Dss Rebuttal To Court Paper 2

June 1, 2012 marked the closure of Rose Garden first anniversary.
At where I am now, I wonder where are all these people, Jeff Hiratsuka, Charles Boatman, Tom Shekta, Will Lightbourne, Audrey Jeung, Gloria Merk, Susanne Roman Clark, Carol Marcroft, Bob Hing, Gary Palmer, Mary Jolls, Mary James, Sandra Munt, Alan Elner, etc.
1
Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by DSS CCL
According to title 22, It stated that if residents were injured, harm or there was a death in my facility and is avoidable, the facility would be fine for 150 dollars a day but no resident was injured, harm and died in Rose Garden. Why do I get 150 dollars a day fine?
11.3 miles or 15 min distance

DSS CCL 851 Traeger Avenue, Suite 360 San Bruno, Ca 94066 to
E. Hillsdale Rose Garden 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd San Mateo, Ca 94403

CCL Inspections 2006 -2009 No problem & No fine
6/30/10 LPA Jeung came to search residents & caregivers of Rose Garden 7/6/10 Boatman set this date to give me my vendor application decision, but he never call 3/18/11 LPA Jeung came to harass on this day, as I have waited. residents & caregivers in Rose Garden, deliver huge accumulative civil penalty to 30000 dollars but this visit was not in CCLs record 3/21/11 10 am Boatman set this date to give me my vendor application decision, but he 4 did call this time to deny my application


6/30/10 LPA Jeung came to search residents & caregivers of Rose Garden 7/6/10 Boatman set this date to give me my vendor application decision, but he never call on this day, as I have waited.
DSS CCL came on these date to Rose Garden
4/24/2009 excellent visit 6/30/2010 came 3p-5p

Search the Rose Garden Care Home
7/6/2010 Boatman scheduled conference But Boatman never call on his schedule
7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

7
4/24/2009
Excellent visit: 4 items only, no fine, no problem and LPA noted OK and recd and cleared. Now CCL brought these charges back to life in court. Why after 3 years? Whatever the problems were must have no urgency, no harm and no consequences, no injury and no complaint from our residents? If it was truly urgent and a health and safety issue, CCL had failed to act within this 3 years. I wanted to know if some government officials fraudulently filed false claim and victimized and abuse my elderly residents in order to revoke my administrator and facility licenses after 6 years in operation.
8
4/24/09 Allegations started on page 3 item 12 12. On or about April 24, 2009, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in that: (1-4) 1.Respondent failed to comply with the limitations of her license in that Client #1, Client #2 and Client #4 were resident at the Facility and were all under the age of sixty (60). This issue had been cited and discusses with Respondent on previous visits of June 21, 2006 and September 29, 2006. Rebuttal: I had applied for exception to licensing back in 2006 to clear that. (LPA never return and never thought that was a problem until 6/30/10 , never heard back from CCL on status, but not significant for health and safety risk reason to return or to have any follow-up, misled Rose Garden to believe that this problem had been resolved. On CCLs part of duty negligence, it was an act on error and omission and these charges were brought back to live after many years when the issue had lost it urgency and inconsequent to the residents as no complaint and no harm result among the residents, but these charges repeatedly appeared again and again for nothing more serious to claim) CCL LPA never provide me, licensee, their confidential name list and along with these allegation. My questions: Who are client 1, client 2 and client 4? I could not address this issue without knowing who were licensing LPA referring to on each visits. Do LPA come to label this client using the same number or different number, each time they come, may be 1-5 years?
9
Was there a complaint among these clients for what reason? (There was no complaint from my clients, our residents were abused and victimized by the DSS and CCL authority whom they had never met in their live time. Those who pull the strings behind the scene.) These clients had been living together everyday for years. They were friends and watch out for each others. I interviewed my clients and they knew that across the street from us was 108 E. Hillsdale blvd, a resident care home for hospice and dementia residents who wandered and was bedbound and incontinent. All clients in 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd, were alert and oriented, ambulatory, no one need to use a wheelchair. They were all compatible in mental, physical and functional status. Residents told me, they would not be comfortable to live with demented wanderer, or hospice clients who were actively dying in house. They were friends without they age limit as set by the book who was 59 or who were 60. My residents enjoyed the care here, they like the caregivers cooking, fresh food, fruits and vegetables their private room and private toilets, privacy in their own suite and the low rent. They would not want to live anywhere else. I had never evicted a resident and residents could move away anytime at will. 10
I wanted to know in this investigation. All the one to two pages letters I got from Gary Palmer and Gloria Merk were no investigation to me. The letter were full of what their staffs said, all hearsay. I, complainant called to talked to Gloria Merk, she never return my call. I call Bob Hing, after I identified myself, he was impulsively asked me what do you want ? in his first sentence and closed with Charles Boatman will call you in two weeks. I waited for 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 6 weeks, 8 weeks, but no one call. I was found guilty without the needed evident. The real criminals were laughing and cheering for success in their harassment, intimidation, suppression, retaliation out there and planning for their glorious and flawless retirement and I was suffering Chapter 7 as they closed my care home, removed my Care Home administrator and facility license. CDPH job was terminated for no fault. They just want to cover the truth in dust and have me rest in peace, silence me forever and wish no one would remember what happen in Rose Garden. I felt very hopeless and helpless. There is no hope in American democracy. Civil right, justice were all dead.
11
years old and had not been updated Who were client 1, 2 and 3? Who did the medical assessment and appraisals? This is a form for admission Lic 602 A (3) The request for a recent medical assessment (Title 22 87458) The form LIC 602A, is known as the Physician's Report. This assessment must be completed and signed by a physician. It is important to reiterate that RCFEs are non-medical facilities. The staff employed by RCFEs are not required to have any medical experience aside from general training requirements (Title 22 87411). If you feel the resident may need medical support, even intermittently, you will want to investigate the following: the medical experience of the caregivers employed by the facility the medical experience and critical thinking skills of the administrator/licensee the availability of an RN or LVN (either one employed by the facility or available for consult) and/or you might want to verify whether a higher level of care might not be more appropriate, in that it may provide more experience, more oversight, and more attention to certain conditions and changes in status. As LPA stated update, please give example, asked concrete, specific questions, I couldnt answer unless I know what was LPAs questions, I couldnt address the issue unless you tell me what was the issue. There was no change and no updated was needed, we would just note a new12 date on re-evaluation, or ongoing until resolved, next to column without rewriting and recopying over and over again on the same problem. I responded to CCL by fax each time.
2. Medical assessments and appraisals for Client #1, Client#2 and Client #3 were over three
How Often Should I Update the Physicians Report and Service Plan? Posted on August 10th, 2010 by Josh Allen, RN Last week we reviewed the California RCFE requirements for updating resident appraisals. This week we turn our attention to the Physicians Report and Service Plan. Physicians Report RCFE Regulation 87458 states that you must obtain and keep on file, documentation of a medical assessment, signed by a physician, made within the last year. It goes on to say that you must obtain an updated medical assessment when required by the department. So for your typical RCFE resident, regulations do not require that you update the physicians report on a regular basis. (Lic 602A is an required doc on admission to RCFE signed and dated by the MD within the last year.) However, if the resident has dementia, Regulation 87705 requires that the physicians report (or medical assessment) be updated at least annually. (my residents are all alert and oriented x4, no dementia) Service Plan Lic 625 The requirements to maintain a service plan type document (although the term service plan is not used) can be found in Regulation 87467. In the regulation it states that you must meet with the resident and appropriate individuals to review and revise the plan when there is a significant change in the residents condition, or once every 12 months, whichever occurs first. However, as we discussed last week regarding appraisals, many providers choose to review service plans more often, such as twice a year or quarterly.
13
Resident record LIC 603 A LIC 625 (as applicable) It is less important if the paper were completed with signatures or all the I were dotted. It is more important to see if the assessment on the form is accurate. I would be more concern if LPA Jeung found inaccuracy on the assessment. It is current as long as the resident condition had no change. Like I said in my defense that if no change in condition, nurses and evaluators customary initial and set new date for re-evaluation instead of re-writing and re-copying the same statement or descriptive assessment because there was no change. Please note that a signature is required per document and the rest would be sufficient with initials. I understood that LPA Jeung may not had work in a Health Care facility as a charge nurse nor as a CDPH evaluator before like me for more than 30 years of service. I had a wider scope of service in my career. I just want to share with Jeung what we did in our practice.
14
Resident record LIC 603 A LIC 625 (as applicable) It is less important if the paper were completed with signatures or all the I were dotted. It is more important to see if the assessment on the form is accurate.
15
dont just look at the paper completeness and count the signatures. Look at the quality of care, accuracy of the resident assessment, interviewed the residents and caregivers without pressure and harassment. Never assume yourself is always rights and care home residents, caregivers and licensee were second class residents Asking for clarification, and explanation politely not interrogation. Dont just count the number of pills left in the container with your non washed hands Look at the process of pill pass Dont look at the waste paper container in each residents room with lid or no lid, because RCFE is a non medical facility. If residents need contact isolation with lided double bag protection or infection control they should be in a skill nursing facility not RCFE. There was no requirement for lided container in all the acute care hospital I worked and surveyed in residents room of skill nursing facility and health center and acute care hospital why RCFE. If you said lided container, please described what LPA saw in the unlided waste basket container in each residents room, such as noted odor and items like body fluid found in the waste paper container. LPA Jeung had done none of these. My facility license and administrator licenses were revoke d and residents got taken out of the care home walking with no harm in Rose Garden.
LPA Audrey Jeung: I couldnt say more
16
LPA Audrey Jeung: I couldnt say more

Look at all the caregivers if they wash their hand after each personal care, wash hand before food processing and after going to the bathroom Learn to write good documentation. Describe what you see and interview the residents or caregivers. Learn to collect substantial evidence. Dont not treat everyone you meet as demented. Dont believed that what you said is title 22 and intentionally misinterpret rules and allow double standard. Wear your badge if you have one, Knock on door, ask for permission to enter, explain what you do, dont make a mess and assumed that the residents and caregivers would pick up your mess from the personal belonging search. If LPA break any lock for force entry to the caregivers room and find nothing illegal. Who is responsible for the repair?
17
Emily Samson was fingerprinted back in Jan 2010 when she worked for Gordon Manor in Redwood City
Emily
18
Emily Samsons documents were complete and no problem for Gordon Manor Care Facility in Redwood City, but why was the same caregiver worked for me, Rose Garden got a 1000 dollars fine for the two hours that LPA Jeung came to my facility in doing her narcotic and firearm search in the residents and caregivers home on 6/30/10 after a long absence and came just 6 days before I was scheduled to talk to Charles Boatman, manager of the CDSS ACS with e-mail Charles.Boatman@dss.ca.gov and LPA Audrey Jeung had e-mail Audrey.Jeung@dss.ca.gov My residents, caregivers and me, the licensee was harassed continuously with 30 thousand dollars fine and with facility and administrator licenses revoked and I got throw out of the CCL office as threatened by regional manager Carol Marcroft in the unannounced deposition meeting when I refused to sign the self incrimination and self confession paper prepared by her and type up by her court reporter in the room.
It was a messy mess.
19
LPA Jeungs 6/30/10 residents search and her following 4 visits were punitive with motive. It was double standard per my caregivers who also work in Gordon Manor, a 70 resident capacity care facility in Redwood City. We shared human resource. How come I got a 1000 fine on the two hours LPA Jeung spent on searching our residents and caregiver and without giving Rose Garden a chance to defend our self. I kept faxing in my plan of correction but Jeung said that she never received. How come I got my facility license revoked and administrator license revoked for sharing the same caregivers but not the other facility, Gordon Manor? Fair or not fair.
20
3.Needs and services plans for client #1 and Client #2, and client #3 were not signed by a Facility representative and/or were not current Corrected with no consequent to residents, Type B deficiency paper work correction only
1. One signature per document, this is a golden rule in nursing, the rest could be initials. Nurses initial hundreds of time everyday on Medication Administration Record at work for every medication we pass and every treatment procedures we performed at work. If we yellowed out the old date. That means discontinued, in our nursing universal language. We would put in new date for next re-evaluation, as soon as the new date was written next to the old yellow out date. This document was updated and current. Even thought I originated on the date of Residents admission date, if problem was on going, unresolved with continue monitoring and nothing had changed. That was all we need to make it current. We didnt need to rewrite and recopy and lost the original documentation when this problem was first listed and the process of resolution and intervention and continuous evaluation.
Please noted that Needs and Service Plan update when applicable in CCLs instruction on LIC 625 completion. 21
4.Personal rights forms for Client #1 and Client #3 were modified after the forms were signed and there was no proof that the new information were acknowledged by either of the clients or their representatives Corrected with no consequent to residents, Type B deficiency , paper work correction only Please noted that one signature was required per document and the rest could be initial. Initial for acknowledged would be sufficient. A Personal rights forms was in every residents chart and there was no violation of residents right in home by the licensee and the caregivers. There was no consequences, no harm or injuries as resulted to the residents. No resident complaint of the care they have in house, but false claim to victimized residents, blind search on alert and intelligent elderly residents personal belonging was a fraudulent crime 22 committed by the CCL.
Accusation started on 4/24/09 visit; there were a total of 3 pages as shown in the following. I would need the confidential name list to fully address the issue for who is Client #1, Client #2 and Client #4, do they have the same number labeling every time LPA come to the facility, in order to avoid any misunderstanding. I had not been provided with a copy of the confidential name list. 6/06 visit was pre-licensing visit as labeled by LPA on form 9/06 visit was a post-licensing visit as labeled by LPA on form I had applied for exception to licensing back in 2006 to clear that. o 4/24/2009 was Client #1, Client #2 and Client #4 o Who were they? I was never given a confidential name list. o No confidential name list, no deficiency esp. when there was no complaint and no issue, no consequences to resident except motive for retaliation by DSS CCL ACS.
23
This copy clearly shown that in LPA Audrey Jeungs own hand writing and in its original blue ink noted on the right side of this document, OK and Recd and dated on these pages. LPA Audrey Jeung noted incomplete on late item for addendum to facilitys plan of operation for staff medications training.
24
o Licensing had not communicated to me that this item was incomplete nor to ask me for what LPA want to have from completion. It is a matter for me to send in the right items. I had purchased a book of training program when I sent my care giver to medication training. I have also design my own program of medication training sent to Charles Boatman.
25
Why was that Department of Social Service and Community Care Licensing Cited me today for all issues that had been resolved back in 2009 when there was no harm, injury, complaint or consequences from the residents. What made Community Care Licensing think that what happened 3 years ago and resolved would be significant to accuse me, licensee now, to make their case convincing? When there was no consequence and harm done to residents? With Audrey Jeungs own noted and date to sign these off, all of mentioned here on 4/24/09 were insignificant and not enough strength to revoke my administrator license and facility license to operate as stated on page 2 and page 8 Cause for disciplinerevoke respondents residential care facilities for the elderly administrator certificate .to revoke the license to operate the Facility in item 19 and 20.
26
The following documents were not what CCL wanted to give me. I got these document in Audrey Jeungs own original hand writing in blue. On 11/19/10 meeting with Clark and Jeung, they threw at me these original documents which landed in front of me on the table. I accidentally picked them up along with my own documents at the end of the meeting. CCL never asked for these documents back. I believed that they could reproduce another set any time.
27
Careless handling of confidential documents
4/24/2009 Line 1 live in caregiver who is now a certified RCFE administrator and has current first aid training My live in caregiver Zeniada was the administrator during the time that my administrator status was up-held by DSS by their own mistake. My caregiver had been the administrator and caregiver to the residents.
28
29
30
31
Rose Garden had a very good visit on 2009, cleared without problem for only 4 items being cited and it was only on record completion. But on Accusation document that I got to revoke my administrator and facility licenses included the finding from 4/24/2009. The finding is on 4/24/2009 must not be important to CCL. CCL had failed to do their job to protect health and safety of the RCFE resident during 1/29/2009 to 5/30/2011. There was no consequence, no one get hurt, harm nor injured from 4/24/2009 CCL finding on record completion. It was CCL who abused our residents in their blind search of everyones personal belonging in the care home. The documents I showed you here was obtained in 11/29/2010 meeting with Clark and Jeung, they threw those original paper in front of me. I accidentally took them home with me with my own documentation for the meeting. It had shown that on 4/24/2009 CCL had already cleared and check off those items that they used to accused me again and again for non-compliance.
32
33
4/24/2009 excellent visit 6/30/2010 came 3p-5p

