Roselle Care

Allegation investigated: Licensee improperly transferred ownership and/or control of the facility

This unannounced inspection is being conducted by Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sean Haddad for the purpose of investigating the above-mentioned complaint allegation. LPA met with Staff #1 (S1) Alfie Manahan, discussed the purpose of the inspection, and explained the allegation. Administrator (AD) Romel Bisda arrived during the inspection. The investigation into the allegation that Licensee improperly transferred ownership and/or control of the facility revealed the following: During the course of the investigation, LPA inspected the facility, interviewed AD, staff, and witnesses, and requested and reviewed copies of the resident roster, staff roster, and resident files. It was reported that on 02/28/23, Witness #1 (W1) Joseph Laxamana and his partner Witness #2 (W2) Mary Joy Garcia arrived at the facility, were not trained or knowledgeable about the residents in care, claimed to be the new owners, Substantiated attempted to terminate the current staff who were knowledgeable about the residents in care, the police were called, Department staff intervened via telephone, and AD agreed to keep the current staff in place and remove W1 and W2 from the facility. During the inspection, LPA and S1 toured the facility. LPA observed there were 2 staff present, wearing PPE. LPA observed 6 resident present. LPA conducted health and safety checks on the 6 residents present and confirmed they were doing well and observed no health and safety issues. LPA observed the facility to be clean and organized, and found no health and safety issues. LPA observed the facility has a 2-day supply of perishables and a 7-day supply of non-perishable food is available as required by regulations. LPA observed the electricity and water were running and the facility had soap and paper towels. LPA interviewed AD, W1, and S1 who corroborated and admitted the incident on 02/28/23 occurred as reported. AD and W1 apologized and stated the events should not have occurred as they did. AD and W1 stated that AD is in the process of selling the business to W1, that W1 will work at the facility as an employee house manager until the sale is finalized, and that W1 will submit an application for change of ownership, but that AD is still the owner of and in control of the facility. AD admitted that AD did not follow the proper procedures for a change of ownership, that the Department was not notified of the pending sale, and that residents and their responsible parties were not notified either. AD and W1 stated the deal they had to transfer ownership and/or control of the facility has been rescinded and moving forward they will follow the proper procedures for a change of ownership. AD stated that AD will ensure the facility is adequately staffed with trained, background cleared and associated staff, and that the facility will maintain up to date staff rosters and staff files. AD admitted that if the Department had not intervened, additional violations would have occurred, because W1 and W2, who were not trained or knowledgeable about the residents in care, would have dismissed the current staff, who were trained and knowledgeable, from the facility, leaving the residents without qualified staff to care for them. During the course of the investigation, the Department obtained sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation mentioned above. The preponderance of evidence standard has been met; therefore, the above allegation is Substantiated. See LIC9099D for cited deficiencies per Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report and appeal rights was discussed with and provided to facility representative.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 2, 2023 · control 22-AS-20230301092615

From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: HSC 1569.191(a)(1) · Plan of correction due date: Mar 3, 2023

§1569.191 Sale of licensed facility… (a) … (1) The licensee shall provide written notice to the department and to each resident or his or her legal representative of the licensee's intent to sell the facility at least 30 days prior... This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews, the licensee admitted that he is in the process of selling the facility, but did not follow proper procedures, notify the Department, or notify residents or their responsible parties, which poses an immediate safety and personal rights and safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 2, 2023

Plan of correction: Licensee stated the deal to transfer ownership and/or control of the facility has been rescinded and moving forward they will follow the proper procedures for a change of ownership. POC CLEARED

Type of visit: Office

On today’s date, Regional Manager (RM) Marina Stanic, Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Luz Adams, and Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Sean Haddad conducted a virtual informal meeting via Microsoft Teams with Licensee and Administrator (LE) Romel Bisda and manager Joseph Laxamana. The purpose of the meeting was to follow up on the relationship between LE and manager Joseph Laxamana and the incident which occurred on 02/28/23 during which Joseph Laxamana and his partner Mary Joy Garcia arrived at the facility, were not trained or knowledgeable about the residents in care, claimed to be the new owners, attempted to terminate the current staff who were knowledgeable about the residents in care, the police were called, RM intervened via telephone, and LE agreed to keep the current staff in place and remove Joseph Laxamana and Mary Joy Garcia from the facility. During the meeting, the following items were discussed: • LE admitted the facts of the above incident which occurred on 02/28/23, apologized, and stated the events should not have occurred as they did. • Joseph Laxamana admitted the facts of the above incident which occurred on 02/28/23, apologized, and stated the events should not have occurred as they did. • LE and Joseph Laxamana explained that LE is in the process of selling the business to Joseph Laxamana, that Joseph Laxamana will work at the facility as an employee house manager until the sale is finalized, and that Joseph Laxamana will submit an application for change of ownership, but that LE is still the owner of and in control of the facility. • Non-transferability of the license. • Care and supervision for residents in care pending any changes in the facility. • The procedures for changes of ownership and adding a management company to the license. • The Business Purchase Agreement dated 02/06/2023 and Management Services Agreement dated 03/01/23. During the meeting, the following was agreed upon: • LE will look for an administrator to help with running the facility. • Joseph Laxamana will work for LE as an employee house manager. • LE will submit an updated LIC500 by close of business on 03/06/23 including Joseph Laxamana, Mary Joy Garcia, and all other staff, specifying their schedules. • All staff will be properly background cleared and associated and properly trained. • The facility will operate under its current license until any new license is issued. • Joseph Laxamana will submit an application for change of ownership on or before 03/15/23. • Another meeting will be held in approximately 3 weeks. • LE will amend the Business Purchase Agreement dated 02/06/2023 and Management Services Agreement dated 03/01/23 as necessary to meet applicable requirements and submit the new versions prior to the next meeting. An exit interview was conducted. This report will be emailed and an electronic email read receipt confirms receipt of the report. Facility representative agrees to sign the report and email it back to LPA.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 1, 2023

