn’t on the DHCS waiver list (checked August 9, 2026). Details →

Free for families · We never sell your information · Homes never pay to appear, and rankings are never affected by fees.

Cost range look wrong? Report it — free →

Non-ambulatory approval — whole home or specific rooms, and is a spot open?
Ask how the 2023 complaint investigation report was corrected — what changed?
How is medication handled and logged day to day?
What’s in the base monthly rate, and what’s billed separately?
Staff-to-resident ratio on day and night shifts?
How are medical emergencies handled after hours?

The first two come straight from this home’s record — a brochure won’t answer them.

Operate this home? This page is generated from CDSS public records — respond or correct it, free.
Claim your home → · See something wrong? → · How we source every fact →
Call (209) 333-8033

Is Brookdale Kettleman Lane licensed?

Yes — Brookdale Kettleman Lane is a licensed residential care home for the elderly (RCFE) in Lodi (San Joaquin County): California license #397005466, shown as licensed in the CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026, licensed for 56 residents. State records list 37 inspection and complaint documents since 2021; the most recent, a facility evaluation report dated June 25, 2026, appears in the inspection record on this page.

Can Brookdale Kettleman Lane care for dementia, hospice, bedridden, or non-ambulatory residents?

From the CDSS license record, checked August 2, 2026.

The CDSS license record checked August 2, 2026 lists Brookdale Kettleman Lane with clearances for wheelchair / non-ambulatory, hospice care, and bedridden; it does not list dementia / memory care. A clearance that is not on file is not a “no” — it may simply be unrecorded, so if your family needs one of these, ask the home directly and confirm its current scope on a tour.

Wheelchair / non-ambulatoryDementia / memory careHospice careBedridden

From the California state record. Some approvals are bed- or room-specific — always confirm current scope with the facility.

What the state record says, word for word
Verbatim, from the CDSS license recordLICENSED TO SERVE 56 NON-AMBULATORY RESIDENTS AGES 60 AND ABOVE. HOSPICE WAIVER APPROVED FOR 15 BEDRIDDEN RESIDENTS.

How much does Brookdale Kettleman Lane cost?

California's public licensing record does not include Brookdale Kettleman Lane's monthly price, so we never show or estimate one for a specific home. As county-level context only, assisted living in San Joaquin County typically runs $3,500–$5,500/mo and small board-and-care homes $3,000–$5,000/mo (market research compiled June 2026 — ranges, not quotes; California's 2026 SSI/SSP board-and-care payment standard is $1,626.07/month, of which $1,444.07 is the room-and-board portion paid to the home). Ask the home for its own rate sheet and what the base rate includes — or use the cost section at the top of this page.

Does Brookdale Kettleman Lane accept Medi-Cal or the Assisted Living Waiver?

Brookdale Kettleman Lane is not in the DHCS Assisted Living Waiver participant record we checked August 9, 2026 — that list covers only the state's ALW program, not a home's own payment policies, so ask the home directly about private Medi-Cal arrangements. The waiver pays for assisted-living care services (not room and board) at participating homes; every DHCS-listed home appears on our statewide Medi-Cal page.

Assisted living on Medi-Cal in California →See the DHCS list →

How full it was at the last state visit

44 of 56 beds occupied (79%) when the state visited on October 7, 2025. Availability changes constantly — confirm a current opening with the home.

What do state inspections show for Brookdale Kettleman Lane?

Verbatim from CDSS complaint-investigation reports — the state's own words, never summarized by us. Record checked August 2, 2026.

The CDSS state record checked August 2, 2026 lists 38 state visits and 37 dated documents since 2021 for Brookdale Kettleman Lane; 5 complaint-investigation narratives are transcribed verbatim below. The most recent, dated October 7, 2025, records an allegation the state marked “Unfounded. Open any entry to read the state's full finding, word for word.

Most licensed homes receive some findings over 36 months; what matters is what was found and whether it was corrected. Counts here are shown compared with homes of similar size, and the state's own words appear in full below.