Search the whole Care Home
7/6/2010 Boatman scheduled conference But Boatman never call on his schedule
7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

34
6/30/2010
6/30/2010 was a very important date because Audrey Jeung came to do blind search to my residents in home. It was exactly 6 days from when I was scheduled to talk to Charles Boatmans decision for my vendor application status. Charles Boatman was the one who set the date and time for this conference with him on July 6, 2010, a Tuesday. (In 2010, 7/6/10 is the date after 7/4/10 observe holiday Monday)
35


Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by DSS CCL
37
6/30/2010 CCL came to do a Narcotic search in Rose Garden

Jeung only stayed form 3p-5p Too busy in searching the residents and care givers belongings Gave 1000 dollars of civil penalty in as short as two hours without giving a chance for facility to defense itself on 6/30/10 visit after a long than a year absence. Failure to interview caregivers and residents Care home was pre-determined to be guilty, I was a blind search Jeung was doing and determined to leave with a fine, citation and penalty.
38
Charles Boatman, Manager of Administrator Certification Service, would talk to me on July 6, 2010 Tuesday. (That week on Monday, July 5 was an observance Holiday for July 4 independent day.)
39
On Wednesday, June 30, 2010, licensing analyst, Ms. Audrey Jeung, came to "raid" my elderly resident care home. Just 6 days prior I would be talking to Mr. Boatman again, Community Care Licensing analyst came and did a complete search on residents' and care givers personal belonging. Residents' rights were violated. The Department of Social Services and Community Care Licensing failed to properly train their analysts in protecting elderly residents privacy, rights, quality life and respect and not to disturb them from peace and enjoyment in their own home. Of course, analyst had exceeded her limit and scope of responsibilities during the search, including acting like a cop and narcotic squat without a warrant from court, unable to come up with evident to incriminate residents and licensee in the search to charge the facility, didn't explain and state purpose of the search to the alert and oriented elderly residents. Community Care licensing work in collaboration with DSS ACS in Sacramento to retaliate on facility owner and in abusing elder care home residents who resided in E. Hillsdale Rose Garden in San Mateo. Elderly resident were victimized in by Mr. Boatman.
40
Accusation on June 30, 2012. (4 items only) 13. On or about June 30, 2010, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in that: 1. Staff persons Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson were present at the Facility and did not have criminal record clearance. (Facility fined for 1000 dollars civil penalty) 2. Unattended and unlabeled medications were observed in paper cups on the dining table and in an unmarked container on a dresser. 3. Household toxins were observed in unlocked cabinets in the garage 4. The smoke detector in room #6 was Chirping indicating low battery level and the hot water temperature tested at 123 degrees in the bathroom of room #6. In LPA Jeungs document missing the unit of measurement in C or F. It only stated 123 degree. Noted degree didnt replace C or F in these legal documents.
41
Accusation on June 30, 2010. 1. Staff persons Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson were present at the Facility and did not have criminal record clearance. My residents like the above relief caregivers. They worked full time in another RCFE and became relief caregivers to my live in caregivers.
42
Back in Jan 2010 Emily Samsons fingerprint was completed and record in file inside CCL office.
43
Snap shot taken on 7/21/12
Emily Samson worked for Gordon Manor in Redwood City, she came to help out to relief our regular live-in caregivers Zenaida. Gordon Manor didnt get cited for using her as their primary caregivers. Why did I get a 1000 dollars fine on 6/30/10 CCLs facility search without given a chance to explain that led to revocation of facility license and administrator license. 44
This problem had been resolved long time ago as listed on the CCL office respondent that Alarcon Evangelina and Samson Emily were associated with East Hillsdale Rose Garden with background check cleared. Why was that listed on court paper: Accusation on June 30, 2010 I was able to get this document from the CCL office and brought this information to Clark and Jeung meeting on 11/19/10.
45
2. Unattended and unlabeled medications were observed in paper cups on the dining table and in an unmarked container on a dresser. Rebuttals: 1. Were those medication in the paper cups on the dining table and in an unmarked container on a dresser were the questions and we would never know the answers now. It was only LPA Jeungs bias observation and bias report. 2. Lack of description: in what form, liquid, pill, powder, capsule, suspension etc 3. What LPA Jeung should have done were to interview the caregivers and residents. All our caregivers and residents were alert and oriented, if you asked anyone of them, he/she would give you the correct answer. Then, LPA could go back and check med record and document to see if that was or was not medication. LPA had done none.
1. 2. What it is, medication or not medication? Who put it there and what was that for? All my residents were in private room and private bath suite and a unmarked container on a dresser wouldnt make it medication without description on what she saw and without acknowledge from caregivers and residents who were all alert and oriented and even staff would need to knock on door to get permission to enter their room. Residents room was not accessible to other residents or anyone without the residents 46 permission.
3. The smoke detector in room #6 was Chirping indicating low battery level and the hot water temperature tested at 123 degrees in the bathroom of room #6. Rebuttals: LPA Jeung had only mention room 6, resident who live their 24 hr/day made no complaint, caregivers made no complaint for chirping sound.
I worked for CDPH as a health care facility evaulator nurse and I did a lot of water temp check such as refrigerators, freezer, tray line food temperature testing, resident bathroom and shower room, medication room temperature for medication storage and medication room refrigeration temperature and temperature log47 checks, Lab specimen temperature etc. in health care facilities. As well as other areas including facility generator inspection and testing for kick off time. Just one word of advice to LPA, your temperature gauge whatever kind that was issued to you by your agency needed to be calibrated before use. In the past, LPA Jeung just came to turn on the facet and stick the temperature gauge needle into the running water and read the number on the dial without the proper calibration. Ask what LPA Jeung did for calibration of the temp gauge.
Did she actually check the water temperature on 6/30/2010 as she said in room 6 and did it correctly. She came in Rose Garden from 3p-5p for a thorough room to room search. She was very press for time and got on every residents and caregivers nerve for what went on without explanation to the residents and the new substituting caregivers. LPA Jeung said that Rm 6 had water temperature 123. That was 3 degree above the max allowable limit. For CHPD, we would immediately declare IJ (immediate jeopardy), our team would not leave the premise until the facility submitted an acceptable plan of correction which may include further investigation with professionals or building engineers to check all the water temp used in the facility, to determine the extend of the problem, identify and fix the problem immediately, relocated the residents from the room with involved temp problem, closed room from any resident access until water temp proven safe and within the acceptable limit. Water temp in resident room. What did LPA Jeung do? She gave me an fine for 1000 dollars and left without coming back 48 until
Could cause potential harm, but resident never complaint and there was no harm noted. LPA Jeung had only mentioned Rm 6 water temp 123F but failed to proceed and check other facets and bathroom and shower room water temperature. LPA Jeung was negligence in doing her job and practice resident abandonment and failure to protect the resident or she provided fraudulent accusation, lied on water temperature for fine from the facility which CCL constantly demanding penalty money set by her, instead of whether the temperature problem was resolved for resident safety. I wanted to know if LPA knew how to calibrate the temperature gauge before she retired from her CCL job. She might not have known and trained to do the correct calibration every time before she started her water temperature check.
49
4. I will not teach Audrey Jeung how to check water temperature accurately with the meter guage
water boils @212 deg F (100c) !!! Ice water stirred is 33 deg F (0c) These are two good constants to measure by.
Don't switch from cold to hot with the meter, they don't like that!
50
4. Household toxins were observed in unlocked cabinets in the garage The garage area was not accessible to resident because residents were not allowed to go to the garage. My residents were alert and oriented. We didnt have demented residents in house. The caregivers were new to the facility. The regular caregiver was out for an errand. New caregiver had a big chunk of keys including the garage cabinet keys, only if she would be allowed to calm down she could remember which key. She was given a big set of keys for all lock in house. She needed to learn them. CDPH never evaluate managers office nor the employees lounge because we were only checking safety and inspecting area only accessible to the residents. Why LPA Jeung came to break in my regular live-in female caregivers personal room and search also her personal belongings? My regular live in caregiver kept her private room and private bathroom locked from other caregivers and residents, when she was not in the facility. This female caregivers worked here for longer than 6 years and with background check clearance associated with Rose Garden. 51
13C and 13D were signed off in LPA Audrey Jeungs own hand writing on her 7/12/10 onsite visit. Why these accusation appeared again and again on the court paper after LPA signed them off. All my residents were alert and oriented x4, ambulatory and self care. They should not be treated as the Alzheimer residents.
52
Mr. Gantt came to me and apologized that he didnt know he had to turn in his as needed diarrhea medication. He said that his doctor gave it to him directly to keep. He had a doctor approval for self medication. This is very common even in nursing home and skill nursing facilities with higher level of care. I could name a few of these facilities in my nursing home survey such as Laguna Honda and Burlingame Nursing Home. (I remembered Mr. Gantt, an Afro American man who had a vas cath on chest for dialysis 3 x /wk in the neighboring dialysis center 2 blocks away from former Rose Garden on E. Camino Real, who was very helpful and kind. He would come to help unload the grocery everything he saw us coming. He had no new clothes but he would pull up his old jacket hood in the drizzling rain to buy his snack in the ma and pa grocery store which is one block away. He loved to sit in the yard to enjoy his sunshine on a sunny day. A very gentle and quiet man. Mr Gantt was very appreciative to what We brought to the residents, he enjoyed very much to have simple pastry or fresh fruit. He made you feel it was a blessing to be able to give than to receive from others ) In fact, some of the medication such as sublingual nitroglycerine, albuterol inhaler etc. These are called the rescue medication. If residents is alert and oriented and with MDs self medication order and resident was trained to self medicate should kept these medication and be with resident any time as needed, not to be locked up or centrally stored. Rose Garden did not operate with night awake staffs like the nursing home for 24 hour care. Remember, RCFE is a non-medical facility.
53
LPA Audrey Jeung was searching all the drawers, dresser and cabinet including live-in caregivers bedroom. LPA Jeung never talked to the residents. Residents were treated by LPA Jeung as if they were demented. We have no demented resident in Rose Garden. My residents were able to go in and out of the facility at will and visited the close by shopping mall and made purchase themselves and spent their own money on their favorite items. One resident had a regular job and a telemarketer and took the nearby Cal train to work everyday.
54
I have repeated many times to Jeung and to Susan Roman Clark that she could not compare oranges with apples because they are very different. Right across the street from me , 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd, was another RCFE, 108 E. Hillsdale Blvd. They served hospice and demented residents. Garage area was only accessible to caregivers only and it was locked off from the residents. That was also what I said about compatibility of residents. It is more important about their physical condition and functional ability, not about if they are 59 or 60 years old for the age cut off. I had applied exception back in 2009. CCL now claimed that they had never received them. I had never evict friends in the facility based on age cut off. They could leave at will anytime.
55
LPA Jeung should describe what she saw and interviewed the staffs and residents which he had done none of this. Unattended, unlabeled, observed in a paper cup on the dining table didnt make what she see as medication (13B). There is no preponderance of evident here because she should have described the subject was in pill form or liquid form and interviewed the staffs and have the staff identify the unlabeled substance for her. She had done none. Poor training and poor practice on LPAs part. She never interviews staffs or the residents in home as she had never done before. She was too subjective and bias. It was medication just because LPA assumed and called it medication. If LPA Jeung would only ask, even the resident would tell her what that was. But now we would never know. LPA failed to follow up and investigate further.
56
Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by CCL

57
However, searching the residents and caregivers living area was nothing but a fact and Susan Roman Clark said that CCL has the right search care home without a court warrant as in a civilian home. It was not on title 22 and it was never disclosed in residential care home for the elderly required orientation meetings that facility was subject to Licensing search as soon as we hang our license for business as I was told by Clark. Was that Clarks own interpretation only? Rose Gardens Residents were shock and felt unbelievable by Licensings action. This is the first time that residents were searched in a facility by CCL. It didnt make the preponderance evident here.
58
6/30/2010
59
60
61

62
13A On the left hand side of Page 3 or 3, in LPA Audrey Jeungs own hand writing in its original blue ink, these two caregivers were identified and listed on Attachment 7. They were all cleared. This is a record sent to facility by Community Care Licensing. This is health screening report of Emily Samson. She was only a as needed caregiver. She had a primary caregiver job that she did regularly. We share human resources with other facility. By processing the transfer she was completely transfer to our facility where she would be called upon once a while as needed. Her documentation and training was complete and she had been shadowing our facility primary caregivers as a mentor and our residents knew and liked her.
63
64
65
Only LPA Jeung would learn to ask and, if caregivers were not nervous, felt threatened and felt harassed, they could do a much better job and of course this were not the regular caregiver here, so they were still learning which is not a crime. They hadnt made any mistakes and residents like them. I was also told by these caregivers that there were double standard to these inspections which was worse than bribery. What happened in Rose Garden was not usually what happened in their primary facility.
66
These were fax cover sheets; I used to fax my information and document to CCL in chronological order. I could show you my file with date on that month for completion.
67
11/29/10
68
69
70
The following documents were from Evangeline Alarcon. Her documents was complete. All this were in CCL office, the clerk in the office knew because Clark said that the clerk took care of those documents and not her.
71
72
73
74
There are a lot of #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 facilities listed on the DSS CCl websites. I wondered how do these facilities get such special privilege? I only have one licensed for six facility and was force to close by DSS for serving and providing good care go our residents? CCL cited me for not spending enough time in the facility. My live in caregiver was the former administrator in the facility when DSS upheld my 75 administrator license for 2 years long. I only have one facility with a max capacity of 6 residents and most of the time, my facility was half full. How come CCL raise no question about Mr. James Wu who managed 4 facilities in different district in San Francisco for a total capacity of 103 incontinent and max care residents. Rose Garden had alert and oriented, continent and ambulatory residents.
There was death in this assisted living facility on 8/3/2010
76

