Large community · Licensed for 120 · Los Angeles
Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care)
8717 West Olympic Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90035Licensed since 2015
Overview
No openings reported
- Approved by the state: Wheelchair · Hospice · BedriddenState licensing record · October 26, 2026
- Languages spoken: KoreanReported on AssistedLiving.com · September 9, 2026
- Ways to pay: Medi-Cal ALW acceptedDHCS participant list · October 1, 2026
Ask this home
Free for families. A home gets your number only if you say yes.
Care and support
- Wheelchairup to 120 residents
- Hospiceup to 10 residents
- Bedriddenup to 35 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
120 NON-AMBULATORY OF WHICH 35 MAY BE BEDRIDDEN (ROOM 100-116,228, 302-329). HOSPICE WAIVER WITH TOTAL CARE FOR 10. APPROVED FOR DELAYEDEGRESS.
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 AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Medication management
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Diabetes care
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Incontinence care
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Respite / short-term stays
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
As needs change
Staying through hospice
Hospice waiver on file · covers up to 10 — care may continue at the end of life
State licensing record · October 26, 2026
We’ll ask for you. Not on file for Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care): 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
This home’s starting rate
$2,500a month to start
Listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026
Monthly cost breakdownWith a studio and basic help · room, care and fees$2,500likely 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$2,500this home
The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for assisted living private room, seen September 9, 2026.
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 $2,500–$3,100
- $2,500
- First monthWith a one-time move-in fee · likely $2,500–$6,650
- $5,000
How people payOn the Medi-Cal waiver list · private pay, 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 appears on the DHCS participation list, October 1, 2026. Confirm eligibility and current participation with the program. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board. On the waiver, a resident on SSI/SSP pays the home $1,444.07 a month for 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 homes9 nearby homes publish starting rates of $3,000 to $11,200
9 homes like this within 3 miles publish starting rates mostly between $3,300–$9,900.
- Oakmont of Beverly HillsBeverly Hills · 0.7 mi · Large community$8,795Listed on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026
- The Pinnacles at BurtonLos Angeles · 0.9 mi · Large community$4,500Listed on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026
- Sunrise of Beverly HillsBeverly Hills · 1.1 mi · Large community$10,000Listed on its own website · studio · seen October 27, 2026
- The Leonard on Beverly A Clearwater CommunityLos Angeles · 1.5 mi · Large community$8,240Listed on A Place for Mom · seen September 9, 2026
- Hayworth TerraceLos Angeles · 1.6 mi · Large community$3,500Listed on Seniorly · assisted living studio · seen September 9, 2026
- Nazareth HouseLos Angeles · 2.4 mi · Large community$3,000Listed on Seniorly · assisted living studio · seen September 9, 2026
- City View LaLos Angeles · 2.6 mi · Large community$6,000Listed on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026
- Belmont Village WestwoodLos Angeles · 2.9 mi · Large community$11,200Listed on Seniorly · seen September 9, 2026
- Golden Manor Rest HomeLos Angeles · 3.0 mi · Large community$3,000Listed on Seniorly · assisted living private room · seen September 9, 2026
How this estimate worksWhere this price comes from
The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for assisted living private room, seen September 9, 2026.
- 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 (5)Roll-in / accessible shower · Outdoor space · Common areas
Roll-in / accessible shower
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Outdoor spaceOutdoor Common Areas
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Common areasIndoor Common Areas
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Visitor parking
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
AmenitiesBeautician
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Meals, preferences & familiar food (1)Meals provided
Meals provided
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Activities & the rhythm of a day (2)Activity types offered · Religious services at the home
Activity types offeredActivities On-site
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Religious services at the home
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Faith, culture & language (1)Languages spoken by caregivers
Languages spoken by caregiversKorean
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Visiting & staying involved (1)Transportation costs extra
Transportation costs extra
Reported on AssistedLiving.com · seen September 9, 2026.
Where it is
8717 West Olympic Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90035Address from the public record · October 26, 2026. Confirm the entrance with the home before visiting.
Opening the neighborhood map…
- Cedars-Sinai Medical CenterHospital · General acute care, on the state’s list1.2 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 #197608842 · See the state’s own record
The last 36 months — 18 of 29 documents
Complaint outcomes in these 36 months, in the state’s words: 2 “Substantiated” and 13 “Unsubstantiated”.
20263 state visits · 7 documents
Jun 18, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff leave resident in soiled diaper for an extended period.
On 06/18/2026, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Wendy Gibbs, conducted an unannounced Complaint Visit to the facility listed above. LPA met with Jung Hee Kim, Executive Director, and the purpose of today’s visit was explained. LPA was granted entry into the facility. The investigation consisted of: During today's visit, LPA inspected the facility, interviewed Staff S1-S5, interviewed Residents R1-R7, and received and reviewed documents pertinent to the investigation. The following documents were received and reviewed Staff Roster, Resident Roster, Admission Agreement (dated 04/30/2025), Identification and Emergency Information (dated 04/30/2025), Physician’s Report (dated 07/16,2025), Needs and Service Plan (dated 01/27/2026), Physician’s Orders, and In-Service Logs (from 07/16/2025 through 06/17/2026). The investigation revealed the following: Unsubstantiated Allegation: Staff leave resident in soiled diaper for an extended period The allegation alleges that staff do not regularly change a resident’s diaper knowing the resident requires frequent changes. During the facility inspection, LPA observed a list of residents who require assistance with incontinent care posted behind the front desk. LPA observed caregivers taking residents to the restroom or checking to see if they need changed. During Record Review, LPA received and reviewed Staff In-Service Training logs regarding residents Personal Rights. S1 stated incontinent care is part of the of the staff Personal Rights Training. LPA received and reviewed training material for incontinent care. During interviews with Staff S1-S5, were asked how often residents are assisted with changing diapers or using the restroom, five (5) out of five (5) stated residents are checked every 2 hours to see if they need changed or use the restroom and they are cleaned and changed every four (4) hours. During interviews with Residents R1-R7, were asked if they have been left in soiled diapers for an extended period of time, four (4) out of seven (7) stated they have not been left in soiled diapers for an extended period of time. One (1) out of seven (7) shook their head yes, when asked if they were left in a diaper for an extended period of time. Two (2) out of seven (7) declined to be interviewed. During interviews with Residents Responsible Party’s W2, was asked if there was a time they have come to the facility and observed their resident in soiled diapers, W2 stated no, they have not observed that. Additionally, W2 was asked if they have any concerns regarding residents being left in soiled diapers, W2 stated no, they have no concerns. During the course of the investigation, LPA was unable to find evidence to support the allegation. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated. LPA did not observe or cite any deficiencies. An exit interview was conducted with Jung Hee Kim, Executive Director, and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 18, 2026 · control 11-AS-20260611163254
Mar 2, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff's behavior poses a health and safety risk to residents.
On 03/02/26, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to further investigate the allegation mentioned above, and deliver findings. LPA met with Administrator Jung Hee Kim, and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was granted entrance to the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: On 02/25/26, LPA Gonzalez requested the staff roster, and resident roster. LPA reviewed records for staff #5-#6 (S5-S6) and requested a copy of the following documents: Personnel Record (LIC501), and Department of Justice (DOJ) Background Clearance Form. Additionally, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5) and attempted to interview staff #6 (S6). Furthermore, on 03/02/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with resident #1-#6 (R1-R6), and a tour of the facility. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated The investigation revealed the following: For the allegation: Staff's behavior poses a health and safety risk to residents. It is being alleged that a staff member at this facility is sexually harassing another staff member. It is also being alleged that staff members are not being treated fairly at his facility. On 02/25/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with S1-S5, and attempted to interview S6, but was unable to as they are no longer working at the facility. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff could not corroborate the allegation. 5 out of 5 staff said they are treated equally and fair at this facility. On 03/02/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with R1-R6. Of those interviewed, 6 out of 6 residents could not corroborate the allegation. 6 out of 6 residents said they are satisfied with the services provided to them at the facility. Based on observation, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. No deficiencies were cited during this investigation. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Jung Hee Kim, Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 2, 2026 · control 11-AS-20260217085439
Mar 2, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff's behavior poses a health and safety risk to residents.
** This report serves as an amendment to clarify findings. It does not supersede the complaint investigation findings reflected on report created 02/25/26. ** On 03/02/26, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint investigation visit for the allegation listed above. LPA met with Administrator, Jung Hee Kim, and explained the purpose of this visit is to provide an amended copy of the LIC9099 report. On 02/25/26, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced complaint visit to investigate the allegation mentioned above. LPA met with Administrator Jung Hee Kim, and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was granted entrance to the facility. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated During today’s visit, LPA Gonzalez requested the staff roster, and resident roster. LPA reviewed records for staff #5-#6 (S5-S6) and requested a copies of various documents. Additionally, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5) and attempted to interview staff #6 (S6). Due to time constraints, and additional information needed, the above allegation needs further investigation. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 2, 2026 · control 11-AS-20260217085439
Jan 22, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests.
Duplicate complaint. On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit for the allegation listed above. LPA met with Jung Hee Kim, Administrator, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA was granted access to the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez collected the following documents: staff roster, resident roster, and service invoices from OK Exterminators (dated:11/07/25, 12/12/25) and National Exterminator Company (dated: 01/09/26). LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), and residents #1-#6 (R1-R6). Additionally, LPA conducted a tour of the entire facility, and inspected resident rooms, kitchen and common areas. Unsubstantiated The investigation revealed the following: For the allegation: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests. It is being alleged that there are bedbugs and cockroaches in the facility. On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with S1-S5. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff denied the allegation. 5 out 5 staff said pest control services are provided monthly. On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with R1-R6. Of those interviewed, 6 out of 6 residents could not corroborate with the allegation. During a records review conducted on 01/22/26, LPA reviewed pest control service invoices from Ok Exterminators dated 11/07/25 and 12/12/25, and National Exterminator Company dated 01/09/26. Documentation reflected that general pest control services were performed on the referenced dates. On 01/22/26, LPA and Jung Hee Kim conducted a tour of the facility and inspected rooms #102 and #113 on the first floor, rooms #206 and #217 on the second floor, rooms #302 and #306 on the third floor, as well as the kitchen and common areas. LPA observed the inspected areas to be clean, sanitary, and free of pests. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. No deficiencies were cited during this investigation. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Jung Hee Kim, Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 22, 2026 · control 11-AS-20260112152629
Jan 22, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests.
On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit for the allegation listed above. LPA met with Jung Hee Kim, Administrator, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA was granted access to the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez collected the following documents: staff roster, resident roster, and service invoices from OK Exterminators (dated:11/07/25, 12/12/25) and National Exterminator Company (dated: 01/09/26). LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), and residents #1-#6 (R1-R6). Additionally, LPA conducted a tour of the entire facility, and inspected resident rooms, kitchen and common areas. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated The investigation revealed the following: For the allegation: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests. It is being alleged that there are bedbugs and cockroaches in the facility. On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with S1-S5. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff denied the allegation. 5 out 5 staff said pest control services are provided monthly. On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with R1-R6. Of those interviewed, 6 out of 6 residents could not corroborate with the allegation. During a records review conducted on 01/22/26, LPA reviewed pest control service invoices from Ok Exterminators dated 11/07/25 and 12/12/25, and National Exterminator Company dated 01/09/26. Documentation reflected that general pest control services were performed on the referenced dates. On 01/22/26, LPA and Jung Hee Kim conducted a tour of the facility and inspected rooms #102 and #113 on the first floor, rooms #206 and #217 on the second floor, rooms #302 and #306 on the third floor, as well as the kitchen and common areas. LPA observed the inspected areas to be clean, sanitary, and free of pests. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. No deficiencies were cited during this investigation. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Jung Hee Kim, Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 22, 2026 · control 11-AS-20260112152629
Jan 22, 2026Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests.