5 transcribed reports on file

2025

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unfounded
Allegation the state reviewedFacility does not employ adequate staff to meet the residents' needs. Residents do not received assistance from staff in a timely manner. Residents are left in soiled for extended period of time.
State's findingUnfoundedThe state investigated and found the allegation to be false.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kesha Lewis arrived at the facility unannounced to open a complaint for the above allegations. LPA was greeted by staff and explained the reason for the visit. Based on the information provided by the reporting party and the actual rooms in the facility this can not be a correct facility. There is a discrepancy in the room numbers provided in the complaint to the rooms that are in the facility. LPA did not observe a preponderance of evidence standard therefore the allegations are UNFOUNDED. Per California Code of Regulations (CCRs) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, no deficiencies are being cited. “This agency has investigated the complaint alleging the above mentioned allegations. We have found that the complaint was unfounded, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis.” An exit interview was held, and a copy of this report was given. UnfoundedCDSS inspection report, October 7, 2025 · control 27-AS-20251003102613

2024

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedPersonal Rights Personal Rights Personal Rights Personal Rights
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
On 04/16/2024 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Kesha Lewis arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the allegations noted above. the health and wellness dirsctor, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA attmepted to reach RP multiple times by phone and email, RP responded to emails but would not diclose the residents name the complaint was made for. Therefore, based on review of the facility, it is found that the complaint was unsubstantiated, meaning, 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. See 9099C. UnsubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, April 16, 2024 · control 27-AS-20240319104407

2023

Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Substantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff do not properly store food
State's findingSubstantiatedThe state investigated and found this allegation more likely than not true.
On 12/14/23, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Renee Campbell made an unannounced visit to facility at approximately 12:45 pm. LPA Campbell discussed the purpose of the visit and the elements of the allegation with Assistant Executive Director Nicole Bacon. Regarding the allegation that staff do not properly store food, prepared desserts were observed by LPA Campbell to be stored uncovered in the refrigerator. Based on LPA’s observations and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Per California Code of Regulations (CCRs) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, the following deficiency is being cited on the attached 809-D during this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and copies of the report and appeal rights left. SubstantiatedCDSS inspection report, December 14, 2023 · control 27-AS-20230824115015
Complaint investigationAllegation reviewed · Unsubstantiated
Allegation the state reviewedStaff denied resident phone access Staff denied resident visitors
State's findingUnsubstantiatedThe state investigated but could not confirm the allegation. This is not a finding of wrongdoing.
On 04/28/2023 at approximately 8:30 am, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Renee Campbell arrived unannounced to deliver complaint findings for the allegations noted above. LPA met with Mary Margaret Chappell, Executive Director, and explained the purpose of the visit. Based on Department interviews and record reviews, it was determined that resident1 (R1) had been placed under Conservatorship with San Joaquin County Public Guardian's Office after breaking her hip . R1 was then sent to the facility from the hospital. Initially, R1 had been able to call people and have visitors per witnesses and the complainant according to facility rules. This was changed by the Conservator, not the facility. R1 was barred from having visitors or making phone calls at the Conservators request. Therefore, based on department record review, we have found that the complaint was unsubstantiated, meaning, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove tCDSS inspection report, April 28, 2023 · control 27-AS-20230306110047

Transcribed from CDSS complaint-investigation reports · record checked August 2, 2026.

What the state has logged

California has logged 38 state visits for this home as of August 2, 2026. These are the home's own counts, straight from that record — shown beside the statewide median for larger communities (16+ beds), computed across all 1,244 licensed homes of that size, because larger and longer-licensed homes naturally accumulate more visits and reports. They are facts, not a grade — a citation may be minor and since corrected, and an “unsubstantiated” complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing.

Type A citations
0
typical for this size: 1
Type B citations
1
typical for this size: 1
Substantiated complaints
1
typical for this size: 2
Total complaints
5
typical for this size: 7
State visits on file
38
typical for this size: 19
See the full inspection record on the state's site →

Who runs Brookdale Kettleman Lane?

From the CDSS ownership record, checked August 9, 2026.

Licensed to Emeritus Corporation, who operates 4 licensed California homes in total. Running more than one home is common and is neither good nor bad on its own.

Talk to this home directly

You can call them yourself, anytime — you never have to go through us.

(209) 333-8033
What isn't in the state record

Resident reviews, the exact monthly price, and the languages staff speak aren't part of California's public licensing record, so we don't show them here. Ask the home directly — the tour questions above are a good start.

Operate this home? The record above comes from California's public licensing data. You can respond or correct it — free. Claim your home — free →

See something wrong? Report an error — free → · How we source every fact →

This page is generated from CDSS Community Care Licensing public records. How we build these pages →

Do you run Brookdale Kettleman Lane? Claim this listing — free — add photos, activities, languages, and today’s availability.