77
Dahud husband and wife were the former owner who sold me this facility with a skyrocketing price. They never work in the facility for patient care. Zenaida was their live in caregiver and my live in care giver. Victoria was another care home caregiver in Redwood City and she only come to relief the regular live in caregiver. Both husband and wife of former owner were listed but they never work in the facility to provide any care.. I had more people to work here then them.
78
My staffs registered in CCL
79
11/19/2011
In meeting with Audrey Jeung and Susan Roman Clark, I showed her what her office sent me as record. Clark told me that the clerk sent this out. Her clerk knew better than her. Was there a communication problem in her office? How come she accused me without doing her own research for the information was stored in the office she managed?
80
7/1/2010
81
6/30/2010
7/1/10
7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

CCL found nothing wrong on 7/1/2010 CCL came back next day and stayed all day.
82
7/1/2010 LPA found nothing wrong in Rose Garden. She was here all day
7/1/2010
On July 1, 2010, Audrey Jeung found nothing wrong. I am at a point that no caregivers would substitute for my primary caregivers , because no caregivers want to be harassed, intimidated and LPA was here every months and weeks and she got on their nerve while doing there job. My primary caregiver saw me and explained what happened to them and the imposed fine by LPA, she said Licensing was hungry with money.
84
LPA Jeung came again on 7/1/2010 but stated that found nothing wrong, so there was only a total of 4 items on 6/30/2010 in the two days combined inspection search.
85
86
On 7/12/2010, there are 7 items on the original document the Administrative Law Judge accusation paper had 10 items Item 5 (4/24/2009), item 7 (6/30/2010), item 10 (6/30/2010) were duplication of old accusation from the previous inspections. Plan of Correction was sent to CCL but LPA Jeung said that she never got them. Accusation including Item 1 and item 2 (2 out of 7) had already signed off by LPA Jeung as resolved findings noted that all 7 items were Type B deficiency. CCL repeatedly put those resolved findings on their accusation paper. Type B=Less serious, meaning a failure to comply does not present an immediate or substantial threat to physical health, mental health or safety of the residents.
87
7/12/2010
CCL hadnt been my nurse friends facility located in San Leandro for longer than 5 years, as of 7/19/2012 As of January 2004, the law was changed, decreasing the required annual on-site evaluations of RCFEs to a minimum of once every five years. Pre and post licensing inspections, as well as those in response to complaints, continued as before (Official California Legislative Information, 2005). It was high unusual for CCL LPA to come for a house search blindly and come every 1 to 2 weeks as in Rose Garden for all Type B deficiencies.
88
7/12/2010
All 4 items on this page were Type B Less important deficiency by definition. Type B=Less serious, meaning a failure to comply does not present an immediate or substantial threat to physical health, mental health or safety of the residents. Noted on this visit every items have the statement civil penalty fine and payment repeated.
89
7/12/2010
All 3 items on this page were Type B Less important deficiency by definition. Type B=Less serious, meaning a failure to comply does not present an immediate or substantial threat to physical health, mental health or safety of the residents. residents. Noted on this visit every items have the statement civil penalty fine and payment repeated.
90
14. On or about 7/12/2010, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in that: 1. A rear screen door was broken. (not accessible to residents, resolved & check off) 2. A sheet on the bed in bed room #6 had a visible hole in it. (how big, resolved) 3. Unidentified meats were wrapped in thin plastic wrap and stored in the freezer. ( what was inside, was it meat, was it freezer burn) 4. The licensee, as Administrator, does not devote and adequate amount of time at the Facility properly manage and oversee Facility operations. (my caregiver was a administrator, I was in house when you are not here) 5. Respondent failed to comply with the limitations of her license in that Client #1,Client#2, and Client #5 were residing in the Facility and were all under the age of sixty(60). (4/24/10 Duplicated charge) 6. Staff persons at the Facility were unfamiliar with the location of client records and were unable to produce them to licensing staff. 7. There was no staff training documentation for unfingerprinted staff persons Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson and no documentation of continuing 4 hours of training for staff person Zenaida Macatangay. (6/30/10 Duplicated charge) 8. There was no proof of valid first aid training for staff persons Emily Punzalan Samson, licensee/administrator Sylvia so Fee Lee, and Zenaida Macatangay. (All of the had complete training) 9. There were no resident records available for Client #5 and Client #6 10.The medical assessment for Client #1 and Client #3 were now over four years old and had not been updated and the appraisals for Client #1 and Client #3 were 91 incomplete. (6/30/10 Duplicated Charge)
14. On or about 7/12/2010, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in that: 1. A rear screen door was broken. (not accessible to residents, fixed on same day, checked off by LPA Jeung in her own hand writing as resolved) 2. A sheet on the bed in bed room #6 had a visible hole in it. (how big? It was checked off as resolved by LPA Jeung in her own hand writing) 3. Unidentified meats were wrapped in thin plastic wrap and stored in the freezer. ( what was inside the thin plastic bag, facility didnt use wrap but bag, how thin and was it meat inside? LPA Jeung stated her observation but no interview and no documentation. LPA should state what she was looking for, was what she looked for there and could charged on harm and consequence to the residents) 4. The licensee, as Administrator, does not devote and adequate amount of time at the Facility properly manage and oversee Facility operations. (my caregiver was a administrator, I was in house when LPA not here not here, that was during her work hour) 5. Respondent failed to comply with the limitations of her license in that Client #1,Client#2, and Client #5 were residing in the Facility and were all under the age of sixty(60). (4/24/2009 Duplicated charge client 1, client 2, client 4, no confidential name list on both inspection, no problem found on 6/30/2010, 7/1/2010)
92
6.
Staff persons at the Facility were unfamiliar with the location of client records and were unable to produce them to licensing staff. (Caregivers were new and was not given a chance to look for the records nor to ask someone who knew. As LPA stated the were new and unfamiliar where were the facility record, but they were on the premise) 7. There was no staff training documentation for unfingerprinted staff persons Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson and no documentation of continuing 4 hours of training for staff person Zenaida Macatangay. (6/30/10 Duplicated charge) 8. There was no proof of valid first aid training for staff persons Emily Punzalan Samson, licensee/administrator Sylvia so Fee Lee, and Zenaida Macatangay. (All of the had complete training) 9. There were no resident records available for Client #5 and Client #6 ( Client #5 and #6 were new to the facility, LPA couldnt find them didnt mean that they didnt exist. The caregivers were new relief and unfamiliar with the location of client record and all facility records on item 6.) 10. The medical assessment for Client #1 and Client #3 were now over four years old and had not been updated and the appraisals for Client #1 and Client #3 were incomplete. (6/30/10 Duplicated Charge, as I had explained before for 6/30/10 visit, medical assessment had not change therefore appraisal were the same, new future date for re-evaluation and initial would be sufficient, no need to recopy all sheet with the same content of assessment. If there was no change, then no update would be needed. LPA should put more emphasis on accuracy of the assessment. It didnt matter appraisal and assessment got recopy and signed or not. Please also check my rebuttal on 6/30/2010 for the same reasoning) 93
7/12/10
1. A rear screen door was broken. (not accessible to residents) Fixed on the same day and was checked off as resolved with LPA Jeungs own hand writing, but it remained on the accusation paper for this Type B deficiency.
94
7/12/10
1. The sheet was changed and removed. It was checked off as resolved by LPA Jeung in her own hand writing, but it remained on the accusation paper for this Type B deficiency.
95
1.A rear screen door was broken. The rear screen was not accessible to residents, resolved & checked off by LPA Jeung in her own hand writing. 2. A sheet on the bed in bed room #6 had a visible hole in it. The rear screen was not accessible to residents, resolved & checked off by LPA Jeung in her own hand writing.
96
7/12/10
2. A sheet on the bed in bed room #6 had a visible hole in it. (how big?) It was changed and corrected immediately. LPA Jeung in her own hand writing checkedo ff this item with no complaint from resident, and no consequence. She had to strip the bed spread, blanket on top of the sheet to find that visible hole, but she hadnt give us the measurement of how big. It is not unusual to see defect on sheet from their own laundry in CDPH nursing home inspection. We must give a detail description of what inspector saw with interview of the facility staffs to acknowledge the findings and recorded their explanation and responses. . If it didnt affect the resident or lead to any adverse outcome, a correction was all they need to do such as facility needed to show that the have adequate supply of sheets and linen in stock, purchase invoice etc. No negative outcome to residents, no deficiency. No description of what she charge on the record, no deficiency. We needed measurement or a hole was just a hole. We wanted size of the hole and did it cause any harm to the resident. LPA Jeung had committed resident right violation and abuse in striping and search their own property without residents own consent. Resident room search without permission from the resident was a citation on elder abuse. The resident Mr. Hood in room 6 was a 91 year old male who was alert and oriented and ambulatory.
97
o Mr. Hood in Room 6 was taken to Hillcrest Manor but the owner John. He was crying to take his personal belonging with him. He wanted to call the police for abduction. Finally, he got into Johns car without his belonging. I packed all 8 boxes of his personal items to Hillcrest Manor in Redwood City to Mr. Hood. Linda the caregiver called owner John in the phone and he ordered me not to unload the boxes, take them back, Mr. Hoods belonging were trash. I saw a broken (unhinged on top) door in Room 5 Mr. Hoods room). All our doors in Rose Garden in used by the residents were secured and safe and never unhinged and still being used like this in the residents room. After the house search on 6/30/2010, Mr. Hood asked me Are they (CCL Licensing) going to close Rose Garden down? I told him that They (CCL) come for me. You have done nothing wrong. o Mr. Hoods was a US veteran in WWII and he told us that he was a former Marathon runner. He was physical sound and witty. Except the wrinkle and loose skin on his face, no one could tell that he was a 91 years old man. He went to Senior Focus Adult Day Health in Burlingame on the weekdays. He proudly sang for every audience in the Rose Garden without music to show his talent, a soldier's march song in French that he remember since childhood. He had no TV in his private room, he cared little about the news or what went on in the world but very devoted in his religious magazines he subscribed. He lived on $100 stipends every month. He loved assorted cookies and afternoon snap. His favorite spot was the Green Rocking sofa by the window under the Sun. He was on Synthroid for hypothyroidism and paranoid depression. His hands were always cold and he always wrapped himself in heavy jacket in house during the day. He had a good female friend resident in Rose Garden.(They watched out for each other and help to remind each other like a family) Bette , was in her 50s, a former local Bank teller, very quiet and polite, enjoyed reading novel and walked to the nearby Hillsdale shopping mall to window shop during the day. o In Mr. Hoods better day, Bette and Mr. Hood would go out together to take a short walk in the park which was less than 2 block away. They were very good friends. Since the close of Rose Garden, they had been separated to different Residential Care Facilities in different locale.
98
There are a lot of #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 facilities listed on the DSS CCl websites. I wondered how do these facilities get such special privilege? I only have one licensed for six facility and was force to close by DSS for serving and providing good care go our residents? CCL cited me for not spending enough time in the facility. My live in caregiver was the former administrator in the facility when DSS upheld my 99 administrator license for 2 years long. I only have one facility with a max capacity of 6 residents and most of the time, my facility was half full. How come CCL raise no question about Mr. James Wu who managed 4 facilities in different district in San Francisco for a total capacity of 103 incontinent and max care residents. Rose Garden had alert and oriented, continent and ambulatory residents.
Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22m by CCL
100
Dahud husband and wife were the former owner who sold me this facility with a skyrocketing price. They never work in the facility for patient care. Zenaida was their live in caregiver and my live in care giver. Victoria was another care home caregiver in Redwood City and she only come to relief the regular live in caregiver. Both husband and wife of former owner were listed but they never work in the facility to provide any care.. I had more people to work here then them.
101
My staffs registered in CCL for background clearance
102
The following 9 pages were part of the plan of correction I submitted to CCL by fax to LPA Audrey Jeungs attention, but she said she never got them.
103
104
Page 1
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
3. Unidentified meats were wrapped in thin plastic wrap and stored in the freezer. ( what was inside? Was it meat? Was there freezer burn?) LPA Jeung failed to describe freezer burn. She called it unidentified meat in a thin plastic wrap and in the freeze. By wrapping it in plastic bag and stored in a freezer didnt make the deficiency, if she couldnt identify what was in the wrap and she didnt see any freezer burn in her description. To know whether they were meat or not. It was very simple and easy which LPA had never done before that was to interview the caregivers in house. Open up the thin plastic wraps to see what was inside, the commercial wrapping will identified it. If it was meat describe the meats condition, was there any freezer burn on it. LPA Jeung only stated Unidentified meats were wrapped in thin plastic wrap and stored in the freezer,
113
1. We would never know if they were meats 2. LPA said they were unidentified but yet she decided to call them meats. 3. If LPA Jeung never mention the word nor to give any description of freezer burn in her documentation for what she was looking for. LPA Jeung wanted ziplock bag, the facility went to buy ziplock bag to use for freezer stored food. We did change to ziplock bag regardless of the reason behind the accusation. LPA Jeung had never describe any freezer burn on that unidentified items wrapped in thin plastic wrap and stored in the freezer. She could easily find out by taking the item out of the thin plastic wrap, and interviewing the staffs. (what were these? Who put them in the freezer? What were they for? How did your facility stored meat products in the freezer? Etc.) What she said on item 3 didnt make it a deficiency revoke my administrator license and facility license, comparing to residents complain of the poor quality of meat served, noro virus out break, food processing without hand washing with harm consequence. Food storing and temperature, emergency water and food supplies in any power outage and natural disaster etc would be more important to check for disaster preparedness. These had potential and significant to our residents in house. We never use plastic wrap in the facility, we only use practice bags. Thin plastic bags ( how thin) in freezer didnt was not a deficiency itself. What was LPA Jeung looking for, if she was look for freezer burn then she needed to identify that it was meat inside and described freezer burn on this meat and adverse consequences resulted from ingestion of this freezer burn meat. If there was no freezer burn, there would be no deficiency, no potential for harm to the residents. All caregivers who worked in Rose Garden were caregivers from another Residential care facility and they told me that it was double standard. Their facility didnt use these zip lock bags before and they were never cited for it. Rose Garden residents were victimized by DSS CCL and ACS without knowing any reason, Why this happened to them. Law enforcer who broke the law should be punished for abuse of power.
114
4. The licensee, as Administrator, does not devote and adequate amount of time at the Facility properly manage and oversee Facility operations. (my caregiver was a administrator, I was in house when you are not here. It was a business that I owed and running. I didnt have to cook and do the laundry to be an administrator. ) LPA Jeung should come in more often herself to say that. She was in Rose Garden less than 10 times for the 6 years that we open our business. The first 2 times was prelicensing visit and 4/24/09, then 5 times as listed about starting 6/30/10 to 9/16/10 to, in 2 and a half month to the last time she delivered a 30 thousand dollars fine on 3/18/11 without any inspection because Charles Boatman would talk to me on 3/21/11 for the vendor application status after Alan Elner approved them. Rose Garden closed on 6/1/11. Home vacated. Received court paper for administrator and facility license revocation. I continued to complain even not response received.
115
4. The licensee, as Administrator, does not devote and adequate amount of time at the Facility properly manage and oversee Facility operations. By saying that LPA jeung should list the negative outcome of management and operations to support her findings. The world was not flat just because LPA said that it was. We are in the age and time of evident base practice, not hearsay. There was no negative outcome on residents care. My live in caregiver was a administrator when DSS up held my Administrator license renewal for 2 years. I was working very hard to pay bills and to pay my caregivers. By saying not adequate amount of time was not enough to support her charge. Was there any problem with the facility management and operations? If there were, LPA should list the negative outcome.
116
CCL cited me for not spending enough time in the facility. I only have 1-6 resident capacity facility. My caregiver was a administrator when I was not given a administrator certificate when I had done all my certificate renewal correctly for 2 years. We have no problems and no complaint from the residents and family and most important of all. All of my residents are self care ambulatory and continent, alert and oriented and self care. Look at attachment 1,this James Wu is a administrator all facilities located in different districts with capacity of 42+14+14+33=103 total capacity of residents. (James Wu, 1 Administrator to 103 max assistant residents in different district in San Francisco) Other facilities had this obvious problems listed on your own website, what is going on. Such as, Four Mira Mesa care facilities owned by Ramirez called Ambassador Senior Retreat I, II, III, & IV, she was involved with LPA bribery case investigated 2010-2011 that led to 3 LPA terminated from DSS with out charge. I did not go for vacation and went for travel. I was working very hard to pay bills and harassed by CCL always calling me up at work.
rebuttal
118
5. Respondent failed to comply with the limitations of her license in that Client #1, Client#2, and Client #5 were residing in the Facility and were all under the age of sixty(60). (4/24/10 Duplicated charge)
One of them was Bette, the former local Bank teller. She was Mr. Hoods best friend. Bette asked me that I hope you are not going to sell the Home. I like it here. after the 6/30/10 search in Rose Garden. She complained to me about her personal belonging and every drawer in her room was search for no explanation from LPA Jeung for what Jeung was looking for. Bette felt insulted with the messy and unannounced search. Mr. Hood and Bette were best friends in the Rose Garden. There was no other place they wanted to be. Each got a private room and private bath in Rose Garden for minimum payment and they liked their care here. They were compatible not looking at the paper on their age. Bette was closed to 60 and Mr. Hood was 91. They were happy here. Their functional, and mental ability were compatible . I advised that LPA look at the residents, interviewed them, honored their preference for decision making, not just look at the documentation on age cut off. Look at the most essential thing on their individual preference as they could make their own choice not licensing. There was no consequence in house for this age arrangement. I applied for exception but CCL kept saying that they didnt get. CCL had no authority to say where these alert and oriented resident could live or could not live. I would honor my residents decision if they ever decided to move to another facility, but I never evict them if they decided to stay. 119
4/24/09 and 7/12/2010 Duplicated allegation Allegations started on page 3 item 12 12. On or about April 24, 2009, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in that: (1-4) 1.Respondent failed to comply with the limitations of her license in that Client #1, Client #2 and Client #4 were resident at the Facility and were all under the age of sixty (60). This issue had been cited and discusses with Respondent on previous visits of June 21, 2006 and September 29, 2006. Rebuttal: I had applied for exception to licensing back in 2006 to clear that. (LPA never return and never thought that was a problem until 6/30/10 , never heard back from CCL on status, but not significant for health and safety risk reason to return or to have any follow-up, misled Rose Garden to believe that this problem had been resolved. On CCLs part of duty negligence, it was an act on error and omission and these charges were brought back to live after many years when the issue had lost it urgency and inconsequent to the residents as no complaint and no harm result among the residents, but these charges repeatedly appeared again and again for nothing more serious to claim) CCL LPA never provide me, licensee, their confidential name list and along with these allegation. My questions: Who are client 1, client 2 and client 4? I could not address this issue without knowing who were licensing LPA referring to on each visits. Do LPA come to label this client using the same number or different number, each time they come, may be 1-5 years?
120
Was there a complaint among these clients for what reason? (There was no complaint from my clients, our residents were abused and victimized by the DSS and CCL authority whom they had never met in their live time. Those who pull the strings behind the scene.) These clients had been living together everyday for years. They were friends and watch out for each others. I interviewed my clients and they knew that across the street from us was 108 E. Hillsdale blvd, a resident care home for hospice and dementia residents who wandered and was bedbound and incontinent. All clients in 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd, were alert and oriented, ambulatory, no one need to use a wheelchair. They were all compatible in mental, physical and functional status. Residents told me, they would not be comfortable to live with demented wanderer, or hospice clients who were actively dying in house. They were friends without they age limit as set by the book who was 59 or who were 60. My residents enjoyed the care here, they like the caregivers cooking, fresh food, fruits and vegetables their private room and private toilets, privacy in their own suite and the low rent. They would not want to live anywhere else. I had never evicted a resident and residents could move away anytime at will. 121
1.Respondent failed to comply with the limitations of her license in that Client #1, Client #2 and Client #4 were resident at the Facility and were all under the age of sixty (60). 4/24/2009 was Client #1, Client #2 and Client #4 5. Respondent failed to comply with the limitations of her license in that Client #1,Client#2, and Client #5 were residing in the Facility and were all under the age of sixty(60). 7/12/2010 was Client #1, Client #2 and Client #5 Who were these residents? CCL never gave me, the licensee, a the confidential name list. I thought that I have taken care of the problem by applying for the exception. CCL never communicate with me the status, they just didnt come to the facility anymore until the next they show up. I had no clue that was that CCL gesture of approval for no action. There had not been any problem with this age mix, no complaint and no consequence why do they come to charge me after all these years. CCL brought these out on as needed bases and including old and resolved issued. CCL knew but by not taken any action was that a gesture of acceptance or agreement during that time frame and why did I 122 get charge now. (Again there was no consequences to residents)
6. Staff persons at the Facility were unfamiliar with the location of client records and were unable to produce them to licensing staff. (Caregivers were new and was not given a chance to look for the records nor to ask someone who knew. As LPA stated the were new and unfamiliar where were the facility record, but they were on the premise) Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson were new relief workers for regular live in caregiver Zenaida Macatangay. As LPA said unfamiliar with the location of the record (all inclusive). These two workers wouldnt have to do anything with the facility record except their resident care duties, cooking, cleaning, laundry etc. Our live in regular care Zenaida would have no problem finding the records for LPA Jeung. Unfamiliar with the location didnt mean non-exist. The records were here.
123
7. There was no staff training documentation for unfingerprinted staff persons Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson and no documentation of continuing 4 hours of training for staff person Zenaida Macatangay. (6/30/10 Duplicated charge) Plan of correction and evidences were sent by fax to LPA Jeung. These caregivers were also working in another facilities. Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson were new relief workers for regular live in caregiver Zenaida Macatangay. As LPA said unfamiliar with the location of the record (all inclusive). These two workers wouldnt have to do anything with the facility record except their resident care duties, cooking, cleaning, laundry etc. Our live in regular care Zenaida would have no problem finding the records for LPA Jeung. Unfamiliar with the location didnt mean non-exist. The records were here. Their records were complete. I faxed and CCL never received. Here is one.
124
125
8. There was no proof of valid first aid training for staff persons Emily Punzalan Samson, licensee/administrator Sylvia so Fee Lee, and Zenaida Macatangay. (All of them had complete training) Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson. Here is one from Evangelina Alarcon Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson were new relief workers for regular live in caregiver Zenaida Macatangay. As LPA said unfamiliar with the location of the record (all inclusive). These two workers wouldnt have to do anything with the facility record except their resident care duties, cooking, cleaning, laundry etc. Our live in regular care Zenaida would have no problem finding the records for LPA Jeung. Unfamiliar with the location didnt mean non-exist. The records were here. Their records were complete. I faxed and CCL never received. Here is one.
126
127
9. There were no resident records available for Client #5 and Client #6 Evangelina Alarcon and Emily Punzalan Samson were new relief workers for regular live in caregiver Zenaida Macatangay. As LPA said unfamiliar with the location of the record (all inclusive). These two workers wouldnt have to do anything with the facility record except their resident care duties, cooking, cleaning, laundry etc. Our live in regular care Zenaida would have no problem finding the records for LPA Jeung. Unfamiliar with the location didnt mean non-exist. The records were here in the facility. Their records were complete. I faxed and CCL never received.
128
Staff #4 I didnt have the confidential name list, who was Staff #4 She had first aid card but issue by me so LPA Jeung said that invalid for conflict of interest. I am a qualified American Red Cross Instructor and American Red Cross had not put any restriction on whom I could teach Red Cross to. If she was talking about conflict of interest please note the following. I didnt need to have first aid certification because I am a licensed RN for 30 plus years. It was waived since I applied for facility and administrator licenses. LPA Jeung has a lapse in her memory.
129
6/17-18/10 P1 I found Charles Boatman and the