On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit for the allegation listed above. LPA met with Jung Hee Kim, Administrator, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA was granted access to the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez collected the following documents: staff roster, resident roster, and service invoices from OK Exterminators (dated:11/07/25, 12/12/25) and National Exterminator Company (dated: 01/09/26). LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), and residents #1-#6 (R1-R6). Additionally, LPA conducted a tour of the entire facility, and inspected resident rooms, kitchen and common areas. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated The investigation revealed the following: For the allegation: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests. It is being alleged that there are bedbugs and cockroaches in the facility. On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with S1-S5. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff denied the allegation. 5 out 5 staff said pest control services are provided monthly. On 01/22/26, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with R1-R6. Of those interviewed, 6 out of 6 residents could not corroborate with the allegation. During a records review conducted on 01/22/26, LPA reviewed pest control service invoices from Ok Exterminators dated 11/07/25 and 12/12/25, and National Exterminator Company dated 01/09/26. Documentation reflected that general pest control services were performed on the referenced dates. On 01/22/26, LPA and Jung Hee Kim conducted a tour of the facility and inspected rooms #102 and #113 on the first floor, rooms #206 and #217 on the second floor, rooms #302 and #306 on the third floor, as well as the kitchen and common areas. LPA observed the inspected areas to be clean, sanitary, and free of pests. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. No deficiencies were cited during this investigation. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Jung Hee Kim, Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 22, 2026 · control 11-AS-20260112152629
Jan 22, 2026Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 01/22/26, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced annual required visit using the CARE Inspection Tool. LPA met with Jung Hee Kim, Administrator, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA was granted access to the facility. The facility is licensed to serve (120) elderly adults ages 60 and above, of which (120) can be non-ambulatory and (35) bedridden on rooms:100-116,228,302-329. The facility has an approved hospice waiver for (10). The facility is a four-story building located on a main street. The basement/first floor consists of a parking garage. The second floor consists of the medicine room, industrial kitchen, office, front desk, dining room, common room, patio area with shaded seating, and resident rooms for assisted living. The third floor consists of resident rooms for assisted living, and community rooms. The fourth floor consists of the memory care unit, the bedridden unit, and resident bedrooms. LPA Gonzalez and Jung Hee Kim toured the physical plant. There were no bodies of water or obstructions on the premises. LPA inspected a total of six (6) bedrooms and six (6) bathrooms. The beds and bedding supplies were in good condition, adequate lighting was provided, and storage for the residents’ personal belongings was observed. The bathrooms were found to be within Title 22 regulations and were , operational. The water temperature properly measured between 105.0°F and 120°F. LPA Gonzalez observed that the facility to be clean, sanitary, and appropriately furnished. Storage areas for personal hygiene were in place. Cleaning supplies, toxins, and sharp objects were stored in a way that made them inaccessible to residents in care. The kitchen was inspected, and there was sufficient perishable and non-perishable food available, and properly maintained. Fire extinguishers were charged and operable. Smoke and carbon monoxide detectors were in operable condition. The last Fire/Disaster Drills were conducted on 12/26/25. A review of (6) residents' service files and (5) staff personnel files was maintained in order. LPA reviewed (3) Medication Administration Records (MARs) and found no discrepancies. Medications are centrally stored in the facility's medication room. The facility is equipped with fully stocked first aid kits with manuals. LPA observed the facility's infection control practices. All mandated inspection control posters were displayed throughout the facility. A copy of liability insurance was provided to LPA. Facility Annual Fess current. No citations were issued during this inspection. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Jung Hee Kim, Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 22, 2026
20257 state visits · 8 documents
Dec 30, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests.
On 12/30/25, LPA Gonzalez conducted an unannounced complaint investigation visit for the allegation listed above. LPA met with Chansook Koo, receptionist, and explained the purpose of the visit. LPA was granted access to the facility. Administrator, Steve Cho, joined LPA for the visit shortly after. The investigation consisted of the following: On 12/30/25, LPA Gonzalez collected the following documents: staff roster, resident roster, and service invoices from OK Exterminators dated 11/07/25 and 12/12/25. LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), and residents #1-#6 (R1-R6). Additionally, LPA Gonzalez and Chansook Koo conducted a tour of the entire facility, and inspected resident rooms, kitchen and common areas. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated The investigation revealed the following: Allegation: Staff does not ensure facility is free of pests. It is being alleged that live German cockroaches were observed on facility’s kitchen floor. On 12/30/25, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with S1-S5. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff denied the allegation. 5 out 5 staff said pest control services are provided monthly. On 12/30/25, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with R1-R6. Of those interviewed, 6 out of 6 residents could not corroborate with the allegation. During a records review conducted on 12/30/25, LPA reviewed pest control service invoices from OK Exterminators dated 11/07/25 and 12/12/25. Documentation reflected that general pest control services were performed on the referenced dates. On 12/30/25, LPA and Chansook Koo conducted a tour of the facility and inspected rooms #113 and #114 on the first floor, rooms #228 and #229 on the second floor, rooms #301 and #306 on the third floor, as well as the kitchen and common areas. LPA observed the inspected areas to be clean and free of pests. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. No deficiencies were cited during this investigation. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Steve Cho.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Dec 30, 2025 · control 11-AS-20251226141305
Nov 2, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident sustained unexplained injuries while in care.
On November 2, 2025, the department conducted a follow-up complaint visit to the facility and was greeted by the Administrator. The department explained that the purpose of this visit is to deliver findings regarding the complaint allegation mentioned above. The investigation included the following: On 07/23/2025, the department reviewed and obtained the following documents for Resident #1 (R1): Resident Roster (dated 09/16/24), Staff Roster (dated 01/10/25), ID/Emergency Information (dated 01/26/24), Admission Agreement (dated 01/26/24), Appraisal & Needs Service Plan (dated 09/18/24), Physician's Report (dated 03/22/24), Unusual Incident/Injury Report (dated 09/21/24), Medication Administration Records (dated 02/19/24 - 09/19/24), Consent for Emergency Medical Treatment (dated 11/26/24), Copy of the Death Report (dated 09/21/24), and Legal Services Documents (dated 10/16/24). On 04/15/2025, at 2:26 PM, the department interviewed Med Tech (MT1). On 04/15/2025, at approximately 2:59 p.m., the department interviewed the Staff member (S1). On 04/15/25, at approximately 2:06 PM, the department interviewed Resident (R2). The department attempted to interview the staff members (S2), but they were unable to answer the interview questions. Substantiated It is alleged that Resident (R1) sustained multiple rib fractures, including a clavicle fracture, along with a bruise on the lower back and buttocks. The department obtained and reviewed Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Hospital records for R1 dated 09/21/2024. The department found on 09/21/2024, the facility's Med Tech (MT1) checked R1's vital signs in the a.m. (actual time not found on record) and found R1 was in an altered mental state. The facility then contacted R1's primary physician and called 911. At approximately 8:06 a.m., the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) arrived, and R1 was transported to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. The department found R1 was in an altered mental state due to R1 not eating and refusing medication for two days. The Cedars-Sinai Medical Records review indicated that the facility informed the hospital that R1 had no history of falls; however, a review of the Home Health records indicated R1 had a secondary diagnosis of repeated falls. Additionally, R1 complained of low back pain and left arm pain prior to the 09/21/2024 hospitalization. On 04/15/2025, at approximately 2:26 pm, the department interviewed Med Tech (MT1), who stated that when R1 experienced an unwitnessed fall, staff did not document unwitnessed falls with Unusual Incident Reports, nor did the staff seek medical attention to rule out invisible injuries after unwitnessed falls. Based on reviews and interviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met; therefore, the above allegation is substantiated. Per the California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8), the deficiency noted above was observed, and a citation was issued (ref. LIC 9099D). At the time of the complaint visit, an immediate civil penalty of $500 was issued, and the licensee was informed that an enhanced civil penalty determination is pending reference to Health & Safety Code § 1569.49. An exit interview was conducted and plans of correction were developed and reviewed. A copy of this report and appeal rights were discussed with Administrator Steve Cho and a hard copy left with Kay Hwang. The department attempted to interview the staff members (S2), but they were unable to answer the interview questions. On 07/23/2025, LPA interviewed three staff members (S1-S3), five residents (#2-6, R2-R6). LPA was unable to interview R1 because R1 passed away on 09/21/2024. Allegation: Questionable Death. On 01/27/2025, at approximately 2:58 PM, the department reviewed records from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center regarding the care timeline dated 09/21/2024. According to the Cedars-Sinai Medical Records, R1 was transported from Sunny Hill Assisted Living Facility to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Emergency Department on 09/21/2024, for altered mental status, with conditions including sepsis, shock, and a urinary tract infection (UTI). The department examined the Cedars-Sinai Medical Records and the death certificate provided by the Special Investigator Assistant (SIA). R1 was diagnosed with severe sepsis and acute UTI. The death certificate listed cardiopulmonary arrest, acute hypoxic respiratory failure, acute kidney failure, and pneumonia as causes of death. On 04/15/25, at approximately 2:26 pm, the department interviewed Med Tech (MT1), who stated that on September 18, 2024, R1 refused food and medications and complained of pain. The department reviewed the Cedars-Sinai Medical Record, which showed that the hospital Social Worker (SW) called Sunny Hills Assisted Living and spoke with a staff member (S2), who stated that R1 had refused all medication and food for the past two days. The SW noted that there were no concerns of suspected abuse or neglect based on R1’s mental state and physical mobility. On 04/15/2025, at 2:26 PM, the department interviewed Med Tech (MT1), who reported that on 09/18 and 19/2024, R1 refused to eat, refused medications, and did not allow MT1 to check R1’s vital signs. The department reviewed the emergency room case for R1, date 09/ 21/2024. R1 passed away on 09/21/2024, at 3:43 PM. A family member was contacted twice to inform them of the critical situation and prognosis. R1 was appropriately assigned a Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) status. Subsequently, R1 experienced respiratory and cardiac arrest and died. The department's review of R1’s death certificate indicated that the causes of death were cardiopulmonary arrest, acute hypoxic respiratory failure, acute kidney failure, and pneumonia. Regarding the allegation, “Questionable Death,” based on record reviews and interviews, the Department found no evidence to support the allegation mentioned above. Although the allegation may have occurred or be valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove whether the alleged violation did or did not occur; as a result, the allegation is Unsubstantiated. Allegation: Staff did not notify the resident's representatives about the resident's change in conditions. The complaint alleges that the facility failed to contact the responsible party regarding the resident's change in condition. On 07/23/2025, LPA Richard interviewed Staff #1 (S1), who denied the allegation and reported that when R1 was admitted to the facility on 01/26, 2024, the staff attempted to call the phone number listed in the admission record for R1, but there was no answer. R1 personally signed the admission agreement. The S1 mentioned that they also called the phone number from a previous admission agreement, but again, no one answered. It was noted that R1 has not received any visitors except on one occasion. A couple of times, someone came with another person to speak with R1; that was the last time anyone saw them. For the past eight months, R1 has had that many visitors. On the same date, LPA interviewed three staff members (S1-S3), all of whom denied the allegation. Staff member S3 mentioned that during one attempt to contact the responsible party, the person who answered was very upset and told S3, "Do not call this number anymore; it is up to you now." Additionally, LPA interviewed five residents (R2-R6), with the help of an interpreter, all of whom stated that the facility does contact their families. LPA also reviewed the admission agreement dated 01/26/2024, which indicated that R1 was the only person who signed the agreement. There was no responsible party signature on file. LPA was unable to interview Resident #1 due to R1 passing on 09/21/2024 at Cedar Sinai Hospital. Based on interviews and observations, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation: Staff did not notify the resident's authorized representatives of the resident's change in condition. 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. Allegation: Staff did not seek medical attention for the residents in a timely manner. The complaint claims that staff failed to seek medical attention for residents in a timely manner. On 07/23/2025, LPA Richard interviewed Staff member #1 (S1), who reported that on 09/21/2024, the caregiver contacted Med Tech (MT) to check the vitals of resident R1. After assessing R1's vitals, Med Tech discovered that R1 was exhibiting an altered mental status. The (MT) immediately notified R1's primary care physician and family. When there was no response, the facility called for Emergency Medical Services (EMS). As a result, R1 was transported to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. On 07/23/2025, the Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) interviewed three staff members, Staff #1-3 (S1-S3). All three denied the allegations, affirming that staff members never neglected residents and always provided necessary medical attention. They stated that in the event of a Medical Emergency, they would call 911. The (MT) and (S1) reported that on 09/21/2024, staff promptly assisted Resident #1 (R1), who was then transported to Cedars-Sinai Hospital's ICU at approximately 8:06 AM, where R1 was admitted. There were no instances in which the facility failed to seek timely medical attention for a resident. On 07/ 23/2025, the LPA interviewed five residents, Residents #2-6: (R2-R6). All five residents stated that the facility usually calls 911 for them, or the Nurse comes to assist them when needed. Based on interviews and observations, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation: Staff did not seek attention for the residents in a timely manner. 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. Allegation: Staff locked the residents in their rooms. The complaint alleges that every time they visit R1, there is no way to exit the third floor because all the stairway doors are locked, and the elevator requires a key to operate. LPA interviewed S1, who stated that the elevator door is locked. However, if a visitor signs in, we will provide them with a code to open it. Additionally, a staff member is always present on the third floor to open the door for residents who wish to enter. LPA interviewed staff #1-3 (S1-S3), who stated that the residents do not need a key because the rooms are locked from the inside. The residents could open their doors from the inside, but when they are outside, they need assistance when returning to their rooms. S3 also stated that since R1 was admitted to the facility, R1 has only had one visitor following R1's admission to the facility. On 07/23/25, the LPA interviewed five residents (R2-R6), who all showed the LPA the key they had to open their rooms from the outside. On 07/23/25, the LPA inspected and observed that the third-floor rooms are locked from the inside, allowing residents to leave their rooms at any time. Based on interviews and observations, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation: Staff did not seek attention for the residents in a timely manner. 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. No deficiencies were cited. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was given to Kay Hwang.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 2, 2025 · control 11-AS-20250114113540
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type A · Section cited: CCR 87466 · Plan of correction due date: Nov 4, 2025
The licensee shall ensure that residents are regularly observed for changes in physical... and... assistance is provided when such observation reveals unmet needs. When changes... are observed, the licensee shall ensure that such changes are documented and brought to the attention of the resident's physician and... responsible person...This requirement was not met as evidence by: Based on interviews and record review, the licensee did not ensure R1 receive assistance after fall(s) and complaints of low back pain. This posed an immediate health risk to resident.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 2, 2025
Plan of correction: The facility wll provide a written plan outlining how it will address falls and train staff on how to handle a resident's fall, whether witnessed or unwitnessed. The plan will include training dates and should be emailed to Antonine.Richard@dss.ca.gov by the POC due date.