Allegation investigated: Resident not accorded dignity in relationships with facility staff.

On this day Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Andrea Mendivil made an unnanounced visit to deliver complaint findings. LPA was greeted and granted entry into the facility by Alife Manahan and explained the reason for the visit. Administrator Romel Bidsa arrived at 9:45 am. The department received a complaint on 01/23/2023 and the initial 10 day visit was conducted on 01/27/2023. During the course of the investigation the Department interviewed staff, residents and witnesses. In addition the Department obtained copies of pertinent documents such as physician reports and emergency contact information. Regarding the allegation resident not accorded dignity in relationships with facility staff, the investigation revealed the following: Based on interviews with 3 out of 6 residents they have not experienced any staff that is mean, rude or discourteous. 3 of the residents were unable to be interviewed due to not being oriented to time and space or were asleep. CONT on 9099-C dated Unfounded Based on interviews with 4 out of 4 staff they all deny allegations of ever being mean, rude or discourteous to residents. Interviews with 4 out of 4 witnesses reported they have not witnessed or heard of any staff that was mean, rude or discourteous to residents. Based on the preponderance of evidences through interviews the allegation that resident not accorded dignity in relationships with facility staff is UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegations were false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. This agency has investigated this complaint. No deficiencies cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report and confidential names list was provided. Based on interviews, 3 of the residents were unable to be interviewed due to not being oriented to time and space or were asleep. Interviews with 4 out of 4 staff indicate they have had to limit water intake for R1. Based on interviews staff reported they do not deny the R1 water, but serve a little less in each glass. In addition the staff provides a gallon of water available for R1's request. Based on interviews, 4 out of 4 witnesses stated they have not heard of the facility denying residents water. Therefore based on evidence through interviews and observations, the allegation that facility staff are not providing water to residents in UNSUBSTANTIATED, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. This agency has investigated this complaint. No deficiencies cited. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report and confidential names list was providedthe state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 31, 2023 · control 22-AS-20230120085655

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Claudia Gutierrez made an unannounced visit for the purpose of conducting a Required/Annual Inspection. LPA was greeted by staff Alfie Manahan and granted entry into the facility. LPA Gutierrez discussed the purpose of the inspection. During the inspection LPA Gutierrez and staff Manahan conducted a tour of the inside and outside of the facility, common areas, resident rooms, kitchen, garage and observed the following: This is a single-story house with five bedrooms, and two bathrooms, with one bedroom being occupied by staff. During the inspection LPA observed two staff and five residents in care. Residents were observed resting in their respective rooms and in the living room area. A 2-day supply of perishable and a 7-day supply of non-perishable foods was observed during today’s visit. Upon record review LPA noted emergency care requirements were met. LPA observed the facility has a 30-day supply of PPE on hand. LPA observed hallways and walkways were free of obstruction. Administrator (AD) arrived at 9:24 a.m. LPA reviewed and confirmed facility policies and practices regarding resident screening; a Technical Advisory was given on this date, staff screening, visitation, COVID-19 surveillance testing, COVID-19 clearance testing, quarantine, isolation, cohorting, infection control training, PPE, staffing and staffing shortages. Based on the observations made during today’s inspection, no deficiencies are being cited per Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was left at the facility.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 27, 2022

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.

Type of visit: Required - 1 Year

Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Norman Woodridge conducted a Covid-19 Annual Inspection at the facility. Upon arrival, LPA signed in and completed a temperature check. LPA met with Administrator, Romel Bisda, informed AD of the purpose of the visit, and conducted a tour of the inside and outside of the facility, common areas, kitchen, bedrooms, bathrooms, and garage. LPA discussed and observed the following: LPA observed Covid-19 station with sign in sheet, hand sanitizer, and disinfectant wipes. The facility also requires temperature checks for all visitors and staff. LPA observed a 2-day supply of perishables and a 7-day supply of nonperishables. LPA observed 30-day PPE supply. Hallways and walkways were free from obstruction. LPA reviewed Covid-19 temperature log for residents. LPA provided technical assistance on documenting temperature for staff members and Covid-19 related signage. LPA provided technical assistance regarding Covid-19 related training and documentation. LPA discussed updated Covid-19 requirements including surveillance testing, signage, Covid-19 reporting requirements, and documentation. No deficiencies were noted during the inspection. An exit interview was conducted with AD and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 4, 2021

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.