department chiefs in the following activities.
Day 1 June 17, 2010 Topics Dealing with Problem Employee Substance Abuse in the Workplace Medical Marijuana Legal Issues Legal Pitfalls & Practical Suggestions California Labor Laws Review Peter Flanderka, Attorney Long-Term Care Update Medi-Cal Waiver Programs Update Expansion of Assisted Living Waiver Pilot Project Mark Mimnaugh, Acting Chief, Monitoring & Oversight Section California Department of Health Care Services Update on Olmstead Act Implementation Progress of Olmstead Advisory Committee Ruth Gay, Director, Public Policy and Advocacy Alzheimers Association Member, Olmstead Advisory Committee
130
6/18/10 P2 I found Charles Boatman and

California Community Care Licensing Mission & Updates For RCFEs, ARFs, and Group Homes Gary Levenson-Palmer, Chief, Technical Assistance & Policy Branch Dorette Pierce, Chief, Caregiver Background Check Bureau Cathy Claiborne,Manager, Caregiver Background Check Bureau Charles Boatman , Manager, Administrator Certification Section Mary Jolls, Senior Care Program California Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division RCFE
the department chiefs in the following activities
Course Approval: Applied for 16 Hours (8 Hours Each Day) ARF Course Approval: Applied for 16 Hours (8 Hours Each Day) Group Home Course Approval: Applied for 16 Hours (8 Hours Each Day)
131
6/18/10 P2 I found Charles Boatman and the

Day 2 June 18, 2010- Topics 2010 Legislation Update 2010 CCL Implementation Plans-RCFE/ARF/GH Joan Regeleski, CRCAC Consultant Workers Compensation Insurance Update & Claims Procedures Gail Drzesiecki, Assistant Claims Manager Jan Smith, Claims Liaison State Compensation Insurance Fund California Community Care Licensing Mission & Updates For RCFEs, ARFs, and Group Homes Gary LevensonPalmer, Chief, Technical Assistance & Policy Branch Dorette Pierce, Chief, Caregiver Background Check Bureau Cathy Claiborne,Manager, Caregiver Background Check Bureau Charles Boatman , Manager, Administrator Certification Section Mary Jolls, Senior Care Program California Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division RCFE Course Approval: Applied for 16 Hours (8 Hours Each Day) ARF Course Approval: Applied for 16 Hours (8 Hours Each Day) Group Home Course Approval: Applied for 16 Hours (8 Hours Each Day) NHAP Approval: Applied for 16 Hours (8 Hours Each Day) Provider Approved by the California Board of Registered Nursing, Provider Number 10821, for 16 Hours. Hotel Reservations:
132
6/18/10 P3 I found Charles Boatman and the

Atlantis Resort Hotel (800) 723-6500 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (800) 723-6500 end_of_the_skype_highlighting Room Rates: Nights of June 16 & 17 = $59.00 Single/Double Night of June 18 = $119.00 Single/Double All reservations are subject to local occupancy tax along with $10.00 resort fee + tax per night. Identify yourself as attending the Community Residential Care Association of California Conference Hotel rooms blocked until 5 PM on Monday, May 24, 2010. Reservations received after 5 PM on or after Monday, May 24, 2010 will be booked upon space availability and prevailing rack rate. Hotel Check-In Time: 3:00 PM Conference Registration: Early Bird Discount CRCAC Members On or Before May 17, 2010 = $185.00 Non-Members On or Before May 17, 2010 = $220.00 CRCAC Members After May 17, 2010 = $215.00 Non-Members After May 17, 2010 = $270.00 For a registration form, please contact the CRCAC office at crcac@comcast.net or call us at (916) 455-0723 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (916) 455-0723 end_of_the_skype_highlighting.
133
I completed one out when I worked For CHDP. Did Charles Boatman, Gary Palmer, Mary Jolls and other department chiefs complete one for their 6/18/10 activities?
134
10. The medical assessment for Client #1 and Client #3 were now over four years old and had not been updated and the appraisals for Client #1 and Client #3 were incomplete. (6/30/10 Duplicated Charge) It was explained on 6/30/2010 plan of correction
1. One signature per document, this is a golden rule in nursing, the rest could be initials. Nurses initial hundreds of time everyday on Medication Administration Record at work for every medication we pass and every treatment procedures we performed at work. If we yellowed out the old date. That means discontinued, in our nursing universal language. We would put in new date for next re-evaluation, as soon as the new date was written next to the old yellow out date. This document was updated and current. Even thought I originated on the date of Residents admission date, if problem was on going, unresolved with continue monitoring and nothing had changed. That was all we need to make it current. We didnt need to rewrite and recopy and lost the original documentation when this problem was first listed and the process of resolution and intervention and continuous evaluation.
Please noted that Needs and Service Plan update when applicable in CCLs instruction on LIC 625 completion.
135
Also on 4/24/2009 item #2 Needs and services plans for client #1 and Client #2, and client #3 were not signed by a Facility representative and/or were not current Corrected with no consequent to residents, Type B deficiency paper work correction only as stated on LPA Jeungs own hand writing.
136
o LPA should look at the quality of life and quality of care not the paper work completion. That was why all these paper work completion were Type B deficiency that would not be sufficient to revoke my administrator and facility licenses and a civil penalty of thirty thousand dollars. o If new relief caregivers were unfamiliar with the record location, shouldnt she wait for the regular live in caregiver Zenaida to return for further assistant or call licensee for help. I faxed those already afterward to CCL office.
137
138
LPA Audrey Jeung from San Bruno office was in Rose Garden on 8/3/2010 for an inspection without any consequence. LPA was here to harass the residents and intimidate the caregivers again and gave out 2 deficiencies to Rose Garden for : 1. No fingerprint clearance for Emily, our new relief worker (a duplication charge and she did have clearance as a regular worker in Gordon Manor fingerprint was done on Jan 2010) 2. received medications were not recorded on the medication log.
139
8/3/2010
Whenever I called CCL in San Bruno, I kept hearing the message that CCL in San Bruno would only answer phone calls from 10 am to 3 pm (4 hours a day during the weekdays). CCLs phone and fax were always busy. The nature of their job must not be in any urgency. CCL was in Rose Garden, capacity of 6 facility, to harass, intimidate and abuse my residents and caregivers in order to suppress and retaliate on me, the licensed, every 1 or 2 weeks. On 11/19/2010 meeting with Susanne Roman Clark, she complained to me that they were very busy with 4 counties to inspect as she name the counties to me one by one, San Francisco, San Mateo, Alameda and Contra Costa counties. On this date 8/3/2010, LPA Jeung was in Rose Garden and charged Rose Garden for 1. No fingerprint clearance for Emily and 2. received medications were not recorded on the medication log. The packaged medication was wrapped in parcel form just came from Veteran Administration Medical Center nd was in safe keeping of the caregivers in house, the arrived parcel was not even opened to be used. The two claims with no consequences
140
6/30/2010 3p-5p
Gave 1000 dollars fine in 2 hours
7/1/2010 all day