Oct 27, 2025Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff does not ensure resident receives sufficient continence care resulting in resident being left in multiple soaked diapers.
On 10/27/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to deliver amended report for the allegation mentioned above. LPA met with Chansook Koo, Receptionist, and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was granted entrance to the facility. ** **This report supersedes the report created and delivered on 09/11/25. This report is to clarify findings. On 09/11/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted a subsequent unannounced complaint visit to further investigate the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Administrator, Steve Cho, and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was granted entrance to the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: On 07/28/25, LPA requested the staff and resident rosters. Continued on LIC9099-C Substantiated LPA reviewed service records for resident #1 (R1) and requested copies of the following documents: Facesheet, Physician’s Report, Service and Care Plan, Resident notes (dated 07/14/25-07/19/25), Unusual Incident/Injury Report (dated: 07/21/25), and 2-Hour Rounds Check Policy Form. Additionally, LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), witness #1 (W1), attempted to interview witness #2 (W2), residents #2-#4 (R2-R4) and attempted to interview R1. On 09/11/25, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with residents #5-#6 (R5-R6), and S1. The investigation revealed the following: Allegation: Staff does not ensure resident receives sufficient continence care resulting in resident being left in multiple soaked diapers. It is being alleged that a resident came into the emergency department wearing 3 diapers that were all soaked through. On 07/28/25, between 10:20 AM and 12:00 PM, LPA conducted interviews with S1-S5. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff stated that they did not know if the above allegation happened. 5 out of 5 staff said they do not put more than one diaper on a resident. Interview conducted with S1 revealed that after conducting their own investigation, they became aware of two staff admitting to putting more than one diaper on a resident, and that they have taken the necessary disciplinary action. On 07/28/25, between 1:05 PM and 2:00 PM, LPA conducted interviews with R2-R4 and attempted to interview R1 but was unable to as R1 is in the hospital. On 09/11/25, between 1:00 PM and 1:45 PM, LPA conducted interviews with R5-R6. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 residents said don’t use diapers. 5 out of 5 residents said they don’t know if staff puts multiple diapers on any resident. Based on record reviewed, and interviews conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation(s) is found to be substantiated. Title 22, Division 6 Chapter 8 are being cited on the attached LIC9099-D. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of the report along with appeal rights was provided to Chansook Koo.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 27, 2025 · control 11-AS-20250721104317
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.1(a)(2) · Plan of correction due date: Sep 18, 2025
87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities. (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 regulation is not met as evidenced by: Based on interview with S1 revealed that two staff members admitted to putting multiple diapers on a resident which poses a potential health and safety risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Oct 27, 2025
Plan of correction: Administrator will provide an in service training for all staff on personal rights for the residents. Administrator agreed to submit in service training log to LPA Gonzalez via email by POC due date 09/18/25.
Sep 11, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident is being physically abused while in care. Facility staff are not properly supervising residents who are a fall risk.
** This report serves as an amendment to add additional information to the report created on 07/02/25. It does not supersede the complaint investigation report created 07/02/25. **On 09/11/25 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint investigation visit for the allegations listed above. LPA met with Administrator, Steve Cho, and explained that the purpose of this visit is to provide an amended copy of the LIC9099 report, and was granted entrance to the facility. On 07/02/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced complaint visit to investigate the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Administrator, Steve Cho, and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was granted entrance to the facility. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated The investigation consisted of the following: On 07/02/25, LPA requested the staff and resident rosters. LPA reviewed service records for resident #1 (R1) and requested copies of the following documents: Physician’s Report, Advance Health Care Directive Form, Admission Agreement, Medication List dated 07/01/25, Resident Care Assessment Form, Appraisal Needs and Services Plan, Preplacement Appraisal Information, Personal Care Program Form, and 2-Hour Rounds Check Policy Form. Additionally, LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), witness #1 (W1), and residents #2-#5 (R2-R5) and attempted to interview R1. Furthermore, LPA and Steve Cho conducted a tour of the facility. On 09/11/25, LPA Gonzalez received the following documents for R1: Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the months of July and August 2025, and staff notes. The investigation revealed the following: Allegation: Resident is being physically abused while in care. It is being that a resident is being abused on a regular basis and has been observed with multiple bruises and scars on their body. On 07/02/25, between 11:00 AM and 12:15 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed S1-S5. Based on interviews conducted, 5 out of 5 staff interviewed denied the allegation. 5 out of 5 staff interviewed stated that body checks are conducted daily and any bruising or change in condition is communicated to both the primary care physician and families and are then monitored. 5 out of 5 staff interviewed stated that they treat residents with dignity and respect. On 07/02/25, between 01:35 PM and 2:18 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed R2-R5 and attempted to interview R1 but was unable to because the resident was asleep in their room and did not wish to be interviewed. Based on interviews conducted, 4 out of 5 residents denied the allegation. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff have not physically abused them while in care. 4 out of 5 residents stated that they have not observed staff physically abusing a resident while in care. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff treat them with dignity and respect. On 09/11/25, LPA conducted a review of records and revealed the following: Physician’s Report (dated: 07/08/25) stated that R1’s ambulatory status is bedridden based upon both physical and mental conditions. Continued on LIC9099-C Report also stated that R1 has a history of skin condition or breakdown due to thin skin related to age. A review of the MAR for the months of July, and August 2025 noted that certain prescribed medications may contribute to increased bruising. There was no incident reports reporting any physical abuse, scars or bruising. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. Allegation: Facility staff are not properly supervising residents who are a fall risk. It is being alleged that a resident has been observed with multiple bruises and scars on their body, and that staff claim the injuries are due to the resident falling out of their bed. It is also being alleged that a resident is often left alone in their room. On 07/02/25, between 11:00 AM and 12:15 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed S1-S5. Based on interviews conducted, 5 out of 5 staff interviewed denied the allegation. 5 out of 5 staff interviewed stated that they supervise and monitor residents who are considered a fall risk. 5 out of 5 staff stated that they check on the residents frequently and as needed depending on the residents’ needs. S1 stated that all residents are checked every two hours and as needed. S1 stated that when a resident is considered a fall risk after assessment, they recommend to the family or the party responsible for their special care service called the Personal Care Program, which is offered for an additional fee. If the family denies that extra coverage, then staff will continue to follow their 2-hour Rounds Check Policy which ensures that the residents are checked on every 2 hours when they are in their rooms. On 07/02/25, between 01:35 PM and 2:18 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed R2-R5 and attempted to interview R1 but was unable to because the resident was asleep in their room and did not wish to be interviewed. Based on interviews conducted, 4 out of 5 residents denied the allegation. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff does supervise residents who are a fall risk. 4 out of 5 residents stated that they do not know if a resident has fallen down the stairs. 4 out of 5 residents stated that they are not left alone in their room for a long period of time. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff treat them with dignity and respect. Continued on LIC9099-C On 09/11/25, LPA Gonzalez conducted a review of records and observed that there were no incident reports reporting any physical abuse, scars or bruising. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report along with appeal rights was provided to Administrator, Steve Cho.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 11, 2025 · control 11-AS-20250623123311
Sep 11, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility staff do not ensure resident is provided adequite supervision resulting in resident having multiple falls while in care.
On 09/11/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted a subsequent unannounced complaint visit to further investigate the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Administrator, Steve Cho, and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was granted entrance to the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: On 07/28/25, LPA requested the staff and resident rosters. LPA reviewed service records for resident #1 (R1) and requested copies of the following documents: Facesheet, Physician’s Report, Service and Care Plan, Resident notes (dated 07/14/25-07/19/25), Unusual Incident/Injury Report (dated: 07/21/25), and 2-Hour Rounds Check Policy Form. Additionally, LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), witness #1 (W1), attempted to interview witness #2 (W2), residents #2-#4 (R2-R4) and attempted to interview R1. On 09/11/25, LPA Gonzalez conducted interviews with residents #5-#6 (R5-R6), and S1. Unsubstantiated The investigation revealed the following: Allegation: Facility staff do not ensure resident is provided adequate supervision resulting in resident having multiple falls while in care. It is being alleged that a resident has sustained multiple falls at the facility resulting in resident having multiple bruises on their arms, and face. On 07/28/25, between 10:20 AM and 12:00 PM, LPA conducted interviews with S1-S5. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff stated that they provide adequate supervision for residents to prevent any fall and/or injuries. 3 out of 5 staff said they did not know if R1 fell on 07/19/25, and 2 out of 5 staff stated R1 did fall. 3 out of 5 staff stated that R1 does not fall frequently. 5 out of 5 staff stated that residents are checked on every 2 hours and as needed. On 07/28/25, between 1:05 PM and 2:00 PM, LPA conducted interviews with R2-R4 and attempted to interview R1 but was unable to as R1 is in the hospital. On 09/11/25, between 1:00 PM and 1:45 PM, LPA conducted interviews with R5-R6. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 residents said they weren’t aware of a resident sustaining multiple falls. 5 out of 5 residents reported feeling safe when being assisted by staff. 5 out of 5 residents said they are satisfied with staff and the services provided to them. On 09/11/25, LPA conducted a review of records and revealed the following: Physician’s Report (dated: 07/09/25) noted that resident is non-ambulatory and will participate in unsafe wandering and will try and get out of bed without reason and/or physical power. An Unusual Incident/Injury Report (dated: 07/21/25) reported that on 07/19/25, at around 05:30 AM, R1 was found on the floor with a laceration on left eye area. R1 was assessed, and first aid was provided. R1’s responsible party was then notified, and staff continued to observe R1 for any change in condition. Then at 08:10 AM, R1 was observed bleeding from nose, and 911 was called and resident was transported to hospital. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of the report along with appeal rights was provided to Administrator, Steve Cho. The investigation revealed the following: Allegation: Staff does not ensure resident receives sufficient continence care resulting in resident being left in multiple soaked diapers. It is being alleged that a resident came into the emergency department wearing 3 diapers that were all soaked through. On 07/28/25, between 10:20 AM and 12:00 PM, LPA conducted interviews with S1-S5. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 staff stated that they did not know if the above allegation happened. 5 out of 5 staff said they do not put more than one diaper on a resident. Interview conducted with S1 revealed that after conducting their own investigation, they became aware of two staff admitting to putting more than one diaper on a resident, and that they have taken the necessary disciplinary action. On 07/28/25, between 1:05 PM and 2:00 PM, LPA conducted interviews with R2-R4 and attempted to interview R1 but was unable to as R1 is in the hospital. On 09/11/25, between 1:00 PM and 1:45 PM, LPA conducted interviews with R5-R6. Of those interviewed, 5 out of 5 residents said they weren’t aware of a resident sustaining multiple falls. 5 out of 5 residents reported feeling safe when being assisted by staff. 5 out of 5 residents said they are satisfied with staff and the services provided to them. Based on record reviewed, and interviews conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation(s) is found to be substantiated. Title 22, Division 6 Chapter 8 are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of the report along with appeal rights was provided to Administrator, Steve Cho.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 11, 2025 · control 11-AS-20250721104317
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87468.1 · Plan of correction due date: Sep 18, 2025
87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities. (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 regulation is not met as evidenced by: Based on interview with S1 revealed that two staff members admitted to putting multiple diapers on a resident which poses a potential health and safety risk to persons in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Sep 11, 2025
Plan of correction: Administrator will provide an in service training for all staff on personal rights for the residents. Administrator agreed to submit in service training log to LPA Gonzalez via email by POC due date.
Aug 21, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: The facility only admits residents based on race.
On 08/21/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA), Wendy Gibbs, conducted a subsequent unannounced Complaint Visit to the facility listed above. LPA met with Reception, Chan Sook Koo, and the purpose of today’s visit was explained. LPA was granted entry into the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: During the initial visit conducted on 02/22/2024, LPA inspected the facility, interviewed Staff S1-S7, attempted to interview Residents R1-R8, interviewed Resident’s Responsible Party’s Witness W1-W7, and received documents pertinent to the investigation. The following documents were received and reviewed Staff Roster, Resident Roster, an Admission Agreement packet, Anti-Discrimination Policy in-service training logs dated 10/14/2022 and 10/20/2023, Meal Menu (English Version), and advertising brochures. The investigation revealed the following: Unsubstantiated Allegation: The facility only admits residents based on race The allegation alleges that the facility turned away clientele who inquired about moving in and were denied based on race. During record review, LPA received and reviewed an Admission Packet which is given to perspective residents. In the packet is the facility’s Anti-Discrimination Policy that states "It is the policy and practice of Sunny Hills Assisted Living and Memory Care and its agents and employees not to engage in housing discrimination based on a current or prospective resident’s race, color, national, origin, religion, sex, familial status, disability or any other classification protected by applicable federal, state or local law." Additionally in the packet is Personal Rights in Privately Operated Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly that states in number (4) To be encouraged and assisted in exercising their rights as citizens and as residents of the facility. Residents shall be free from interference, coercion, discrimination, and retaliation in exercising their rights. LPA additionally received and reviewed the facility’s multilingual brochures. LPA observed the brochure has multiracial photos. During the facility inspection, LPA observed multilingual signs posted throughout the facility, including the menu, activity schedule, and other required postings. LPA received and reviewed staff In-Service training logs dated 10/20/2023 and 10/14/2022, on the topic of the facility’s Non-Discrimination Policy. During interviews with Staff S1-S7, were asked if they have heard of or know of a person inquiring about the facility that was turned away based on race, gender, color, marital status, or national origin, seven (7) out of seven (7) stated no, not that they have knowledge of. Additionally, Staff S1-S7 were asked if they have turned a person away who was inquiring about the facility based on race, gender, color, marital status, or national origin, seven (7) out of seven (7) stated no, they have not turned any inquiring persons away. During an interview with Staff S1, stated when they became the administrator they had multilingual brochures made so they could expand their advertising to all communities. During interviews with Residents R1-R8’s Responsible Party’s Witnesses W1-W7, were asked if they were told the facility is a Korean facility only, seven (7) out of seven (7) stated no, they were not told the facility was a Korean facility. During the course of the investigation, LPA was unable to find evidence to support the allegation. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated. LPA did not observe or cite any deficiencies. An exit interview was conducted with Reception, Chan Sook Koo, and a copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 21, 2025 · control 11-AS-20240216142414
Jul 2, 2025Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Resident is being physically abused while in care. Facility staff are not properly supervising residents who are a fall risk.
On 07/02/25, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Elvira Gonzalez conducted an unannounced complaint visit to investigate the allegations mentioned above. LPA met with Administrator, Steve Cho, and the purpose of the visit was explained. LPA was granted entrance to the facility. The investigation consisted of the following: On 07/02/25, LPA requested the staff and resident rosters. LPA reviewed service records for resident #1 (R1) and requested copies of the following documents: Physician’s Report, Advance Health Care Directive Form, Admission Agreement, Medication List dated 07/01/25, Resident Care Assessment Form, Appraisal Needs and Services Plan, Preplacement Appraisal Information Personal Care Program Form, and 2-Hour Rounds Check Policy Form. Additionally, LPA conducted interviews with staff #1-#5 (S1-S5), witness #1 (W1), and residents #2-#5 (R2-R5) and attempted to interview R1. Furthermore, LPA and Steve Cho conducted a tour of the facility. Continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated The investigation revealed the following: Allegation: Resident is being physically abused while in care. It is being alleged that a resident is being abused on a regular basis and has been observed with multiple bruises and scars on their body. On 07/02/25, between 11:00 AM and 12:15 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed S1-S5. Based on interviews conducted, 5 out of 5 staff interviewed denied the allegation. 5 out of 5 staff interviewed stated that any bruises and cuts observed on a resident are reported to the med-tech and management, and are then monitored. 5 out of 5 staff interviewed stated that they treat residents with dignity and respect. On 07/02/25, between 01:35 PM and 2:18 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed R2-R5. Based on interviews conducted, 4 out of 5 residents denied the allegation. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff have not physically abused them while in care. 4 out of 5 residents stated that they have not observed staff physically abusing a resident while in care. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff treat them with dignity and respect. On 07/02/25, between 01:15 PM and 1:35 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed W1 and revealed that they appreciate the staff at this facility and all they do for the residents in care. W1 stated that the staff at this facility are very caring and go above and beyond for their family member, and the other residents in care. W1 stated that they understand that with age, the residents can become weak and fragile, and they are more prone to falls. W1 stated that they have no safety concerns for their family member at this facility, and that they have 100% confidence that the staff at this facility will provide the best care possible. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. Continued on LIC9099-C Allegation: Facility staff are not properly supervising residents who are a fall risk. It is being alleged that a resident has been observed with multiple bruises and scars on their body, and that staff claim the injuries are due to the resident falling out of their bed. It is also being alleged that a resident is often left alone in their room. On 07/02/25, between 11:00 AM and 12:15 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed S1-S5. Based on interviews conducted, 5 out of 5 staff interviewed denied the allegation. 5 out of 5 staff interviewed stated that they supervise and monitor residents who are considered a fall risk. 5 out of 5 staff stated that they check on the residents frequently and as needed depending on the residents’ needs. S1 stated that all residents are checked every two hours and as needed. S1 stated that when a resident is considered a fall risk after assessment, they recommend to the family or the party responsible for their special care service, which is called the Personal Care Program, for an additional fee. If the family denies that extra coverage, then we will continue to follow their 2-hour Rounds Check Policy which ensures that the residents are checked on every 2 hours when they are in their rooms. On 07/02/25, between 01:35 PM and 2:18 PM, LPA Gonzalez interviewed R2-R5. Based on interviews conducted, 4 out of 5 residents denied the allegation. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff does supervise residents who are a fall risk. 4 out of 5 residents stated that they do not know if a resident has fallen down the stairs. 4 out of 5 residents stated that they are not left alone in their room for a long period of time. 4 out of 5 residents stated that staff treat them with dignity and respect. Based on observation, records reviewed, and interviews conducted, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the allegation. 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. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report along with appeal rights was provided to Administrator, Steve Cho.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 2, 2025 · control 11-AS-20250623123311
Jan 15, 2025Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
On 1/15/2025, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Alfonso Iniguez conducted an unannounced annual required visit using the CARE Inspection Tool. LPA met with Steve Cho/Administrator. LPA explained the purpose of today’s visit. The facility is licensed to serve (120) elderly adults ages 60 and above, of which (120) can be non-ambulatory and (35) bedridden on rooms:100-116,228,302-329. The facility has an approved hospice waiver for (10). The facility is a four-story building located on a main street. The basement/first floor consists of a parking garage. The second floor consists of the medicine room, industrial kitchen, front desk, dining room, several community rooms, patio area with shaded seating, and resident rooms for assisted living. The third floor consists of resident rooms for assisted living, and community rooms. The fourth floor consists of the memory care unit, the bedridden unit, and resident bedrooms. LPA Iniguez and the Administrator toured the physical plant. There were no bodies of water or obstructions on the premises. LPA inspected a total of (5) bedrooms and (5) bathrooms. The beds and bedding supplies were in good condition, adequate lighting was provided, and storage for the residents’ personal belongings was observed. The bathrooms were found to be within Title 22 regulations and were operational. Smoke and carbon monoxide detectors were in operable condition. The water temperature ranged from 105.0°F to 116.2°F, and the room temperature ranged from 76°F to 78°F. The evaluation Report continues on the next page, LIC 809-C, providing further details of the inspection findings. During the visit, LPA Iniguez observed that the facility was clean, sanitary, and appropriately furnished. Storage areas for personal hygiene were in place. Cleaning supplies, toxins, and sharp objects were stored in a way that made them inaccessible to residents in care. The kitchen was inspected, and there was sufficient perishable and non-perishable food available, which was adequately maintained. All fire extinguishers were charged and operable. The last Fire/Disaster Drills were conducted on 12/5/24. A review of (5) residents' service files and (5) staff personnel files was maintained in order. LPA reviewed (5) Medication Administration Records (MARs) and found no discrepancies. LPA observed the facility's infection control practices. All mandated inspection control posters were displayed throughout the facility. A copy of liability insurance was provided to LPA. Facility Annual Fess current. According to the California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8), LPA did not observe deficiencies during this visit; therefore, no citations were issued. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of the Facility Evaluation Report was provided to Steve Cho / Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 15, 2025
20243 state visits · 3 documents
Nov 7, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff unlawfully evicted a resident.
The investigation consisted of the following: On 11/07/2024, Community Care Licensing Division (CCLD) Staff conducted a complaint investigation at the above facility to address the following allegation. CCLD Staff met with Administrator Steve Cho and explained the purpose of the visit. CCLD Staff conducted resident and staff interviews and reviewed resident record. Regarding the allegation "Staff unlawfully evicted a resident.” Record review revealed that Resident #1 (R1) was admitted into the facility on 06/13/2023. Interview with the Administrator (S1) indicated R1 has not been served an eviction notice. S1 indicated that in 2023, a Funding Source stated it could pay the Assisted Living Waiver (ALW) Rate one month prior to R1’s admission but has yet to pay as of 11/07/2024. In July 2024, S1 asked the Funding Source and R1’s family if they could pay the normal rate as of January 1, 2024 to present. S1 indicated that R1's ALW is still pending and R1 has not been served an eviction. Continue to LIC9099-C. Unsubstantiated Six out of six staff interviews, including S1, indicated there has not been any recent evictions and residents have not complained about being with an eviction. Six out of six resident interviews, including R1, indicated they have not been served an eviction notice. Five out of six residents indicated they are treated with dignity and respect. R1 did not understand the question. Regarding the allegation “Staff unlawfully evicted a resident," based on record reviews and interviews, the Department found no evidence to support the allegation mentioned above. 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, as a result, the allegation is Unsubstantiated. No deficiency was cited for this allegation. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to the Administrator Steve Cho.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 7, 2024 · control 11-AS-20241101161633
Jun 26, 2024Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff did not ensure that the resident's call assistance button was operable. Staff did not assist resident in a timely manner.