But found nothing wrong
7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010
LPA Jeung was in Rose Garden 4 times in less than 35 days. I remembered Charles Boatman told me that I was his special project. Charles Boatman and Audrey Jeung 141 worked for the dss department with first name.last name @dss.ca.gov
15. On or about August 3, 2010, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing 1. Staff person Emily Punzalan Samson was the only caregiver present at the Facility and still did not have the required criminal record clearance association with the Facility. $1000 immediate civil penalty assessed. ( 6/30/10 duplicated charge, I faxed in their record but CCL said that they did not get them. See below faxed documents). 2. Drug prescriptions for Client #3 and Client #5 were not recorded on the Centrally Stored Medications Record form, as required. We just received these medication sent by the VAMC (veteran administration medical center). The package was not even open.
142
8/3/2010
143
144
145
This was what I had been sending to CCL all the time.
146
2.
Our VA residents got their medication via mail in. We just got the mailed medication package and it was not even open. Our staff would log the medication in as soon as we open the package.
147
148
6/30/2010 7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010
149
8/9/10
16. On or about August 9, 2010, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in those deficiencies cited on June 30, 2010 during an annual evaluation and on July 12, 2010 during a case management visit, were still not corrected as of this date and no proof of corrections had been timely submitted to licensing. Civil penalties assessed at $50/day/deficiency-maximum of $ 150/day, at fourteen (14) days, for a total of $2100 I was corrected as noted by LPA Audrey Jeungs own handwriting.
150
151
152
153
154
6/30/2010 7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010
155
9/16/10
17. On or about September 16, 2010, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in those deficiencies cited on June 30, 2010 during an annual evaluation and on July 12, 2010 during a case management visit, were still not corrected as of this date and no proof of corrections had been timely submitted to licensing. Civil penalties assessed at $50/day/deficiency-maximum of $150/day, at thirty-eight (38) days, for a total of $5700 Additionally, Respondent was found to be in violation of licensing laws and regulations in that staff person Emily Punzalan Samsons criminal record clearance was still not associated to the Facility. A Criminal Record Clearance Transfer Request was received on August 6, 2010, but it was not signed by licensee/administrator, as required I was corrected as noted by LPA Audrey Jeungs own handwriting.
156
157
This problem had been resolved long time ago as listed on the CCL office respondent that Alarcon Evangelina and Samson Emily were associated with East Hillsdale Rose Garden with background check cleared. Why was that listed on court paper: Accusation on June 30, 2010 I was able to get this document from the CCL office and brought this information to Clark and Jeung meeting on 11/19/10.
158
o All plan of correction were sent to CCL. o I found it impossible to communicate with CCL. I wrote to the governor for help, but I only get harsher and punitive repercussion. o To silence Rose Garden licensee, me became a intradepartmental collaborative effort and for self preservation. o I got respond letter as requested by State dept that I had not been getting in the past by being ignored. These so called investigations by Gary Palmer and Gloria Merk were not acceptable investigation but just paraphrasing what the perpetrator told them without evidents. o I finally got a court paper for revocation of my administrator and facility licenses by Will Lightbourne and Jeff Hiratshuta in mail and they continued to play ignore.
159
10/25/10 P1
I wrote to the Governor and Gary L. Palmer responded with a letter.
160
10/25/10 P2
I wrote to the Governor and Gary L. Palmer responded with a letter.
161
Topic 3: List Causes related to difficult behaviors List Goals of behavior management These are just a few examples. Look over the course and check the other topics for areas to add a few examples where they are needed. Quick bullet points should suffice.
Course #2: Safe Medication Practice 2 hours 8:15-9:00 hour: Working Definition (List the definition, need more information) 5 phases of med use system (what are those phases? Need more information)
The 9:00 10:00 hour is great, no changes needed. Thanks Sylvia - dont hesitate to contact me with any questions. Alan Elner, Vendor Analyst Administrator Certification Section 916-657-3392 ph,. 916-654-1808 fax.
1 Attached file| 54KB rcfe correction.docx Download

162
RE: follow up on application submitted

Hide Details
FROM:sylvia lee TO:Charles@DSSBoatman Message flagged Friday, March 11, 2011 12:08 PM Mr. Elner said that the package is now on your desk. I want to follow up with that and make sure that no one drop the ball. Sylvia Lee
163
3/11/2011
These happened over a period of time since 2007 and until today. I complained and complained. Complaint letter ended up on the perpetrators desk. I went to see them. The problem escalated and got worse in suppression and retaliation.
164
March 21, 2011, is another big setback to me. My heart dropped to the bottom of the ocean. I am completely exhausted and depress and completely paralyzed due to major depression as caused by conspiracy, retaliation and suppression from DSS, CCL, L and C. Can a policeman and the judge abuse their power given by the public and pay by the public to search and arrest their protected public for the sole purpose of retaliation (speaking up), suppression (shutting me up), conspiracy (abusing their power). Do these public employees from the State get punish for wrong doing? Retaliation do get stop by someone. On March 21, 2011, at 10:30 am, this is the date and time he set for calling me because I called him on last Wed,
165
Thursday, and Friday, because I wanted to know the result of his decision, and does that really fit into my assumption that licensing came down every time under his direct, including the house search of my alert and oriented elderly residents and care givers personal belonging in their own rooms. On March 21, 2011, Boatman called me and said that your application was denied, I couldnt give it to you. I asked Boatman for the reason and he said that because I was not in compliance with my care home. I told Boatman that I was expecting him to say that to confirmed my suspicion that Community Care Licensing came to my care home and gave us a 22640 dollars plus fine on my care home on March 18, 2011 which is 7-10 days I would talk to Boatman again but he keep putting it off on Monday. I wanted Boatman told me in his own word and I wanted to hear from him. On March 21, 2011, Boatman called me and said that your application was denied, I couldnt give vendor approval to you. I asked Boatman for the reason and he said that because I was not in compliance with my care home.
166
I told Boatman that I was expecting him to say that to confirmed my suspicion that Community Care Licensing came to my care home and gave us a 30 thousand dollars plus fine on my care home on March 18, 2011 which is 7-10 days I would talk to Boatman again but he keep putting it off on Monday. I wanted Boatman told me in his own word and I wanted to hear from him. I asked him to send me his denial letter as soon as possible so that I can get closure and move on with life and decision what to do from here. As of today April 8, 2011, I have not received any letter from Boatman. I have check my school site every day for his mail. Last time, he sent me a denial letter in Dec 2010. I went to the post office for the registered mail and it was someone else denial letter he sent me. A serious breach of confidentiality. Last June 30 licensing came to raid my care home to do a narcotic search to my elderly residents was 7 days that Boatman said that he would talked to me again. The whole scenario got repeated. Prior to this Licensing had not been in my facility for 2 years and we had no fine for the past year. In the November 2010 meeting with Susanne -Roman Clark, She complained that CCL had 4 counties to inspect. As you could see what happen 167 here. Last 3 ways conversation with
Charles Boatman and retired Tom Shekta who misleaded me to believe that he was representing Californian Dept of Social Service, He hung up and threatened me that I would be called to the ALJ Administrative Law Judge which had never happened. I called Boatman to follow up with the ALJ meeting because nothing happened for a very long time. Then, Boatman suggested that he will have new analyst, Alan Elner, who seems to be very kind to read my application. I was so naive to believe that I could still get the vendor status after struggling for all these years with DSS CCL. In our last 3 conversation with Tom Shekta and Boatman, after suddenly without announcing what they were doing, Shekta & Boatman disconnected the phone conversation for their private discussion without me, to make me an offer to refund my application fee and dont ever apply again. I refused. I told them. It is not the money that I have already paid and cashed by the dept long time ago. It was about the amount of work I put in, the sleepless hours, hard work, the hope I put in
168
this work. I want to be read fairly. Then the result of that conversation was to take to the ALJ which never happened as I follow up. Boatman told me Alan Elner will read my application. I worked with Elner for a long time because he wanted the slides rearranged, he wanted this and he wanted that. I do everything for what he wants. He finally told me that it is on Boatman desk now for approval. Audrey Jeung from San Bruno licensing came and gave me a huge fine. And I called Boatman for his decision. He deferred the decision until Monday March 21, 2011 at 10:30am and told me. When I heard what he said, I was choked with my tear but I have to hear it from him to confirm. All of them, Audrey Jeung. Charles boatman, Susanne roman Clark and Alan Elner all have their name@dss.ca.gov as their office e-mail address. I called Elner, he said that he got nothing to do with Boatman decision, he was only one to decide not him, Elner call Boatman Charles. He said that he couldnt understand me because I use too many pronounce. I have never talked to him again
169
Community Care Licensing came to inspect my care home and gave me a fine for taking care of elderly for 30 thousand dollars and a fine of 150 dollars a day. According to title 22, It stated that if residents were injured, harm or there was a death in my facility and is avoidable, the facility would be fine for 150 dollars a day. There was no one fell in my facility, no one got hurt and no one ever die during the whole time I open for business in E. Hillsdale Rose Garden. My facility record on the community care licensing record was I will fax you ombudsman report to substantiate that. It is a fact. My facility had never been put on probation since the 6 years that we are in operation and
170
click to this link for Licensing facility search form under their web page www.ccld.ca.gov
Snap shot taken on 3/29/11. As compare to this facility in South San Francisco, they have a probationary status
171
click to this link for Licensing facility search form under their web page www.ccld.ca.gov
Snap shot taken on 3/29/11. As compare to this facility in South San Francisco, they have a probationary status
172
Money could buy you out of probationary status as if nothing had happened
o If you pay the amount that CCL licensing demanded from your facility, you could buy them to make your record clean and free from whatever were being cite. CCL was not doing it for the health and safety of the residents. CCL were using your business and held the residents in home as hostages, so that they could demand for ransom. CCL did not have follow up on all the deficiency and citation but kept asking for civil penalty was the solution to all the findings. It was no different as receiving bribery except that LPA could do it over the table instead of under the table.
173
o Winston Manor in South San Francisco was clean again after being put on probationary status for whatever happened with CCL with no disclosure to the public just like the dead in Sequoias Assisted living with capacity of 400 residents. o And now Rose Garden was off the CCL website for facility and administrator license revocation for no resident fell, injured, nor harm.
174
June 2011 to now

Rose Garden had been removed and sued by CDSS. This Winton is clean as if nothing had happened https://secure.dss.cahwnet.gov/ccld/securenet/ccld_ search/ccld_search.aspx
Differ LPA in DSS and HFEN in CDPH