On 06/26/24, at 09:30am, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Perry Scott conducted a 10-day complaint visit to the facility and was greeted by Steve Cho, Administrator. LPA explained the purpose of this visit is to gather information about the complaint and deliver findings for the allegations mentioned above. The investigation consisted of the following: LPA investigated the allegations mentioned in this complaint; and conducted interviews with staff (S1-S4) and residents (R1-R8). Resident Roster (Dated 06/19/24), Staff Roster (Dated 06/26/24), ID/Emergency Information (Dated 04/31/24), and Admission Agreement (Dated 04/31/24/Unsigned) for R1 were obtained from the facility. The investigation revealed the following: Allegation #1- Staff did not ensure that the resident's call assistance button was operable. Report continued on LIC9099-C Unsubstantiated The details of the complaint alleged that R1’s call button was faulty and R1 yelled for assistance for hours, but no one came. On 06/26/24, from 10:00am-2:00pm, LPA interviewed staff (S1-S4) and residents (R1-R8) regarding the allegation. R1 could not be interviewed because R1 is no longer at the facility and no new contact information was given. 4 of 4 staff denied the allegation that the Staff did not ensure that the resident's call assistance button was operable. All staff (S1-S4) stated that each room and bathroom have a working call button that alerts the front desk when pushed. Additionally, when the button is pushed, a caregiver is paged to go and check on the resident. The staff stated they have no knowledge of anyone complaining that they were not assisted when the call button was pushed. S1 further stated that S1 had no knowledge of R1 calling for assistance and not receiving it. LPA toured the facility and checked two downstairs rooms (Room 102 and 103) and three upstairs rooms (Room 201, 202, and 206) and found the call buttons all worked and that they registered at the front desk computer. LPA noticed that it took the staff less than five minutes to respond to the call alert. LPA interviewed R1-R8 about the allegation and 7 of 8 residents that were interviewed denied the allegation that Staff did not ensure that the resident's call assistance button was operable. All residents interviewed stated that their call button works and when they need assistance and push the button for help, they are given the assistance they need. Based on interviews, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation that the Staff did not ensure that the resident's call assistance button was operable. 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. Allegation #2- Staff did not assist resident in a timely manner. The details of the complaint alleged that R1 fell on the floor in the middle of the night, called for help, and no one assisted R1 until hours later. 06/26/24, from 10:00am-2:00pm, LPA interviewed staff (S1-S4) and residents (R1-R8) regarding the allegation. R1 could not be interviewed because R1 is no longer at the facility and no new contact information was given. 4 of 4 staff denied the allegation that the Staff did not assist resident in a timely manner. All staff (S1-S4) stated that all residents are assisted in a timely manner and had no knowledge of R1 falling. S1 stated that there is no record of R1 falling, and R1 did not fall to S1s knowledge. Report continued on LIC9099-C LPA interviewed R1-R8 about the allegation and 7 of 8 residents that were interviewed denied the allegation that Staff did not assist resident in a timely manner. All residents interviewed stated that they have not had any problems with getting assistance in a timely manner from the staff when they need help. Based on interviews, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation that the Staff did not assist resident in a timely manner. 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. No deficiencies were cited. An exit interview was conducted with Steve Cho, Administrator, and a hard copy of this report was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jun 26, 2024 · control 11-AS-20240619150645
Jan 10, 2024Facility evaluation reportAnnual/RandomReport on file
Type of visit: Annual/Random
On 01/10/2024 at around 10:50 AM, Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Socorro Leandro conducted an unannounced Required – 1 Year Inspection to the above-named facility and met with the Administrator Steve Cho. LPA explained the purpose of the visit and was accompanied by the Administrator inside and outside the facility during this inspection. This facility is licensed to serve 120 non-ambulatory residents, of which 35 may be bedridden. This facility is approved for 10 hospice residents. A total of 89 residents currently resides in this facility, of which 12 are bedridden. The facility has a balance of $1,982 in Annual Licensing Fees due on 01/29/2024. The facility is a four-story building located on a main street. The basement/first floor consists of a parking garage. The second floor consists of the medicine room, industrial kitchen, front desk, dining room, several community rooms, patio area with shaded seating, and resident rooms for assisted living. The third floor consists of resident rooms for assisted living, and community rooms. The fourth floor consists of the memory care unit, the bedridden unit, and resident bedrooms. There are no security bars or weapons on the premises. LPA toured the kitchen area and observed supplies of nonperishable foods for a minimum of one week and fresh perishable foods for a minimum of two days. Knives and toxins were kept in locked storage cabinets. LPA observed that medications were safe, locked, and inaccessible. All medications observed were labeled and maintained in compliance with label instructions and State and Federal law. Documents are posted as mandated. Last fire drill was conducted on 12/12/2023. First aid kit is fully stocked with manual. Last annual fire inspection was conducted on 09/01/2023. There are several fire extinguishers around the facility, and they were last services on 09/01/2023. LPA did not observe an evacuation chair at each stairwell. There is a landline resident telephone on the front desk. Several resident’s bedrooms were checked. Mattresses were in good condition, adequate lighting, plenty of dresser and closet space observed. Walls and floors were clean and in good condition. Comforters, bed linen, bath towels and mattress protectors were adequately stocked. Bathroom toilets and water faucets worked properly, grab bars were secure, and a non-skid mat was in place. Adequate lighting and toiletries accessible to residents. LPA tested hot water temperature and it measured between 105 and 120 degrees Fahrenheit. This facility provides residents with hygiene products such as feminine napkins, nonmedicated soap, toilet paper, toothbrush, toothpaste, and comb. 5 staff records were reviewed, 5 out of 5 staff records had First Aid Certificates, Criminal Record Clearances, Job Applications, Facility Trainings/Drills, and signed Employee Rights. 1 out 5 staff record did not a Health Screening report and Tuberculosis Test. 5 resident records were reviewed and, 5 out of 5 resident records had Admission Agreements, Consent Forms, Emergency Information, Tuberculosis Test, Centrally Stored Medication Destruction Record, and Personal Rights. 3 out 5 resident records did not have an updated Medical Assessment and Appraisal & Needs Service Plan. Deficiencies are being cited based on LPA observation and record review in accordance with the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, see LIC809Ds. A violation regarding evacuation chair, staff records, and resident records. An exit interview was conducted, Plans of Corrections were reviewed and developed. A copy of this report and appeal rights were discussed and left with the Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 10, 2024
The state marks this report as 8 pages; the online copy we transcribed has 4. You can request the full file from the county licensing office.
Earlier years2021 to 2023 · 11 documents
20234 state visits · 6 documents
Aug 9, 2023Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff did not follow proper Covid-19 safety protocols. Staff are not allowing resident to have visitors while in care.
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA)/Retired Annuitant (RA) Elizabeth Ceniceros made an unannounced visit to the facility and was greeted by Administrator (A2: Steve Cho). LPA/RA conducted a risk assessment prior to entering facility. A2 informed LPA/RA that the facility has no COVID cases nor do residents or staff have symptoms. The purpose for today’s visit is to conduct a subsequent visit to deliver the findings pertaining to the above-mentioned allegations. An initial 10-Day visit was conducted by LPA Martessa Brown on 12/23/22 who was met by (former) Administrator (A1: Jason Park). During that visit, LPA conducted interviews with Staff #1 - #4 (S1-S4). LPA interviewed Resident #4 (R4) and utilized the translation line to assist with interviewing Residents #1 - #3 (R1-R3). LPA toured the facility’s physical plant for health and safety purposes and to ensure the wellbeing of residents in care. LPA reviewed and obtained copies of the following documents: resident and staff rosters, incident report(s), house rules, and pertinent information regarding the above-mentioned allegations. During today’s visit, RA Ceniceros observed the residents in the activity room for Kareoke. Unsubstantiated Regarding Allegation #1: this investigation revealed based on interviews conducted with Staff #1 - #4 (S1-S4), Residents #1 - #4 (R1-R4), and a review of the requested documents that the facility is following COVID-19 protocols. Administrator Park informed LPA Brown that the facility follows COVID-19 protocols during a COVID outbreak - including the facility’s mitigation plan. Administrator informed LPA that there is a weekly COVID testing for staff and residents and whenever there is a positive case, it’s reported to CCLD (via fax) and to the local public health department (via RedCap). Administrator also stated to LPA that facility staff encourages their residents to wear a face mask when inside or outside the facility. LPA conducted an inspection and observed the facility is following their mitigation plan measures. LPA interviewed four (4) facility staff members and 4 of the 4 staff members interviewed corroborated that they have been trained in COVID protocol procedures and that staff encourages the residents to wear their face mask while inside or outside the facility. LPA interviewed four (4) residents and 4 of the 4 the residents corroborated facility staff are following COVID-19 procedures when there are positive cases. Residents also confirmed that the facility provides them with face masks to use while inside or outside the facility. A review of the facility’s COVID-19 incident reports that were submitted to CCLD (via fax) documented notifications made to DPH (via RedCap) that was confirmed by Administrator Park. A review of the facility’s staff training records documented staff were provided with “COVID-19” training on various topics (i.e., Cleaning for COVID-19 (05/30/22); Guidance on 2019 Novel Corona Virus or COVID-19 (06/01/22); Donning & Duffing (06/14/22), Handwashing & 6-feet Distancing (06/16/22); Mask FIT Testing (06/17/22); Cough Ettiquette & Cleaning for COVID-19 (06/18/22). Based on the evidence gathered, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, 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 of OTHER: Staff did not follow proper Covid-19 safety protocols is found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding Allegation #2: this investigation revealed based on interviews conducted with Staff #1 - #4 (S1-S4), 4 of the 4 corroborated that staff do allow residents to have visitors. Administrator Park informed LPA Brown that during a COVID outbreak facility staff will contact the resident’s responsible person and encourage the family member(s) not to visit their loved one(s) while the resident(s) is in quarantine, and/or until their test result returns negative. In the memory care unit, visitors would visit their loved one(s) in the patio area. Facility encouraged an appointment to let facility staff know when a resident’s family was coming to visit their loved one at the facility to make sure there was enough space and to get the resident to the patio area for visitation. Administrator Park confirmed that when the facility had an outbreak, facility staff asked resident’s family to call ahead because the facility did not want to have a lot of visitors in one space to avoid spreading the virus. Although some resident’s family member(s) would show up unannounced to the facility, they would agree to visit their loved ones outside the resident(s) room and were never denied visitation. Interviews conducted with Residents #1 - #4, (R1-R4) 4 of the 4 the residents corroborated that facility staff allowed them to have visitors during COVID and were never denied of their visitation rights. RA Ceniceros observed COVID postings at the main entrance of the facility (photo). A review of the facility’s staff training records documented staff were provided with “PERSONAL RIGHTS” training on various topics (i.e., HIPPA Compliance (10/26/22) and Resident's Rights (12/22/22). Based on the evidence gathered, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, 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 of PERSONAL RIGHTS: Staff are not allowing resident to have visitors while in care is found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview has been conducted and a copy of the Complaint Report was provided to the new Administrator (Steve Cho).the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Aug 9, 2023 · control 11-AS-20221219110219
May 31, 2023Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Licensee does not ensure a supply of basic hygiene products are available for residents in care Staff do not ensure that resident has an adequate supply of medication while in care
This is the addendum of the initial Licensing Report conducted on 11/22/2022. The report was changed to add additional pertinent information. Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Antonia Alvizar conducted an unannounced complaint visit to investigate the above noted allegations. This visit was assisted by the Administrator Woo (Jason) Park and Co-Administrator Steve Yong Jin Cho. During the course of the investigation LPA Alvizar inspected the physical plant approximately at 9:00am. Prior to conducting a tour of physical plant, LPA requested residents and staff rosters, other facility records, including but not limited to the schedule of Incontinent Care assistance, a fee schedule for the basic and additional services provided to the residents and medication administration documents. LPA interviewed the Administrators and four (04) staff at approximately 9:30am. At approximately 11:20am LPA Alvizar spoke with seven (07) out of sixty-nine (69) residents including resident #1(R1) in addition LPA Alvizar spoke with the Witness #1 (W1), who had knowledge of the services provided to R1. Unsubstantiated Allegation 1: Licensee does not ensure a supply of basic hygiene products are available for residents in care. It was alleged that the facility is not providing hygiene supply to the residents. Family is to provide products included in the Incontinence Care supply; service such as wipes, cleaning spray and creams. Staff interviews revealed that facility is providing hygiene products, such as soap, shampoo, body wash and etc. However, providing Incontinent Care supply is not part of the hygiene items that should be provided by the facility. Although, as per the facility Personal Care Program, Incontinent Care products are provided by resident and/or their responsible party(s), as a courtesy, facility is providing diapers and in lieu of wipes they use washcloths. Residents’ family and/or responsible parties may provide wipes based on their preferences. Interviews of residents did not address any concerns regarding incontinent supply (diapers wipes and creams). During facility inspection, LPA Alvizar observed incontinent supply closet and reviewed facility hygiene supply. The facility has sufficient quantity and variety of the hygiene items. A review of facility records verified the information revealed from the staff. Based on inspection, observation, interviews and record review, there is an insufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time. Allegation 2: Staff do not ensure that resident has an adequate supply of medication while in care. It was alleged that resident #1 (R1) ran out of hypertension medication, nobody refills order or request order from the doctor. An interview of Administrators revealed that they are conscious of providing medication to residents. The medication refill is once a month. They check the medication supply periodically and when it gets low, they reorder or refill the medications. Upon arrival, they review new orders and if something is missing, staff reports to pharmacy, and they send it right away. Four (04) out of (04) staff verified the information received from the Administrator. They indicated that they review, log, and prepare all medication immediately after receiving from pharmacy. At times, if needed they request emergency medication supply for new residents. The request to the doctor can be made by phone, fax or via- text. The residents interviewed during this investigation, did not express any concerns regarding their medication assistance, W1 who was private caregiver for one of the residents stated, that they did not notice any problems with medication assistance. A review of medication records and medication supply did not reveal any information to support the allegation. Based on interviews, available evidence, observation, and records reviewed there is not enough corroborating information to support the allegations. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is no supporting evidence to determine validate the complaint. Therefore, the allegation is deemed unsubstantiated at this time. No immediate health and safety hazard were noted during this visit. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of report was issued.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 31, 2023 · control 11-AS-20221114120901
May 26, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: . Facility does not change food menu. 2. Activities are not provided to the resident's. 3. Inadequate staffing to meet the needs of the resident's in care.
Licensing program Analysts (LPAs) Antonia Alvizar, Mario Leon , Wendy Gibbs and Licensing Program Managers (LPMs) Naira Margaryan and Ulysses Coronel conducted unannounced subsequent complaint visit to the facility. LPAs and LPMs met the Administrator, who was informed that this visit was conducted to continue an investigation of the complaint allegations, previously initiated on 10/19/2022 Initial visit was conducted by LPAs Antonia Alvizar, Mario Leon, Wendy Gibbs and Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Ulysses Coronel. On 10/19/22 approximately at 10:10am, LPAs and LPM inspected the facility which included the bedrooms, bathrooms, common areas, kitchen, dining room and medication room. LPAs Alvizar and Leon conducted interviews between 10-30am and 12:00pm at which time, they spoke with the Administrator and other facility staff present at the time of visit. In addition, LPAs interviewed 8 out of 71 randomly selected residents, LPA also gathered facility records, including but not limited to physician report, pre-placement appraisal, need and service plan, residents and staff roster, food menu, activity calendar, sign in sheets for staff training, schedules for resident shower, incontinent care and house keeping log. Substantiated 1. Facility does not change food menu It was alleged that the facility menu never changes. Residents have no other choices except what is on menu. An interview with facility cook and other kitchen staff revealed that they are following facility menu. Residents interviewed during this investigation did not address any concerns about menu. Prior to this visit on 05/15/2023 at 2:30pm, LPA Alvizar and LPM Margaryan reviewed facility menu gathered at the time of initial visit and noted that Five (05) out of seven (07) days, during breakfast, residents were served ham, egg, and cheese sandwiches and pancake and toast for remaining two (02) days. No second choices where available for residents. Based on interview, observation, and record review there is a sufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED at this time. 2. Activities are not provided to the residents It was alleged that facility residents are not participating to the activities. The staff assigned to provide activities does not have required qualifications. During interview, the Administrator verified that the facility does not have qualified Activity Personnel. At the time of initial visit, no activates were provided to facility residents. Residents interviewed during investigation indicated that they are not attending activities. Based on interviews, and observation there is a sufficient information to support the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED at this time. 3. Inadequate staffing to meet the needs of the resident's in care During the visit on 05/26/23 between 8:30am and 11:00am LPM Margaryan, LPAs Alvizar and Gibson spoke with the three (03) out of Five (05) caregivers and one (01) housekeeper. 1 caregiver was working on the 1st floor, 2 caregivers on the 2nd and 2 on the 3rd floor. Interviews revealed that each caregiver is assisting 8-10 residents requiring extensive assistance, which include incontinent, care, shower assistance helping residents on wheelchair, feeding assistance, light cleaning of the rooms, talking residents to walk. Based on the information provided by the caregivers, each of them is spending at least 3hrs to provide incontinent care (10-15min per person, 3 times per shift), 1.5-2 hours to provide escort assistance to 3-5 residents, (5min per resident, 3 times a day to and from meal service). Caregivers also spend at least 1hr taking 3-5 residents to walk (10 min average- 1-2 times a day), In addition staff is spending 1h to provide feeding assistance about 2-4 residents (15min or more per resident). Each caregiver provides 1-2 shower assistance approximately 20-25 minutes. After assisting residents, with their activities of daily living, all caregivers are doing daily cleaning in the rooms; taking out the trash, dirty diapers, making beds, which takes at list 40-50min. Information received revealed that caregivers also assist residents that may require stand by and/or reminder assistance. However, based on interviews, observation, review needs and services plan of current population and staff schedule, it was concluded that within 8 hour shift staff is only assisting residents requiring extensive care. Overall investigation revealed that additional qualified personnel is needed, to assist overall population with all their activities of daily living. The Administrator indicated that they are planning to hire additional staff to ensure that all residents needs are met. The information and evidence obtained during this investigation, is sufficient enough to support the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED at this time. Per California Code of Regulation, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, following citations were issued and recorded on LIC9099D No immediate health and safety hazard were noted during this visit. Exit interview is conducted, Appeal rights discussed and a copy of report was issued. 4. Resident was left in a soiled diaper for a long period of time. It was alleged that staff doesn’t provide scheduled diaper change to the resident #13 (R13). R13 always smells bad. Direct care staff interviewed during investigation, stated that they change residents’ diaper as needed. The residents interviewed during investigation did not express any concerns regarding their incontinent care provided by the facility. During facility inspection LPAs observed caregivers attending residents to provide incontinent care. The rooms inspected during investigation had no smell of urine. As per LPAs observation all residents appeared to be clean and groomed. Based on interviews, inspection and observation, there is an insufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. 5. Staff humiliating residents. 6. Staff yells at residents. It was alleged that during diaper change staff is humiliating residents and yells at residents. During interview, Administrators stated they received no complains from the residents regarding staff yelling or humiliating them. All staff members interviewed during investigation denied humiliating residents or yelling at them, Residents interviewed during investigation indicate that the staff is very nice, and no one yells at them or humiliates them. LPAs observed residents during interviews and did not notice any signs of distress. Based on interviews and observation there is no sufficient information to support above noted allegations. Hence, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. 7. Residents are with out linens. 8. Staff is not providing laundry services. Concerns were addressed that staff does not provide linens to the residents. There are full of laundry left behind in the closet with urine and residents’ laundries are not completed as it was scheduled. To investigate these allegations, on 10/19/22 LPAs inspected randomly selected residents’ rooms. LPAs checked residents’ beddings and all mattresses were covers with padding and linens. The residents’ closets were inspected, and LPAs did not observe dirty laundry hidden in the closets. Staff revealed that linens are being changed once a week. For incontinent residents they change beddings as frequently as needed. Facility has specific staff assigned to laundry services. They are washing dirty linens daily. Facility has laundry schedule for residents and staff follows the schedule. Residents interviewed during investigation addressed no concerns about changing their beddings and/or laundry services. Prior to this visit, on 05/15/23 at 2:00pm, LPA Alvizar reviewed Facility laundry schedule and noted that all residents have specific day to wash their clothes and to change linens. Residents’ clothes are washed as per schedule and linens are washed every day. Based on inspection, observation, interviews and record review, there is an insufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. 9. Residents are not given showers It was alleged that staff did not provide residents shower assistance according to schedule. To investigate these allegations LPAs spoke with the Administrator and other facility staff. Interviews revealed that each resident is being showered at list once a week. Incontinent residents may receive showers more frequently. The residents interviewed during investigation had no issues and concerns regarding their shower assistance. Prior to this visit, 05/15/2023 at 2:00pm LPA Alvizar reviewed residents shower schedule, which indicated that during morning and afternoon shift, staff provides shower assistance to 8-10 residents daily. Based on interviews observation and record review, there is no sufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. 10. Staff not keeping residents’ information confidential It was alleged that Staff discuss residents’ personal health conditions in front of others. Interview of Administrator and co-administrator revealed that they keep residents information confidential. Med tech and other staff verify the information provided by the Administrators. Residents did not disclose any concerns about breach of confidentiality. Residents interviewed during investigation did not disclosed an concerns about breach of confidentially. While inspecting physical plan LPAs observed that the residents files were in Business Office and locked at all times. Based on interviews and observation there is not enough pertinent information to verify validity of the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. 11. Emergency food storage is unsanitary. 12. The facility is serving expired food to residents. 13. Staff not serving adequate amount of food to the residents. The complaint was alleging, that the food served to the residents on the 3rd floor is expired. No sufficient amount of food is served to the residents. Emergency food storage is not clean. Interview of Administrator and kitchen staff revealed that they don’t keep expired food in the kitchen. Cook always makes the meal from fresh food and they provide enough portions of the food to everyone. Residents may ask for seconds if needed. Emergency food storage is being checked frequently. Residents interviewed during this investigation stated that they like facility food and verified that they may ask for seconds. During initial visit facility food storage and available perishable and nonperishable food were reviewed, and LPAs did not observe any expired food in the food storage and in the refrigerators. At the time 11:32AM of this visit LPAs observed the meal served during lunch hours and the portions of the food served to residents were adequate in quantity and variety. Based on inspection, observation and interviews, there is no sufficient information or evidence to verify the allegations. Therefore, the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. 14. Residents service plan is not updated. 15. Physician’s reports were not reviewed prior to admission. 16. Facility did not notice changes in resident’s condition. It was alleged that the Administrator does not review residents’ physician report prior to admission. Residents need and service plan are not updated to identify changes in residents’ condition. Interviews of Administrator and co-Administrator revealed that prior to residents’ admission, residents’ physician reports are reviewed, pre-placement appraisal was competed. Need, and service plan is updated as frequently as needed. Randomly selected residents Physician reports and need and service plan were reviewed by LPA Alvizar on 05/15/23 at 3:30pm. LPA noted that both documents physican report and needs and services plan were updated at least annually. Health information from the physician reports were documented on preplacement appraisal form. Per LPA review, updated appraisal/need and service plan identify few changes in residents’ conditions. Based on interviews and record review, there is no supporting information to establish preponderance of evidence, Hence the above noted allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. No immediate health and safety hazard where noted during this visit. Exit Interview was conducted. Copy of report was provided to the Administrator.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023 · control 11-AS-20221010123746
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87555(b)(6) · Plan of correction due date: Jun 9, 2023
General Food Service Requirements. (b) The following food service requirements shall apply: (6) In facilities for 16 persons or more, menu shall be written at least 1 week in advance & copies of the menu... shall be dated & kept on file... This requirement is not met as evidenced by. LIcensee did not ensure that the facility menu is meeting food services requirement. 5 out of 7 day resident are served the same food for breakfast . This poses a potential personal rights violation to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023
Plan of correction: The Administrator will provide a new copy of the facility menu, drafted and reviwed by the Licensed dietitian or Nutritionist. POC must be completed by POC due date.
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87219(f) · Plan of correction due date: May 26, 2023
Planned Activities (f) In facilities licensed for 50 persons or more, 1 staff member shall have full-time responsibility to organize, conduct, planned activities... The activities shall be written, planned in advance.. be available to all residents… This requirement is not met as evidenced by. Based on observation & record review Licensee did not provide planned activities as required. This posses potential personal right risk to resident in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023
Plan of correction: Based on observation and records provided by the Administrator, facility hired Activity Director and LPAs observed residents were participating in the activities. Therefore, this citation is cleared during this visit.
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87411(a) · Plan of correction due date: Jun 9, 2023
87411(a) Personnel Requirements-General. Personnel shall at all times be sufficient in numbers and competent to provide the services necessary to meet resident needs. This requirement is not met as evidenced by. Based on interviews, record review Licensee did not insure to have sufficient number of compitenat staff. During 8 hours shift staff is only assisting residents requiring extensive care. This possess potential Health & Safety risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023
Plan of correction: The Administrator will provide written plan of action explaining what steps they are going to do to retain sufficient number of qualified personnel to assist current population. POC must be completed by POC due date.