This is the different in LPA (for RCFE) and nurse evaluator (Health Care Facility). Nurses look into the important of handwashing in breaking the chain of microbes transmission . The emphasis to LPA Audrey Jeung would be to get all lided waste paper container and it is not use and required in Health Care Facilities Does Audrey Jeung had all lided waste paper container in her house? She could, it is her individual preference. This is not in title 22. It is more important to wash hand when doing resident care. This was my resident's home. They have no complaint with their open waste paper basket in their rooms, then what is bothering LPA Jeung. If resident required a lided container for infectious control. They should be sent to the hospitals for isolation and care. There were no harm and no consequence for our residents whether they use a lid or unlided
176
waste paper containers. Remember, my residents are all continence. If she cited Rose Garden for not using a un lided container, she had not stated any reason. Rose Garden did not do any personal care because our residents are all independent and RCFE is a non-medical facility. I couldnt see how 108 E. Hillsdale across were taking care of dementia and hospice residents with life expectancy of less than 6 months to live. They were constantly sending patient to hospital through 911. LPA Jeung didn't wash her hand to count all the residents' pills in the care home. I told them many time. The number of pill left didn't tell you the problem, it is the process of passing the medication which is important.
177
LPA did very poor charting, as example: If LPA Jeung cited me for using open container, she should described what she saw such as what was in the container that would require to have a lid, what kind of items was put in there. noted the odor etc. They had to state potential of harm or actual harm. She had done none of this. I changed all the containers in the house to make her happy like all the care home operators but this was not the primary motive she came. She came for a special purposes.
178
I asked Bob Hing, the current dept chief a replacement to Tom Shekta, said that they have to search my care home to give me a citation
179
I told Susanne Roman Clark again and again that it was the process in medication passing was important. In 5/10/2011 meeting with Susan Roman Clark and Carol Marcroft, I refused to sign the paper they prepared by the court reporter. Marcroft ordered me to leave. I couldn't sit inside because she said this is a private property. She gave me 5 minutes to get up from my chair, kept looking at her wrist watch. Susan Roman Clark suggested getting the high way patrol to get me out and Carol Marcroft threatened with the building manager.
180
It was more important to pass the med to right patient, right medication, right time, right frequency, right documentation and right purpose. What is counting of the pill justified? It is more important on how they pass the pills. It is not the Analyst's job to count the sheets on bed. It is not a analyst's job to look under every bed for rodents. It is not necessary to search all resident's personal belongings for what? illegal drugs or firearms? These analysts have abuse their power to search care home without a warrant in my place of business. Analyst abuse care home resident that they suppose to protect. California Department of social service has shown deficiencies in training their analysts by violating the patient rights, dignity and respects. We do resident abuse investigation, quality of care and quality of life and more. Analysts from Department of social service and Community Care licensing harassed my residents and intimidate them by blindly searching residents' personal belongings and care givers personal belonging and pray to find something that they have accused the licensee for. If the licensee was being target for their search as an act of conspiracy and retaliation for fine and accusation from the department of social service. Please come search the licensee's home, not 181 my elderly residents. As a HFEN we never do what they did to the care homes. I want analyst Audrey Jeung from San Bruno office know that we have patient's right in self administration of medication. My residents are alert and oriented x4 and they have MD certified that they can self administer med. They knew that this is their right. Licensing fine me for not knowing the residents' rights. This analysts don't monitor side effects of medication and why
these analysts come to mess around with residents' medication every time they come to the resident home to count all the residents pills and disturb their living. These analysts are not nurses and they are not pharmacist, so what is Counting the number of pills in the bottle mean in their job. DSS CCL analyst practice outside their job responsibility. Analyst Audrey Jeung's routine work day was to go around the care home and count all the pills and count the layer of each bed sheets, look under each bed and search each residents and care givers drawers and my care giver locked her room and her lock in her entrance door was forcefully broken and we have to fix it after Audrey Jeung left and no one single apologies but a fine on everyday and she gave my care giver a fine of 5700 dollars last time. I have never gotten 5700 dollars of rent from my residents per month. What do these analysts know about hand washing between counting and cross contamination, moisture from her hands do to the pills. Need not to say, we treatment by the department of social service and community care licensing was a conspiracy of retaliation. I have complaint but no one care, no one responded. I have just
182
received one e-mail from Mr. Boatman. He said that I will be getting his denial letter in the next several days. In his 2 sentences short email. He started with " As you have requested." which was wrongfully stated. I never requested of him anything and even if I have requested anything at all. He had not responded to me all those months. He was responding to Gary Palmers' request, the division chief. Gary Palmer was the first on the list to present on June 16, 2010 in Reno Nevada along with Charles Boatman ACS manager for California Elderly Residential Care Home Association whom had charged attendee in that conference for more than 200 dollars a seat. We shall not assume the letter will get to me until it actually in my hands. As of now, I have not gotten any denial letter from him. Gary Palmer said that "within the next two weeks I will get a response from Charles Boatman on Oct 25,2010 until now. Charles Boatman's 2 sentences long e-mail and mistakenly stated from the beginning that " As you have requested". Here, was Charles Boatman doing something with exception that is to respond to applicants? What is the policy and procedures in State of California to their applicants? What is his office standard of practice to program applicant? No notification, no acknowledgement on receiving of
183
to the post office to get Charles Boatmans registered letter of denial. It was not a for me. I was someone else denial letter to Fresno who applied to be an administrator but got their denial because the applicant failed the fingerprinting background check. His office made a serious confidentiality breach. What is the purpose of sending the letter in registered mail. I talked to him he told me that he would resend my denial letter. I have too many of this incompetent, and unpleasant encounter with them. During our phone conference, Shekta or Boatman disconnected the phone suddenly for their 2 ways discussion. I attempted to call back but only get a message from Shekta saying that he is no longer with the dept . If anyone had any questions call new chief Bob Hane. Shekta failed to disclose to me that he no longer work and represent the dept. Therefore, whatever he said in our phone conference is not valid and couldnt be held accountable for. Of course, Shekta wouldnt have to do anything because he is no longer with the dept. He wanted to hang up and said that he couldnt talk to me anymore and he will give this to the administrative law judge. For him, not an employee in the dept, he didnt have to do anything, like submit this case to the administrative law judge. He was not seriously prepared to talk to me. He told me that my application was not complete, I missed the nine elements. I asked him Do you have my 184
application and paper right in front of you? He said no I asked him Have you seem and gone over my paper work and have you looked at my powerpoint? He said that I dont have to do it. Then, the nine elements he talked about were what Charles Boatman told him. I told him that it was there but he didnt have my application and document in front of him now and he had never looked at my application. The last conference phone call I had with Sandra Munt and Charles Boatman. Charles Boatman hadnt looked at my application and document. He told me what Sandra Munt told him. He was there using his authority to support his worker blindly. The nine elements were therein 2006, 2009 and 2010. My curriculum was developed and expanded from the nine topics, he called the nine elements. All 9 of them were addressed in the powerpoint instruction material. I will scan and show you the 9 elements. I knew this curriculum more than anyone in his dept. Tom Shekta said that I dont have experience in GH and ARF. I told him did you get my e-mail CV of speakers who have experience in all RCFE, GH and ARF. I know now why he didnt know because he had not been reading his e-mail or mail because he was ready to leave his job. Tom Shekta and Charles Boatman abruptly disconnected the phone for their 2 ways discussion and called me back in about 10 minutes. Tom offered to give me refund on GH and ARF and
185
he would give RCFE to another analyst because Sandra Munt no longer work for the dept. I said no. I told him, if I said yes, I would be barred from reapply again as long as Boatman will be in office or due to conspiracy. It was not the money that they have already cashed and collected 12 months ago. I applied in Dec 2009 again after my failed attempt in 2006. That led to me being sued by the state and they held my administrator status for as long as 2 years and my residential care home was raided by analyst from San Bruno, all those people with e-mail @dss.ca.gov by retaliation and conspiracy. I have everything to lose if I dont peruse this to the end because I have not given up what I wanted to do starting in 2006. It was much harder to put all the curriculum together edit them and type them in different format and develop the instructional material and break down the class activity by every hour. It is much harder and the curriculum was done by accumulation of many sleepless hours, weekdays and weekends. I have 3 ICTP for GH, ARF and RCFE and I have submitted 70 curriculums in CETP in GH, ARF, and RCFE. I have color coded them for their reading. It was never addressed and I am seriously concerned of their whereabout, if these were not reviewed. My work was well done and complete. I am willing to make revision as needed, but this meeting is not about that. Tom Shekta and Charles Boatman couldnt do what I have done. From our last phone conference with Sandra Munt and Charles Boatman, 186 Charles Boatman
that to confirmed my suspicion that Community Care Licensing came to my care home and gave us a 22640 dollars plus fine on my care home on March 18, 2011 which is 7-10 days I would talk to Boatman again but he keep putting it off on Monday. I wanted Boatman told me in his own word and I wanted to hear from him. On March 21, 2011, Boatman called me and said that your application was denied, I couldnt give vendor approval to you. I asked Boatman for the reason and he said that because I was not in compliance with my care home.
187
I told Boatman that I was expecting him to say that to confirmed my suspicion that Community Care Licensing came to my care home and gave us a 30 thousand dollars plus fine on my care home on March 18, 2011 which is 7-10 days I would talk to Boatman again but he keep putting it off on Monday. I wanted Boatman told me in his own word and I wanted to hear from him. I asked him to send me his denial letter as soon as possible so that I can get closure and move on with life and decision what to do from here. As of today April 8, 2011, I have not received any letter from Boatman. I have check my school site every day for his mail. Last time, he sent me a
188
going through a transfer trauma. My employee would have to find another place to live and lost her job. Right now I am completely depressed, exhausted and paralyzed by being punished b y these people. What is justice and what is America democracy. What I have done to the elderly? I treated them like my family member for the last 6 years and what the dept DSS CCL L&C had done to the care home, esp me they targeted on for retaliation. In 2007, I applied for vendor to teach administrator class to DSS certification and licensing dept. Denied by the department, fee confiscated and I was sued by the State of California and administrator status put on hold indefinitely because of the lawsuit. No one remembered that there was a hold on my administrator status due to
189
suggested that he will have new analyst, Alan Elner, who seems to be very kind to read my application. I was so naive to believe that I could still get the vendor status after struggling for all these years with DSS CCL. In our last 3 conversation with Tom Shekta and Boatman, after suddenly without announcing what they were doing, we got reconnected after Tom and Charles discussed without me, to make me an offer to refund my application fee and dont ever apply again. I refused. I told them. It is not the money that I have already paid and cashed by the dept long time ago. It was about the amount of work I put in, the sleepless hours, hard work, the hope I put in this work. I want to be read fairly. Then the result of that conversation was to take to the ALJ which never happened as I follow up. Boatman told me Alan Elner will read my application. I worked with Elner for a long time because he wanted the slides rearranged, he wanted this and he wanted that. I do everything for what he wants. He finally
190
told me that it is on Boatman desk now for approval. Audrey Jeung from San Bruno licensing came and gave me a huge fine. And I called Boatman for his decision. He deferred the decision until Monday March 21, 2011 at 10:30am and told me his decision. When I heard what he said, I was choked with my tear but I have to hear it from him to confirm. All of them, Audrey Jeung. Charles boatman, Susanne roman Clark and Alan Elner all have their name@dss.ca.gov as their office e-mail address. I called Elner, he said that he got nothing to do with Boatman decision, he was only one to decide not him, Elner call Boatman Charles. He said that he couldnt understand me because I use too many pronounce. He was playing good guy, Elner to get me to revised on my application and give me false hope, and Boatman was doing the bad guy to get rid of me.
191
Everyone in my care home was gone, the place was deserted and vacant. I got a letter from Community Care Licensing demanding money $26400 plus dollars. Caregiver told me that Mr. Hood wanted to bring his things with him to the new care home but the new care home licensee who came to pick him up refused and said the if he bring everything with him in his car, he would get a flat tire. Mr. Hood was crying. He wanted his belonging which the new owner considered "trash". Mr. Hood wanted to call the police. This new care home licensee called John took Mr. Hood in his car and left. These were Mr. Hood's belonging in his private room and private bath for 6 years and he only pay SSI rate (less than 1000 a month). He had total autonomy and self decide on keeping his personal things.
192
I was connected with Mr. Hood over the phone. He asked for his personal monthly stipend in a form of check 100 dollars a month that he left on his drawer. He was taken out of my building without opportunity to retreat his check in the nightstand drawer. I told him I would bring him his pictures on top of the night stand, his checks, his hearing aid and battery, electric razor (a Christmas gift from my brother), his watches, partial denture, his religion books, magazines, newly ordered books and mail order pants and clothes that had not been even taken out of the plastic wrap along with 8 boxes of mails and magazines. I loaded up 8 boxes of things in my car's trunk and car seat and took them to Mr. Hood. Including his latest mails.
193
As soon as I arrived, the caregiver called John the new owner and they talked over the phone and they refused to let me unload Mr. Hood's things because they were "trash", the boxes. Linda handed me the phone and told me to talk to the owner of the facility. Owner rejected them and told me to take it back and not to unload. Mr. Hood came out and said the these were his belonging and said everything were important. Mr. Hood said that he wanted them. I took some of the things to his room (room 5) and saw that he had a broken door in his room. The upper hinge was screw-less. The door was merely hanging with the lower hinge. I didn't know how many times Mr. Hood open and close this door everyday. John had already hang up the phone and he, the administrator was not on site. It would be considered as a potential for harm and injury to Mr. Hood, an elderly 91 years old ambulatory resident. Because it is in his room and being use frequently, it needed to be fix immediately or be use again. There was no broken door nor warning sign for not to use the
194
door. I called Nikki Manske, ombudsman in San Mateo to take a look at the broken door. She has not call me back but she had been very responsive in the past. I loaded all the boxes in the parking lot and let Mr. Hood know that all his belonging were here with him. I wouldn't take all inside for him. There were 3 workers in house for this 14 beds care home. 2 females and one male. They had taken 2 of my residents in. I suggested that Mr. Hood to screen and take his belonging inside. Mr. Hood said that He was an old man, He could not do it himself. I told him to get help from the male caregiver. Linda, the female care giver, told me that this male caregiver had recent surgery with hernia couldn't help. I am less than 5 feet but I could load and unload all boxes for him. I believe that anyone could do it slowly and a little bite at a time, if they allow him. My facility never had any broken door and these personal belonging was Mr. Hood's personal things over 6 years.
195
I was mistreated and fine for reason on retaliation. I have never received a denial letter since I talk to Charles Boatman last on March 21, 2011 at 10:30am. As I follow up again months later, He said in one line e-mail " near future". It is almost 4 months now. I facility had been closed but still didn't get a letter. I kept getting fines from Community Care Licensing, even after closing. I personally sent an e-mail to Audrey Jeung that I was closing in June
196
I got a letter from Gloria Merk, I have send her a letter before but she never responded, so I dont even know if she got my letter or not but this time she responded because it was the senator who wrote to her. She call both dept ASC and CCL but of course she got her unilateral story. She had never talked to me and ask me but sent me a letter spelling out what these people said, to her was 100 % true in cover up. Merk was doing this for self preservation. What she had written down was all hearsay from the perpetrators and abusers in one page thru 6 years ordeals and she called this investigation. What she heard from her staffs were all grain of truth? Cast no doubt. She never responded to me the complainants.
197
Please also click to see my other pages for content I submitted to the Department and I have 70 CEU. Analyst don't have time to read them and I am not in compliance along with a 30 thousand dollars fine could take care of me. I have also included supporting documents that accompanied these letter. I decided to put it in the public and let the public decide, let you be the judge.
198
I am reaching out to seek help from anyone who care to stop these suppressions from government agency call Department of Social Service Community Care Licensing, Licensing and Certification. These happened over a period of time since 2006 and until today. I complained and complained. Complaint letter ended up on the perpetrators desk. I went to see them. The problem escalated and got worse. Today, ,March 21, 2011, is another big setback to me. My heart dropped . I am completely exhausted and depress and completely paralyzed due to major depression as caused by conspiracy, retaliation and suppression from DSS, CCL, L and C. Can a policeman and the judge abuse their power given by the public and pay by the public to search and arrest their protected public for the sole purpose of retaliation (speaking up), suppression (shutting me up), conspiracy (abusing their power). Do these public employees from the State get punish for wrong doing? Will this government retaliation stop by someone?
199
What is the delay and I had not been getting a response before this message. I told him on March 21, 2011 at 10:30 AM to send me my denial letter ASAP which had never happened. I kept checking my mails every day but nothing came for over a month. I followed up by sending Boatman e-mail and this was his response eventually. What did he mean "near future". It could be 10 years, 20 years, 30 years or before either of us retired and died. I wonder if Boatman is also retiring in his "near future." It didn't tell me anything at all. Why was Boatman try to hid and reluctant to send this denial letter. I had already told him that I would appeal. No denial letter, no appeal. I was ignore for a very long time after I submitted my application without knowing when my
200
application would be review. At this point they are holding on to the denial letter no chance for me to appeal. I was always the one to ask. I wanted to know what is next. I have hanged on since 2006 and who had 1/2 a decade to waste when these perpetrators retired one by one. If my course had been approved by Alan Elner the new analyst, my 2006 submitted package should be approved by the old analyst, Sandra Munt and Mary James, if they had read it. If CCL & C from San Bruno found a deficient practice that was endangering residents in my home, they house, Shouldn't they do follow up. If there was any urgency to their accusation at all, shouldn't they removed the residents to ensure their safety, instead of constantly send me registered, demanding for money and on top of that, they sent me a license for license renewal for they ever increasing annual licensing fee. To me the sole purpose for licensing to come give me a fine. L & C had never return since they put on the 30 thousand dollars fine and left. It was very inconsistent with the severity of their fine imposed on my facility. Do they know what they were doing except for the purpose of conspiracy and retaliation. Incompetent state employees retaliate and abuse of power their 201 to elderly
On March 21, 2011, Boatman called me and said that your application was denied, I couldnt give vendor approval to you. I asked Boatman for the reason and he said that because I was not in compliance with my care home. I told Boatman that I was expecting him to say that to confirmed my suspicion that Community Care Licensing came to my care home and gave us a 30 thousand dollars plus fine on my care home on March 18, 2011 which just before I would talk to Boatman again for his decision. I would talk to Boatman again but he keep putting it off on Monday. I wanted Boatman told me in his own word and I wanted to hear from him. I asked him to send me his denial letter as soon as possible so that I can get closure and move on with life and decision what to do from here.
202
As of today April 8, 2011, I have not received any letter from Boatman. I have check my school site every day for his mail. Last time, he sent me a denial letter in Dec 2010. I went to the post office for the registered mail and it was someone else denial letter he sent me. A serious breach of confidentiality. Last June 30, 2010, licensing came to raid my care home to do a narcotic search to my elderly residents was 7 days that Boatman said that he would talked to me again. The whole scenario got repeated.
203
11/19/2011
Dec 2010, I went to meet with Susan Roman Clark, while I was waiting to see her. I spot a message framed on the wall to say that CCL don't get gifts for a good job they did (gratitude). It should still be there. (very ironic) The inspection and evaluation training is out dated. They were missing a lot of things and serious problem of double standard. I talked to the hospice care home across the street 108 e. Hillsdale blvd, San Mateo, CA 94403. Licensee told me that they never talked back to the LPA even they hated them badly, they would treat LPA nicely and smile at her because they have a business to run.
204
Prior to this Licensing had not been in my facility for 2 years and we had no fine for the past year. In the 11/19/2010 meeting with Susanne Roman Clark, and Audrey Jeung . Susanne Roman Clark complained to me that CCL had 4 counties to inspect, San Francisco, San Mateo, Alameda and Contra Costa County. My facility had never been in probation as on their facility search website as of 3/29/2011 as comparing to other facility under probation in the same county inspected by the same CCL office. What is the chance that CCL showed up 6 days and 2 days that I would be conference with Boatman for his decision on my vendor application.
205


This is a serious breach of confidentiality. What is the purpose of sending this out in registered mail? Terry Stewart would miss her 20 days to appeal and without knowing that it was sent somewhere else.
207
Licensing kept writing to me for licensing fee other than the 30 thousand dollars heavy fine. All care home were given a pin number to pay. What do they care about quality? They only care about if you pay the fee. If I was for these amount of money but they couldn't tell me what is wrong. Here they remind me to pay for the licensing fee. I was initially licensed in Sept every year but since last year, there was an unexplained 3 month missing. I started to get renewal in June every year. The amount was out of proportion. My care home but since last year, Licensing sent me renewal every June for annual and the fee went up 33 % and fine for one day late was 50% (200 dollars) for last year. This year is 206 dollars late fee. In my job, we always have to ask if there was any consequential harm to residents. My resident were happy. There are plenty of room and privacy for them. Low rent, plenty of food and good care givers. My residents were independent and alert and oriented x4. They don't need me
208
4/7/2011
I paid my annual licensing fee every year. In 2011, one day late to submit the fee was 619.5 dollars and 206.5 was late fee. There was miscommunication through out the CCL office. With what happened to Rose Garden Care Home in March 2011, and I got this RCFE license renewal fee request in April 2011. CCL stated on their website that they update their information every week.
209
3/29/11
Snap shot taken on 3/29/11. As compare to this facility in South San Francisco, they have a probationary. Yet I was given a 2100, 5700 and 30 thousand dollars fine and the following are the citation I got in the past.
210
At the same time, Winston Manor Home was clean quickly again as if nothing had ever happen, may be they paid their fine to get out of probation status and what was that meant money equal to resident inspection and equal to residents quality of life in title 22
211
click here to get to link You will see my facility info, I am clean and here is a snap shot I took today 3/29/11
212
My RCFE Rose Garden was quickly removed in June 2011
213
Today, 4/14/11, I went to Rose Garden to pick up 4 more registered mails from licensing in San Bruno. Threatened letter demanding for money signed by Susan roman Clark, this is the repeat of last year's scenario. I went to Betty and told her that I will close the facility and I will help her to find a nice home. She said no. I like it here. I am not going any where. Then, she walked back to her room. I have been called by Phillip 30 times a day. He also called his conservator, payee and social worker 30 plus times a day. Wasting his money on cell phone time because he buy the time charge per minutes. He would just say. I want to know what is going on. I talked to him face to face and told him that he would need to live independently. Phillip had a diagnoses including paranoid schizophrenic. I don't know what to tell Roy. He is my dialysis friend who got pick up by Bayshore transport to dialysis center on Tue, Thursday, Sat. I have no idea where he is going to end up. Robert is 91 years old, at his age, he had to adjust to another new living environment and Bette was his very best friend in the house. They watch out for each others. Both Bette and Robert pay SSI (below $1000 a month). It would be difficult to place them. It is inevitable that they would be suffering emotional trauma of grieve, loss and separation.
214
215
2There was a preventable death in this facility on 8/3/2011 at 10 am in San Francisco which was covered by CCL San Bruno office.
216
On 7/21/12
217
Something is missing here per title 22
218
Something is missing here per title 22
219
Title 22
Read this carefully on title 22
220
You could go back and check to see if the license number were listed anywhere on the front and back of the brochure. Then, studying carefully what title 22 said about this. Now you can print out the brochure and asked for money as you have done to me fraudulently for suppression and retaliation.
221
What was missing on the brochure that was required to have per title 22? I dont have to leave home but I could legally make money for you, CCL licensing with a citation that no one could deny or argue about instead of making all those fraudulence claim to accuse me and your motive was so obvious.
What was missing here in the brochure?
222
Today, 4/15/11, I got a letter for licensing fee from community care licensing. I used to get license renewal letter in Sept but since last year, renewal came in June and if pay one day late, there would be a late fee $206 .50 dollar. The fee went rocketing high. We were being squeeze and strangle to death by Dept of Social Service, Community Care Licensing, Licensing and Certification by doing good work, helping the old and disable. What have licensing done to their elderly to desire these money from us? And not to say that I have no money. Even if I have money, I would give money to my residents not licensing, the bully perpetrator. Everyone, employee, residents asked me what is going to happen to this facility. I don't know. I couldn't even close it now because Bette and other refused to leave.
223
Please look at the following report from the ombudsman

A second report
224
Retype the above Second report of the patient care ombudsman Page 2 4/18/2011 Ombudsman Services of San Mateo County, Inc. is the designated Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman Programs for San Mateo County and is the local representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. As mandated by the federal Older Americans Act, LTC Ombudsman representatives identify, investigate, and resolve complaints that are made by, or on behalf of residents of long-term care facilities, and relate to actions, safety, welfare, or rights of the residents. East Hillsdale rose Gardens, located at 107 E. Hillsdale blvd, San Mateo, California is licensed by the California Department of Social Services, Community care Licensing (CCL) Division as Residential care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE). RCFEs are housing arrangements chosen voluntarily by the resident, the residents guardian, conservator or other responsible person; where 75 percents of the residents are sixty years of age or older and where varying levels of care and supervision are provided, as agreed to at time of admission or as determined necessary at subsequent times of reappraisal. Any younger residents must have needs compatible with other residents. The facility has a licensed capacity for six residents.
225
P3
The facility has the same six residents as previously reported. They are getting good basic care and appear to be happy in their current circumstances. Four of the resident are on Supplemental Security Income and the other two pay only $1000 each per month. It is rare in San Mateo County to find facility that will accept these very low rates.
226
P4
While some of the facility non-compliance issues with licensing have been addressed, none of the staffing issues have been dealt with and civil penalties are now accruing at $50 per day. What staffing issue? There was no issue but DSS said that it was. The house was clean with plenty of food and the residents were happy. Resident were not happy of the personal belonging search by the LPA but not with our care.
227
Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22

228
The two caregivers that CCL said with an issue were caregiver of another care home. They only come once a while to relief my livein caregiver. They had complete documentation. They were good caregivers and my residents had no complaint with them.
229
On Report of the patient care ombudsman

"facility was clean and with plenty of food supplies "Residents were happy and the care was good. "The rate this facility charge is the lowest they have never seen" "the charge from CCL was missing signatures and meat in the refrigerator not properly wrap."
230
Ombudsman would only listened to DSS CCL because ombudsman reported to DSS CCL. Ombudsman only knew that I was filing bankruptcy. My care home was added on their work load. They never knew the DSS part of ordeal since 2006. It is not a crime to be broke with a good cause, as I have struggled for these 6 years and tried to find different ways to get out of this situation exhausted my own resources instead of taken it out of my poor residents.
231

232
Retype in next slide
233
Marcroft and Jolls were the people who received these report.
Licensing Agency: Carol Marcroft, Regional Manager Community Care Licensing 851 Traeger Ave., Suite 360 San Bruno, CA 94066 Mary Jolls, Program Administrator Community Care Licensing The copy of report I got was 744 P St. too light to reproduced for MS 8-3-90 what appeared to be printer ran out of ink. Sacramento, CA 95814
234
My bankruptcy Ombudsman report was more credible for what was Rose Garden and its residents but unfortunately I had been sent copies that was not reproducible, too light to copy, no ink, but another copy was sent to Certification and Licensing to Carol Marcroft and Mary Jolls. All these people here are blind followers. As you could tell in the ombudsman's report they stated that Rose Garden's was charged for wrapping meat in a thin plastic bag and record missing signatures as a direct quote from the CCL, but they had never talked to me. All these not even to revoked facility and administrator licenses and removed Rose Garden's resident and closed us up. The report were to be sent to Carol Marcroft , one who ordered to throw me out of CCL office, for an appointment she arranged and scheduled, an surprised deposition. When I refused to sign her court reporter and Carol Marcroft reviewed typed up self confession court document in her office on 5/10/ 11. I refused to sign. Carol Marcroft ordered to leave.
235