May 26, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff are not properly trained Medication records are inaccurate
Licensing program Analysts (LPAs) Antonia Alvizar, Mario Leon , Wendy Gibbs and Licensing Program Managers (LPMs) Naira Margaryan and Ulysses Coronel conducted unannounced subsequent complaint visit to the facility. LPAs and LPMs met the Administrator, who was informed that this visit was conducted to continue an investigation of the complaint allegations, previously initiated on 10/19/2022 Initial visit was conducted by LPAs Antonia Alvizar, Mario Leon, Wendy Gibbs and Licensing Program Manager (LPM) Ulysses Coronel. On 10/19/22 approximately at 10:10am, LPAs and LPM inspected the facility which included the bedrooms, bathrooms, common areas, kitchen, dining room and medication room. LPAs Alvizar and Leon conducted interviews between 10-30am and 12:00pm at which time, they spoke with the Administrator and other facility staff present at the time of visit. In addition, LPAs interviewed 8 out of 71 randomly selected residents and gathered facility records, including but not limited to Physician report, pre-placement appraisal, need and service plan, residents and staff roster, food menu, activity calendar, sign in sheets for staff in-service training and etc. Substantiated Staff are not properly trained According to the allegation, new staff are not being fully trained, and Med Techs are not properly trained or certified. On 05/20/23, at 8:45am, LPA Gibbs and Alvizar and LPM Margaryan conducted interviews with staff. Information received revealed they have not received proper training for all activities of daily living, to assist overall facility population. Observed revealed that staff are spoon feeding some residents and have not received any training by a qualified medical professional on the proper way to feed residents. Interviews with Med Techs revealed they did not receive initial medication training by the qualified medical professional. Med Techs watched a manager distribute medications, and then they repeat what they observe, while a manager shadows them. A manager shadowing med tech was not qualified medical professional. At the time of this visit Administrator was unable to provide specific training tools, or other pertinent records test results to verify that the medication training provided to the med techs meet Title 22 Regulations and/or Health and Safety Code. During this visit at 12:00pm all training records were reviewed and the information gathered from the documents were not sufficient enough to verify that staff received all required trainings as per Title 22 regulations. Based on LPAs observation, interviews and record review(s), the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Medication records are inaccurate According to the allegation, the medication record for distribution of medications is not accurate. On 05/26/23, at 10:53am, LPA Gibbs and Alvizar and LPM Margaryan inspected a Medication Room to review the resident medication supply and the Medication Record. Upon review of a randomly selected resident’s medication supply and medication record review, LPA and LPM observed medication record to be inaccurate. The information documented on medication record was not consistent with the number of pills dispensed to the resident. After additional review of the medication record, it was observed that no resident’s medication record was signed off on 05/20/23 for medications distributed. Based on LPAs observations, interviews and record review(s), the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Deficiencies were cited under California code of Regulation, Tittle 22, Division 6 & Chapter number 8, and recorded on LIC9099D. No immediate health and safety hazard were noted during this visit. Exit interview is conducted, Appeal rights discussed and a copy of report was issued. Facility does not have a qualified administrator According to the allegation, the facility does not have a properly trained and qualified Director or Administrator. On 05/26/23, LPA Gibbs and Alvizar and LPM Margaryan, reviewed Administrator documents. Administrator provided Personal Record (LIC501), current CPR (ex 08/26/24), Administrator Certificate (ex 09/10/25), copy of Drivers License, Fingerprint Clearance, Board of Resolutions Letter, and Facility Designation Letter. Unsubstantiated Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023 · control 11-AS-20221010123746
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87411(d) · Plan of correction due date: Jun 20, 2023
87411 Personnel Requirements - General (d) All personnel shall be given on the job training or have related experience in the job assigned to them. This training and/or related experience shall provide knowledge of and skill in the following, as appropriate for the job assigned and as evidenced by safe and effective job performance Based on file review, observation, and interviews the licensee failed to provide on the job training to staff. Investigation revealed staff did not receive job specific trainings which poses a potential health andsafety hazard for residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023
Plan of correction: Administrator agrees to provide staff with job specific trainings. Proof of correction will be submitted to LPA Gibbs at Wendy.Gibbs@dss.ca.gov
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87506(a) · Plan of correction due date: Jun 20, 2023
87506 Resident Record (a) The licensee shall ensure that a separate, complete, and current record is maintained for each resident in the facility or in a central administrative location readily available to facility staff and to licensing agency staff. Based on file review, and observation the licensee failed to maintain a complete and current record for residents in care. During record review LPA observed the MAR for 05/20/23 is incomplete. Which poses a potential health and safety hazard for residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023
Plan of correction: Administrator agreed to conduct on the job training to medication staff and update all residents MAR for 05/20/23. Proof of correction will be submitted to LPA Gibbs at Wendy.Gibbs@dss.ca.gov
May 26, 2023Complaint investigation reportSubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility has insects. Facility has rats.
Licensing program Analysts (LPAs) Antonia Alvizar, Mario Leon, Wendy Gibbs and Licensing Program Managers (LPMs) Naira Margaryan and Ulysses Coronel conducted an unannounced subsequent complaint visit to the facility. LPAs and LPMs met the Administrator, Steve Cho, who was informed that this visit was conducted to continue an investigation of the complaint allegations, previously initiated on 10/19/2022. The investigation consisted of: On10/19/2022 LPA Alvizar requested resident, staff and facility records and interviewed staffs S1-S3. LPAs Don Senaha and Gibbs interviewed witness, staff and residents. On 5/26/2023 LPA Leon and LPM Coronel reviewed facility records, interviewed seven (7) residents and six (6) staff and inspected eight (8) resident bedrooms, the laundry room, emergency food storage and kitchen. Report continues, see LIC9099C. Substantiated The investigation revealed the following: Regarding the allegation: "Facility has rats" On 10/19/22 approximately at 10:30am, LPAs and LPM inspected the facility laundry room. LPA and LPM observed fresh black rodent droppings and rat traps located in the laundry room located in the parking garage of the facility. Based on interview, observation, there is a sufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is Substantiated. Regarding the allegation: “Facility has insects” On 10/19/22 approximately at 10:59am, LPAs Leon and Senaha and LPM Coronel inspected bedroom number 106. LPAs and LPM observed live dark brown insects scurrying to the darkness under the bed nearest the door. LPA Leon observed dead cockroaches which are about 2cm in size near the closet doors. Based on interviews and observations, there is a sufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is Substantiated. An exit interview was conducted and plans of corrections were developed. Title 22 regulations are being cited, see LIC9099D. A copy of this report and appeals rights were provided to Administrator, Steve Cho. The investigation revealed the following: Regarding the allegation "Staff are not responding to the Call button". During today's visit, staff responded at an average of four (4) minutes to six (6) out of eight (8) call buttons tested by LPA Leon and LPM Coronel. Six (6) out of six (6) residents did not have any concern with the allegation listed above. In addition S1-S4 corroborated that staff conduct resident bedroom checks every thirty (30) minutes to two (2) hours. Regarding the allegation "Staff are not responding to the Call button"; based on interviews, inspection and observation, there is insufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation "resident rooms are not cleaned". During today's visit LPA Leon and LPM Coronel inspected eight (8) resident rooms and found that all eight (8) bedrooms were found to be in clean and sanitary condition. Six (6) out of six (6) residents did not have any concern with the allegation listed above. Per staff interviews, housekeeping cleans resident bedrooms on a weekly basis and caregivers clean resident bedrooms while providing care to residents. Regarding the allegation "resident rooms are not cleaned"; based on interviews, inspection and observation, there is insufficient information to verify the allegation listed above. Therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding the allegation "Staff restraining resident's.". During today's visit LPA Leon and LPM Coronel did not observe any form of restraints being applied towards residents in care. Per staff interviews, five (5) out of six (6) staff deny the allegation above. In addition, all six (6) residents denied the allegation above. Regarding the allegation "Staff restraining resident's."; based on interviews, inspection and observation, there is insufficient information to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. There are no deficiencies being sited for the above allegations. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Administrator, Steve Cho.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023 · control 11-AS-20221010123746
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87303(a) · Plan of correction due date: May 26, 2023
Maintenance and Operation. The facility shall be clean, safe, sanitary and in good repair...Maintenance shall include...maintenance services and procedures...of residents, employees and visitors. This requirement was not met at evidenced by: Based on observations and interviews conducted, the licensee failed to ensure that the facility was clean, safe and sanitary on 10/19/2022. LPA observed evidence of rats presence at facility which poses a potential health, safety and personal rights risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023
Plan of correction: During today's visit, LPA and LPM did not observe any evidence of rat presence at the facility and the Administrator provided proof that the facility has contracted with an exterminator company to service the facility on a monthly basis. No proof of correction needed.
From the deficiency page — Deficiency type: Type B · Section cited: CCR 87307(d)(2) · Plan of correction due date: May 26, 2023
Personal Accommodations and Services. The following space and safety provisions shall apply to all facilities: The premises shall be maintained in a state of good repair and shall provide a safe and healthful environment. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on observations and interviews conducted, the licensee failed to provide a safe and healthful environment, on 10/19/2022 LPA and LPM observed evidence of cockroaches in resident bedrooms which poses a potential health, safety and personal rights risk to residents in care.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, May 26, 2023
Plan of correction: During today's visit, LPA and LPM did not observe any evidence of insect presence in resident bedrooms, kitchen and laundry area. The Administrator provided proof that the facility has contracted with an exterminator company to service the facility on a monthly basis. No proof of correction needed.
Jan 30, 2023Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Antonia Alvizar conducted an unannounced Annual required visit with a primary focus on infection control measures. LPA was met by Kim Junghee, Med- Tech. and later Steve, Co-Administrator, Steve Yong Jin Cho arrived and the purpose of today’s visit was explained. The facility is licensed to serve 120 non-ambulatory residents of which 35 may be bedridden (rooms 104 A&B, 106B,228A, 303A, 322A, 325B, 326B and 228A). Hospice waiver for a total of 10 residents. There are currently 71 residents and which one (1) is on hospice. LPA and Co – Administrator Steve toured the physical plant. The tour consisted of the following: First Floor: Common/Reception area, TV/Entertainment Room, courtyard, dining room and kitchen, administrative office, lobby, kitchen, business office, storage room, resident bedrooms, elevator, storage area and bathrooms. Second Floor: activity room, storage rooms, resident bedrooms. Third Floor: dining room, staff lounge, storage rooms, resident bedrooms. There is also an underground parking structure and courtyards and storage area. LPA observed the residents and they appeared to be fine. There are no bodies of water or firearm/ammunition on the premises. Residents rooms were checked. Beds and bedding were in good condition, adequate lighting provided, bathrooms and closets were inspected. LPA observed walls and floors were in good repair. Medicine room is located on the 1st floor, LPA observed medicines were stored and locked and observe residents medicine files. Bathrooms were found to be within Title 22 regulations and were clean and operational along with hand soaps, paper towel dispenser and hand sanitizers. The water temperatures measured at between 115 and120 F. A comfortable temperature is maintained in the facility. Report continues on LIC 809-C LPA observed the facility to be clean and appropriately furnished at the time of visit. Storage areas for personal hygiene, cleaning agents, toxins, and sharps were inaccessible to clients. The kitchen was inspected and there is an enough perishable and non-perishable food available which is stored properly. Fire extinguisher was charged, smoke detectors and Carbon Monoxide were operable. During the visit, LPA observed the facility infection control practices. LPA observed screening protocols for visitors, staff and residents, sanitizing stations (Located in common areas and restrooms). LPA observed staff and residents were wearing face coverings and required postings throughout the facility. LPA observed the facility has a 30-day supply of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Co- Administrator, Steve provided LPA with a copy of facility Certificate of Liability Insurance. During today’s visit there were no deficiencies observed. Exit interview held. A copy of the report was provided to Co-Administrator, Steve Yong Jin Cho.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jan 30, 2023
20223 state visits · 4 documents
Nov 8, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Staff do not ensure the residents are being properly fed while in care Residents are not consuming an appropriate amount of water while in care
On 11/08/2022 at 9:30a.m. Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Jeremiah Randle conducted an unannounced visit to deliver the findings of the complaint with the above allegations. LPA identified himself and discussed the purpose of the visit and the elements of the allegation with Administrator Woohyun Park The investigation consisted of the following: On 11/08/2022 LPA conducted observation of physical plant during breakfast and lunch hour, conducted Staff Interviews (S1-S4), and Resident interviews R1-R7, reviewed facility Files for Administrator and residents R1-R7 , LPA obtained copies of pertinent documents pertaining to the allegations. LPA requested from the facility administrator (Admissions Agreement, House Rules, Physicians Reports /Medical Records, Client Roster, Staff Roster) Needs and Services, Functional Capability Assessment, SIR’s/SOC 341, staff / nursing notes facility menus and other documents relevant to the investigation. Unsubstantiated Investigation Revealed the following. Regarding Allegation: Staff do not ensure the residents are being properly fed while in care The complainant alleges staff do not ensure residents are being properly fed. LPA spoke to administrator S1 who denied the allegation. Administrator added that residents are fed three meals per day along with snacks and food on request. Administrator also stated, “we have 7 residents that require their food to be chopped for ease of swallowing and those residents are assisted with feeding when needed”. LPA has interviewed staff S2 memory care floor manager S2 denied the allegation and confirmed 7 memory care residents receive their food cut into smaller pieces for ease of swallowing and stated “all residents receive three meals per day and offered snacks residents that require assistance with feeding are fed by staff ”. LPA observed breakfast and lunch being served to all residents on three floors, meals were robust, LPA observed residents eating and drinking liquids as well as water, residents affect was pleasant. LPA interviewed S3 facility cook who stated “ I cook three meals per day for all residents and snacks, if resident request additional food sandwiches” LPA interviewed S4 Med Tech who was asked if residents were monitored for their weight S4 stated “residents are weighed monthly during doctors visits and provided to the doctor”. LPA interviewed residents (R1-R7) regarding the allegation of ensure residents are being properly fed. Residents interviewed all denied the allegation (R1-R7) residents are not being properly fed while in care. LPA interviewed staff (S1-S4) regarding allegation staff do not ensure residents are being properly fed all staff denied the allegation. Based on information gathered, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support allegation " Staff do not ensure the residents are being properly fed while in care Regarding Allegation: Residents are not consuming an appropriate amount of water while in care The complainant alleges residents are not consuming an appropriate amount of water while in care. LPA interviewed administrator S1 who denied the allegation. S1 stated “water is available to all residents anytime”. LPA toured the facility with S1, S1 showed LPA water containers at the bedside of residents on floors 1-3. LPA observed water, tea, and juices provided at breakfast and lunch. LPA interviewed residents regarding allegation: residents are not consuming an appropriate amount of water while in care. Residents (R1-R7) denied the allegation. LPA interviewed residents (R1-R7) LPA asked residents if they had any problems getting water to drink at any time, all residents stated “no”. LPA interviewed staff (S1-S4) regarding allegation, residents are not consuming an appropriate amount of water while in care, LPA asked staff S1-S4 if water is readily available to all residents staff S1-S4 all stated “yes”. Based on information gathered, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support allegation " Residents are not consuming an appropriate amount of water while in care. Finding The Department’s investigation consisted of an inspection of the facility, observation, analysis of facility records and interviews conducted and found no evidence to support the allegations: Staff do not ensure the residents are being properly fed while in care. Residents are not consuming an appropriate amount of water while in care 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. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Woohyun Park and a hard copy was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 8, 2022 · control 11-AS-20221031142345
Nov 2, 2022Complaint investigation reportUnsubstantiated
Allegation investigated: Facility not providing transportation for resident's. Facility not meeting resident's dietary needs. Staff doesn't safeguard residents' property.
On 11/02/2022 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Don Senaha initiated a complaint investigation for the allegations listed above. Today’s complaint investigation was conducted with Administrator Steve Yong Jin Cho. The investigation consisted of the following: LPA requested resident roster, staff roster and other service documents. LPA interviewed Residents (R1-R7) and Staff (S1-S6). A plant inspection of the facility was conducted. There were no deficiencies found during the visits. Investigation revealed: Unsubstantiated Allegation: Facility not providing transportation for resident’s. During the course of the investigation, LPA was unable to find any evidence supporting the allegation. LPA conducted interviews with residents (R1-R7). 7 of 7 residents stated there are no issues with transportation for residents. 4 of 7 residents have family members take them to their medical appointments. R1 has staff take them to medical appointments, R2 stated the doctor comes to the facility for medical appointments and R5 stated he takes the bus on his own to medical appointments. Resident (R1-R7) stated they do not go outside for any activities. 6 of 7 residents stated they do activities in-house so transportation is not needed. LPA conducted interviews with staff (S1-S6). Staff (S1-S4) stated family members provide transportation for the residents. Staff (S1, S3, S4) stated the primary care physician is in house and comes to the facility so residents do not need transportation. Staff (S1-S5) stated activities take place in house and according to the activities calendar. LPA obtained copy of the Admissions Agreement for 4 residents which states escort service for a doctor’s appointment or special outing will require a charge and has a minimum of 2 hours with a 1-week advance notice necessary. LPA observed and obtained activities calendar. Based on the interviews conducted, observation and records review, LPA was unable to find evidence to support the allegation. Allegation: Facility not meeting resident’s dietary needs. During the course of the investigation, LPA was unable to find any evidence supporting the allegation. LPA conducted interviews with residents (R1-R7). 7 of 7 residents stated there are no concerns with the facility meeting resident’s dietary needs. R1 and R4 have dietary needs and have no issues with the food being served to meet their dietary needs. Residents (R2, R3, R5-R7) do not have any special diet but have no concerns with the food. 7 of 7 residents stated they do receive three (3) meals a day and snacks. 6 of 7 residents stated the menu does change. LPA conducted interviews with staff (S1-S6). 5 of 6 staff stated the facility does offer special dietary needs options for those residents who require special dietary needs. Staff (S1, S6) stated there is a weekly meeting to discuss the residents who require special dietary needs to ensure those needs are met. 6 of 6 staff stated the residents receive 3 meals per day and snacks. 6 of 6 staff stated the menu does change every day. LPA obtained the weekly menu. LPA obtained a copy of the written notes from the kitchen discussed in the weekly meetings for the special dietary needs of residents. Based on the interviews conducted, observation and records review, LPA was unable to find evidence to support the allegation. Allegation: Staff doesn’t safeguard residents’ property. During the course of the investigation, LPA was unable to find any evidence supporting the allegation. LPA conducted interviews with residents (R1-R7). 7 of 7 residents stated there are no issues with anything stolen from their room. 7 of 7 residents stated they have no concerns with property not being safeguarded by staff. 7 of 7 residents feel safe here. LPA conducted interviews with staff (S1-S6). 5 of 6 staff stated there are no concerns from residents of property being stolen from a resident’s room. S1 stated we have CCTV which the facility uses as a safeguard in common areas should there be any issues. LPA observed the CCTV cameras in the common areas of the facility. LPA obtained copy of the Admissions Agreement for 4 residents which addresses a section regarding “theft and loss policy” to be reviewed prior to resident move-in. Based on the interviews conducted, observation and records review, LPA was unable to find evidence to support the allegation. Based on the interviews conducted, observation and records review, LPA was unable to find evidence to support the allegations. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are Unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Steve Yong Jin Cho and a hard copy was provided.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Nov 2, 2022 · control 11-AS-20221024154456
Mar 24, 2022Facility evaluation reportRoutine visitReport on file
Type of visit: Required - 1 Year
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Martessa Brown conducted an unannounced Annual required visit with a primary focus on infection control measures. LPA was met by Susan Park, Administrator and the purpose of today’s visit was explained. The facility is licensed to serve 120 non-ambulatory residents of which 35 may be bedridden (room 100-116,228, 302-329). Hospice waiver for a total of 10 and approved for delayedegress. There are currently 69 residents and which 4 are on hospices. LPA and staff toured the physical plant along with the administrator. The tour consisted of the following: First Floor: Common/Reception area, TV/Entertainment Room, court yard, dining room and kitchen, administrative office, lobby, kitchen, business office, storage room, resident bedrooms, elevator, storage area and bathrooms. Second Floor: activity room, storage rooms, resident bedrooms. Third Floor: dining room, staff lounge, storage rooms, resident bedrooms. There is also an underground parking structure and courtyards and storage area. LPA observed the residents and they appeared to be fine. There are no bodies of water or firearm/ammunition on the premises. Residents rooms were checked. Beds and bedding were in good condition, adequate lighting provided, bathrooms and closets were inspected. LPA observedWalls and floors were in good repair. Medicine room is located on the 1st fl, LPA observed medicines were stored and locked and observe residents medicine files. Bathrooms were found to be within Title 22 regulations and were clean and operational along with hand soaps, papertowel dispenser and hand sanitizers. The water temperatures measured at between 108 and120 F. A comfortable temperature is maintained in the facility. LPA observed the facility to be clean and appropriately furnished at the time of visit. Storage areas for personal hygiene, cleaning agents, toxins, and sharps were inaccessible to clients. The kitchen was inspected and there is an enough perishable and non-perishable food available which is stored properly. Fire extinguisher was charged, smoke detectors and Carbon Monoxide were operable. LIC 809-C is on the next page. During the visit, LPA observed the facility infection control practices. LPA observed screening protocols for visitors, staff and residents, sanitizing stations ( Located in common areas and restrooms). LPA observed staff and residents were wearing face coverings, an isolation room and required postings throughout the facility. LPA observed the facility has a 30-day supply of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). LPA advised the Administrator to continuously monitor the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) website and Community Care Likening Provider Informational Notices (PIN) for any updates relating to COVID-19 guidance. During today’s visit there were no deficiencies observed. Exit interview held. A copy of the report was provided to Taehee Lee..the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 24, 2022
Mar 24, 2022Facility evaluation reportCase Management - IncidentReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Incident
On 3/24/22 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Martessa Brown conducted a Case Management Visit. LPA met with Susan Sungnam Park and explained the purpose of todays visit. On 03/25/21 the facility faxed a Death Report regarding Resident (R1) passed away on 3/25/21. On 4/5/21 LPA Brown met with the administrator and conducted a health and safety check of residents in care. LPA interviewed the administrator and requested the following documents: R1's entire file, food menu and emergency procedure. On 3/24/22 LPA Brown toured the physical plant with the administrator. LPA Brown obtained a copy of R1’s Death Certificate and the cause of death was Cardiopulomary Arrest and other health issue. This case has been closed and no follow-up is needed. An exit interview was conducted with Taehee Lee, RN.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Mar 24, 2022
20211 state visit · 1 document
Jul 7, 2021Facility evaluation reportCase Management - Health ChecksReport on file
Type of visit: Case Management - Health Checks
Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ulysses Coronel initiated a Case Management – Health Check visit. LPA was met by Sungnam Park, the administrator and the purpose of today’s visit was explained. During the visit, LPA and administrator conducted a tour of the physical plant, which includes the Reception area, TV/Entertainment Room, court yard, dining room, administrative office, lobby, kitchen, storage room, resident R1's bedroom #314, elevator, storage and activity room. LPA interviewed administrator and resident R2. LPA requested for resident R1's and R2's resident records and staff S1's staff records. No deficiencies were observed. An exit interview was conducted and a hard copy of this report was provided to Sungnam Park.the state’s words, verbatim · CDSS document, Jul 7, 2021
71 of 120 beds were occupied at the June 18, 2026 state visit — a count on that day, not an opening.
License holder
Spark Family Operation, LLC, licensed since 2015.
The state’s totals for this licenseSince 2015, as the state’s facility page counts them
- State visits on file
- 34
- Total complaints
- 15
- Substantiated allegations
- 9
- Type A citations
- 1
- Type B citations
- 9
These are the state’s own totals for this license since 2015, 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 | 1 | 0 |
| Type B citations | 9 | 1 |
| Substantiated allegations | 9 | 2 |
| Total complaints | 15 | 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 Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care)
Is Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) licensed?
The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
How many residents is Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) licensed for?
120 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Has Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) been cited?
1 Type A and 9 Type B citations since 2015, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. Those records count 34 state visits over the same years.
Is Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) still open?
This license was on the CDSS roster as of November 11, 2026.
What does Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) cost?
$2,500 a month to start — listed by the home on Seniorly · September 9, 2026.
The home lists this starting rate on Seniorly for assisted living private room, seen September 9, 2026.
Among 16 other homes of a similar licensed size in Los Angeles that publish a starting rate, the middle half runs $3,210 to $6,326 a month, and the middle figure is $4,047 (n = 16 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. What Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver covers in a care home.
Does Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) take Medi-Cal?
On Medi-Cal’s Assisted Living Waiver: this home appears on the DHCS participation list, October 1, 2026. Confirm eligibility and current participation with the program. The waiver pays for care services, not room and board.
Who holds the license?
The license is held by Spark Family Operation, LLC, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Is there a hospital nearby?
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center is 1.2 miles away in a straight line, per the CDPH licensed-hospital list dated September 16, 2026. See licensed care homes near it.
Can Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) keep a resident on hospice?
Hospice care is approved on this license, covering up to 10 residents, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
Sunny Hills Assisted Living (Memory Care) license and inspection record
- Name on the license: “SUNNY HILLS ASSISTED LIVING (MEMORY CARE)”, per the CDSS roster as of May 25, 2025.
- License #197608842. The state lists this license as “Licensed,” per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- Licensed for 120 residents — a large community, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- Licensed to Spark Family Operation, LLC, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- First licensed in 2015, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- 34 state inspection visits since 2015, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026.
- 1 Type A and 9 Type B citations on file since 2015, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. The same records count 34 state visits in that period.
- 15 complaints and 9 substantiated allegations on file since 2015, per CDSS records as of October 26, 2026. One complaint can carry several allegations.
- The most recent state visit on file is August 20, 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 Los Angeles County, most information on file first. Every listed home appears on the same terms.
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$3,150 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $2,450–$4,050On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$5,750 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $4,750–$7,100On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$4,000 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $3,100–$5,050On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Dementia: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$5,750 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $4,700–$7,100On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$3,800 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $2,950–$4,850On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Map
Estimated starting rate
$5,950 a month to start
Covelight estimate · likely $4,900–$7,300On the state record
- Wheelchair: on the state record
- Dementia: on the state record
- Hospice: on the state record
- Bedridden: on the state record
Street maps © Protomaps · © OpenStreetMap
Explore Los Angeles County