236
6/18/10
Please note that Mary Jolls was one of the manager who spoke on the 6/18/10 seminar with Charles Boatman who was less than 3 years on his job as a RCFE ACS division manager, and Gary L Palmer and gave out CEU approved by Charles Boatman and advertised on line with their manager and division chief titles. They charged more than 200 dollars per seat of participant.
237
I want to know on 6/30/10 facility search. Was that initiated by a complaint? Who was the complainant? What was the charge on the complaint? What was the motive of the facility search CCL visit? Was the complaint investigated and the result recorded properly in the CCL tracking system? Who order the 3/28/11 facility fine? Please check into the DSS and CCL department communication record. Had they done the job properly
238
11/19/2011
In meeting with Audrey Jeung and Susan Roman Clark, I showed her what her office sent me as record. Clark told me that the clerk sent this out. Her clerk knew better than her. Was there a communication problem in her office? How come she accused me without doing her own research for the information was stored in the office she managed?
239
240
Please note that all these facilities were SNF skill nursing facility. My Rose Garden was only a residential care home or a board and care home. The SNF take Medicare and Medical money on average 300 dollars for a bed/day, excluding medication and skill care. Their resident were sicker because they have skill nursing needs and residential home couldn't take SNF residents and there was no Medicare and Medical pay. My resident have private room and private bath for only 30 dollars a day in Rose Garden. They have no family, no relatives. They have their favorite spot in Rose Garden, the rocking sofa, or a spot by the window under the sun and their picture perfect view from the house.
241
El Rancho Vista Health Care Center 8925 Mines Avenue, Pico Rivera, CA 90660 Citation Number: 940004104 Citation Date: 08/12/2011 Violation Date: 7/7/2007 Class: AA
Penalty: $ 80,000 On 7/07/07, an 80 year old resident who suffered from severe mental illness was struck by a train and died after sustaining multiple traumatic injuries. The resident wandered away from El Rancho Vista Health Care Center that day without being detected despite a recent history of wandering and his doctor's order to use Wanderguard, a device that alerts caregivers when someone exits through a monitored doorway. The investigator found that the resident had eloped from the facility four times earlier in the week of his death and had attempted to elope three other times that week. The nursing assistant assigned to him the day of his death reported she had not been informed about his wandering behavior until after he was missing and that she did not remember seeing him wearing a Wanderguard bracelet. There was also no evidence that the resident was wearing the Wanderguard bracelet during any of the prior elopements that week. The facility was cited because its neglect of the resident led to his death. My comments: 80000 dollars fine for a resident dead - struck by a train. This is a SNF and residents get 24 hr supervision and how this happened and especially resident was a wanderer that use Wanderguard device. There was a serious consequences involved resident's dead. The elopement is avoidable My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
242
Del Rosa Villa 2018 N. Del Rosa Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92404 Citation Number: 240007017 Citation Date: 03/04/2010 Violation Date: 1/15/2008 Class: AA
Penalty: $ 100,000 On 1/15/08, an 86 year old resident died of malnutrition and dehydration about a month after being admitted to the facility in stable condition. According to facility records, she required full assistance with eating when she was admitted to the facility on 12/13/07. By the end of that month, tests indicated that she was suffering from dehydration, but the nursing and dietary staff did not assess or respond appropriately to the warning signs, which also included dark amber urine and increasingly poor meal consumption. Nor did they notify her family of the serious change in her condition. The resident lost 23.8 pounds during her 25-day stay at the facility, dropping from 120.8 pounds to 97 pounds. She was hospitalized on 1/7/08, where she was found to be suffering from severe dehydration, acute renal failure and malnutrition. She died 8 days later from these conditions. The facility was cited because it failed to ensure the resident received sufficient fluids, which led to her death. My Comments: 100,000 dollars fine for the consequence was death, from significant weigh loss, due to malnutrition and dehydration which is avoidable when resident was admitted for stable condition but need assistance in eating and drinking. Was someone monitoring her weight or attempted any kind of intervention, or even referred for nutritional consult with a nutritionist. My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
243
The Orchard - Post Acute Care 12385 E. Washington, Whittier, CA 90606 Citation Number: 940008202 Citation Date: 8/10/2011 Violation Date: 11/?/2008 Class: AA Penalty: $ 75,000
In 2008, a 78 year old resident died due to complications after a nurse incorrectly inserted a feeding tube (gastrostomy tube) into the peritoneal cavity outside his stomach rather than into his stomach. The resident was hospitalized the same day after complaining of severe abdominal pain and arrived in critical condition with extreme pain and bleeding from the tube site. X-rays revealed that the tube had been misplaced. The resident required surgery, was put on a ventilator due to respiratory failure, and was treated for septic shock, pneumonia and persistent renal dysfunction. After his condition continued to decline, he was put on comfort care and died 6 days after the tube was wrongly inserted. The facility was cited because its actions were a direct cause of the resident's death. My Comments: 75,000 dollars fine for the consequence was death, facility was cited because its action were a direct cause of resident's death and it is avoidable. X-ray for placement of tube is required in all hospital before placement confirmed by MD to start feeding. For nursing home, licensed nurses are required to check tube placement before they flush water, gave medication or feeding, that is before nurses put anything in through the G tube. The violation date was undetermined. What was the policy and procedures for tube placement check? Did the nurses follow facilities policy and procedures to check tube placement? My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
244
Creekside Care Center 9107 N. Davis Road, Stockton, CA 95209 Citation Number: 030008293 Citation Date: 6/13/2011 Violation Date: 10/26/2008 Class: AA Penalty: $ 100,000
A bedridden resident died on 10/26/08 as a result of fractured left femur that went untreated at Creekside Care Center. The resident was taken to the hospital on 10/26/08 after being found unresponsive in bed. Creekside did not notify the hospital that the resident had any injuries despite the fact that "her knee was severely swollen and her left leg was shortened and extremely rotated." The hospital reported the resident's death to the police due to the extreme nature of the fracture and the "suspicious" circumstances. X-rays revealed that the resident's femur was "completely displaced" and "shattered into small pieces." An autopsy conducted the day after her death identified the fractured femur as the cause of her death. Creekside did not explain how the resident was injured, but its staff began observing swelling in her left knee on 10/23/08 and observed her in pain on 10/25/08. The resident's son reported that he visited her at Creekside the day before she died and found her "almost comatose." The facility was cited because its failure to promptly inform her physician of the change in her condition and failure to continually assess her condition were a direct cause of her death. My Comments: 100,000 dollars fine for the consequence was death, facility was cited for its failure to promptly inform her physician of the change in resident's condition and failure to continually assess her condition were a direct cause of death. My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or 245 injury and no residents and their family complaint.
Golden Living Center - San Jose 401 Ridge Vista Avenue, San Jose, CA 95127 Citation Number: 070008230 Citation Date: 5/16/2011 Violation Date: 4/24/2011 Class: AA Penalty: $ 80,000
A resident who suffered from dementia and mental illness died on 4/26/11, two days after she choked on a cupcake served at an Easter social party at the facility. Prior to the fatal choking incident, the resident's doctor had put her on a pureed diet because she did not have teeth, did not use dentures to eat, and was at risk of choking because she tended to swallow food without chewing. A nursing assistant took her to the Easter party and left her there unsupervised. Another nursing assistant discovered her unresponsive and pale and took her to her room, where a nurse performed CPR and helped remove multiple pieces of cupcake from her throat. Paramedics transferred her to the hospital, she was admitted to the ICU in a coma, and placed on comfort care. The facility was cited because it failed to provide necessary supervision to prevent a choking hazard to the resident at the Easter party, leading to her death. Comments: 80,000 dollars fine for the consequence was death, facility was cited for failing to provide necessary supervision to prevent choking and CNA training was not sufficient to recognize the risk. MD order of pureed diet was not being followed. Death is avoidable My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
246
Community Hospital of San Bernardino D/P SNF 1805 Medical Ctr Dr., San Bernardino, CA 92411 Citation Number: 240008216 Citation Date: 5/6/2011 Violation Date: 2/2/2008 Class: AA Penalty: $ 80,000 On 2/2/08, a resident who was ventilator dependent died when the ventilator tubing became disconnected, the alarm did not function and the staff did not respond appropriately to the lifethreatening situation. A nursing assistant summoned a nurse after observing a serious change in the resident's condition, but the nurse left after stating the resident was "o.k." A few minutes later, a respiratory therapist discovered that the tubing to the resident's ventilator was disconnected and not functioning. The tubing was reconnected, but the resident did not recover and died about 15 minutes later. A second respiratory therapist reported he had not performed a "vent check" yet that morning, however, the therapist stated that he documented otherwise because the Respiratory Care Manager "made me write the vent check." According to facility training records, the nurse who responded to the resident did not have an annual competency for ventilator dependent residents. The facility was cited because it failed to ensure that staff caring for ventilator dependent residents were qualified, it failed to ensure that staff caregivers maintained yearly competency, it failed to ensure staff performed ventilator checks every four hours as required, and its staff failed to continually assess the resident after his respiratory condition changed. As a result, the resident died. My Comments: 80,000 dollars fine for the consequence was death, Death is avoidable. This happened in a Hospital D/P SNF with a ventilator dependent patient. Staffs should on high alert for ventilator used and check for all possible machine malfunction and developed a back up and emergency plan and procedures. My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint. 247
Victoria Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center 340 Victoria Street, Costa Mesa, Ca 92627 Citation Number: 060007811 Citation Date: 02/10/2011 Violation Date: 9/8/2010 Class: AA Penalty: $ 75,000 On 9/13/2010, a 92 year old resident died less than a month after being admitted to receive therapy for a fractured hip. An autopsy by the coroner stated that "his untimely death was primarily due to septic complications (acute peritonitis) of his perforated ulcer." The coroner told the investigator that the resident's abdomen was full of puss and murky gray fluid and that his ulcer had ruptured several days to a week before he died. The resident began complaining of abdominal pain 5 days before he died and his abdomen was reported to be hard, distended, and tender to the touch at that time. Victoria Healthcare did not notify his physician or have an RN evaluate and assess his condition, as required by its policy. It sedated the resident with Xanac (an antianxiety sedative), Ambien (a sleeping pill), Seroquel (a powerful antipsychotic drug), and pain medication. The resident's condition declined, he became lethargic and displayed symptoms of kidney disease, and died in the emergency room after being found unresponsive and without a pulse at Victoria Healthcare. My Comments: 75,000 dollars fine for the consequence was death, Death is avoidable. Failed nursing assessment and failed to report to MD, delay proper treatment, unnecessary drug used for sedation as a chemical restraint, instead of investigating or assessing for the cause of the real problem. Resident was given sedation, sleeping pill and antipsychotic drugs instead of antibiotics and pain medication. They should be fined for more Money for multiple gross negligence. Nurses are accountable to the patient care. There is gross negligence on part of the facility. It will take a nurse LPA to figure this out because, there are very sick patient in RCFE. It kept telling Clark and Macroft, don't compare apple with orange because my facility Rose Garden is a lower level of care with all alert and ambulatory clients. Across the street from me was a hospice care, very sick residents with six months or less to live by the definition of Hospice. Of course, they came for a purpose, It didn't matter what I said. Here, miss spell Xanac in the article, it should be Xanax My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
248
Santa Cruz HealthCare Center 1115 Capitola Road, Santa Cruz, Ca 95062 Citation Number: 070007755 Citation Date: 12/17/2010 Violation Date: 11/14/2010 Class: AA Penalty: $ 80,000 On 11/14/10, a resident fell, fractured her neck, and died after getting out of her wheelchair unassisted and unsupervised in her room. The nursing staff found her on the floor in front of her bathroom with a large amount of blood from an apparent head wound. Paramedics were called and pronounced her dead a short time later. A mobility alarm that was supposed to alert staff that the resident was getting out of her wheelchair was not clipped to her clothing at the time of the fall. The resident had a history of repeated falls and injuries at the facility, including falls on 1/18/10, 7/20/10 and 8/21/20. Despite this history, the facility did not modify her care plan or try new interventions to protect her after the fall on 8/21/10. The facility was cited because it failed to provide supervision and assistive devices to prevent an avoidable accident. The facility did not evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to prevent falls and did not modify or replace interventions as necessary. These failures led to the resident's death. My Comments: 80,000 dollars fine for the consequence was dead by falling result in fractured neck. Death is avoidable
My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
249
Goldstar Rehabilitation and Nursing Center of Santa Monica 1340 15th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90404 Citation Number: 910007605 Citation Date: 01/10/2011 Violation Date: 4/16/2009 Class: AA Penalty: $ 100000 On 4/16/09, a 60 year old resident who had multiple sclerosis was eating dinner at an activity-sponsored event at the facility, when he began to choke on meat that had been prepared by the activities director at her home, without adherence to the resident's prescribed diet. The resident lost consciousness for 10-15 minutes. Paramedics removed a 2-inch piece of meat and several smaller pieces from his throat and transferred him to the hospital, where he died 7 days later from brain damage caused by the lack of oxygen. The facility was cited because it failed to follow his doctor's order for a soft diet, which was needed because the resident had a chewing problem and was missing some of his teeth. Its failure led to the resident's death. My comments: 100,000 dollars fine for the consequence was dead by choking. Death is avoidable.
My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
250
Walnut Whitney Care Center 3529 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, CA 95608 Citation Number: 030007652 Citation Date: 11/23/2010 Violation Date: 4/14/2008 Class: AA Penalty: $ 80,000 On 4/14/08, an 86 year old resident died several hours after being admitted from Walnut Whitney Care Center due to septic shock, acute renal failure, dehydration and urinary tract infection. She had been admitted to Walnut Whitney a month earlier for short-term therapy due to a fracture, and was considered to have a good potential for rehabilitation and discharge. During her short-stay at Walnut Whitney, she suffered two urinary tract infections, one identified on 3/20/08 and the second on the day of her death. Notwithstanding the history of infection and the risk posed by a diuretic she was taking, Walnut Whitney did not assess her hydration status or food and fluid intake in the days prior to her death. The resident's son reported that a hospital emergency room nurse was very upset about her condition before her death and told him that she had a "terrible bladder infection," "her urine was like sludge," "there was blood in her urine," and that "she was so dry." Walnut Whitney was cited because its neglect led to her death.
My Comments: 80,000 dollars fine for the consequence was dead by poor nursing care and negligence. Death is avoidable. My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
251
Metropolitan State Hospital D/P SNF 11401 S. Bloomfield Avenue, Norwalk, CA 90650 Citation Number: 170006836 Citation Date: 11/18/2010 Violation Date: 9/29/2007 Class: AA Penalty: $ 100,000 On 9/29/2007, a 61 year old resident choked to death due to the facility's failure to monitor him at mealtime and to provide emergency care to remove food that was obstructing his airway. The resident's care plan called for monitoring during meals because he was at risk of choking due to being toothless. Nonetheless, the facility staff failed to supervise him during dinner on 9/29/07. A nurse found him laying down in his bed and unresponsive at 7 pm. The facility called paramedics, but did not clear his airway or administer CPR in accordance with its policy while waiting for their arrival. Paramedics arrived at 7:19 pm, discovered the resident had food in his airway, and transported him to the hospital, where he was declared dead at 7:45 pm. The cause of death was asphyxiation due to choking. The facility was cited because its failures to implement the resident's care plan, to monitor him during meals, and to provide emergency care in accordance with its policies led to the resident's death. My comments: 100,000 the consequence was dead by choking. Death is avoidable My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
252
Gramercy Court 2200 Gramercy Drive, Sacramento, CA 95825 Citation Number: 030007455 Citation Date: 08/03/2010 Violation Date: 10/12/2007 Class: AA Penalty: $ 90,000 On 10/12/07, a 97 year old resident fell from her bed to the floor while being cared for by a certified nursing assistant (CNA). She died four days later due to a head injury and compound neck fractures caused by the fall. According to the CNA, the resident rolled off the bed and fell to the floor face down after the CNA lowered her bed rail and then turned away from the resident to position her wheelchair. The resident's son questioned this explanation, stating "I did not ever see her (mother) move or turn herself." The facility did not train or discipline the CNA following the resident's fall and death. The facility was cited because its neglect caused the resident's death when it left her unattended without the side-rail in place or staff presence to prevent her from falling from the bed to the floor. My comments: 90,000 fine for the consequence was dead from fall. Death is avoidable My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
253
Eskaton Care Center Manzanita 5318 Manzanita Avenue, Carmichael, CA 95608 Citation Number: 030007577 Citation Date: 09/27/2010 Violation Date: 07/20/2008 Class: AA Penalty: $ 100,000 On 7/20/08, a resident suffered a fatal injury when she fell from a mechanical lift while nursing assistants were transferring her from a wheelchair to her bed. The sling to the lift broke, causing the resident to fall to the floor and strike her head on the door. She was sent to the hospital where it was determined that she had suffered serious brain damage from the fall. She died four days later on 7/24/08 due to blunt head trauma. The sling that broke was in poor condition and its support straps had torn off. The facility had not conducted any safety checks on the five-yearold mechanical lift even though its owner manual directed the facility to check the condition of the slings every month. The facility was cited because its failure to check and maintain equipment in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations caused the resident's fall, head injury and death. My comments: 100,000 the consequence was dead from fall. Death is avoidable My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
254
Convalescent Center, Mission Street 5767 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94112 Citation Number: 220007568 Citation Date: 09/14/2010 Violation Date: 3/22/2010 Class: AA Penalty: $ 100,000 On his first day of work on 3/22/10, a certified nursing assistant (CNA) killed an elderly resident who suffered from dementia when he pinched her nose and used a pillow to smother her. After a staff member caught him in the act, the perpetrator fled the building and was later apprehended by police. A housekeeper observed the perpetrator in the victim's room with a pillow over her face a few minutes before she was killed, but left when the perpetrator told her to get out of the room. Prior to the homicide, another CNA asked the director of nursing (DON) "at least 3 times" to check on the perpetrator after observing him acting in a confused and disoriented manner. Another employee reported he thought the perpetrator was on drugs. Each time they complained, the DON said it was okay and never checked on the perpetrator. The CNA who expressed concerns said that within 30 minutes of conversing with the DON, the resident was dead. The perpetrator was assigned to care for 7 residents alone with no direct supervision that morning despite it being his first day of work and his total lack of any experience in caring for the elderly. The licensed nurse who was supposed to supervise the perpetrator said he did not give the perpetrator any information on the residents he was supposed to care for and the nurse did not know what the perpetrator was doing prior to the deadly assault. The Medical Examiner ruled that the resident's death was a homicide due to traumatic injuries caused by smothering, strangulation and blunt force. The facility was cited because its failure to protect the resident from physical abuse caused her death. My Comments: 100,000 fine for the consequence was dead by strangulation. Death is avoidable. I knew this case very well. The perpetrator C NA was cleared with his background check to work. What was cleared in the past didnt provide any clue that it would happen in the future. The facility had a new name called San Francisco Nursing Center. My RCFE administrator and facility licenses were revoke for what CCL claimed in Gloria Merk letter as due to residents health and safety reason per title 22. I was wrongfully accuse because CCL revoked my license to operate and closed my facility business, removed all my residents, so that I would never be able to teach as a vendor and I would never be an administrator nor operate a care home again. My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint. My administrator and facility licensed were revoked by the DSS CCL for doing nothing wrong.
255
Browning Manor Convalescent Hospital 729 Browning Rd., Delano, CA 93215 Citation Number: 120007407 Citation Date: 08/06/2010 Violation Date: 6/23/2009 Class: AA Penalty: $ 100,000 On 6/23/09, a 58 year old resident fell from his wheelchair and suffered fatal injuries that led to his death two days later. The resident had a history of combative behavior and the nursing staff reported that he had been very agitated prior to the fall and had been disconnecting the self-release seat belt on his wheelchair. The facility policy called for it to assign a staff member to provide one-on-one monitoring in this situation, but the facility failed to do so. The coroner reported that the resident suffered spinal fractures and that the injuries caused his death. The facility was cited because its failure to provide the necessary one-on-one monitoring led to the resident's death. My comments: 100,000 the consequence was dead by fall. Death is avoidable My Rose Garden RCFE was fine 30000 for no consequence, no one resident got harm or injury and no residents and their family complaint.
256

257
On March 21, 2011, at 10:30 am, this is the date and time Charles Boatman, manager of the Administrator Certification Section in the State of Californian Department of Social Service set for calling me because I called him on last Wed, Thursday, and Friday, because I wanted to know the result of his decision on my vendor status, and he deferred his decision to the following Monday 3/21/2011. LPA Audrey Jeung came again to gave my care home 30000 dollars fine on 3/18/2011 the Friday I talked to Boatman. My Administrator license and facility license were revoked and my vendor application was denied on 3/21/2011 at 10:30 am by Boatman. I asked him Why?. Boatman said that because my facility Rose Garden was not in compliance.
258
Sequoias This is one case in assisted living with DSS

On August 3, 2011, one resident from a Life Care community on Geary Street in San Francisco fell down from his 22nd floor apt. He was supposed to be discharge from the SNF. What is wrong with DSS? What are they doing in their job ? Why is it possible for resident to plunge to dead from the 22 floor in a split second. DSS came to harass and suppress us, we have no injury no problem with resident. Why is this Life Care community facility is still operating and what happen with the other resident in the building.
259
Health Care Forum in Los Altos

I interviewed the facility administrator who told me that, community care licensing was in their place last month. They only come every 3 to 5 years. They had a "walk thru". One person, LPA, only and it was so quick. for this facility who was licensed for 127 residents in assisted living. There was only 1 LPA for a 127 residents care and a walk thru while my 6 beds facility had an insulting narcotic and firearm search in my residents and caregivers personal belonging.
260
Juan Gonzales, Facility manager used the word "walk thru" but I got different treatment, my care home and my law binding residents' home was search upside down in every drawer and even my care givers room was completely search. I have a 6 beds care home and LPA from licensing act like a police without a warrant and a narcotic squat without knowing what they are looking for, a blind search. I talked to the program manager, Susan Roman Clark in our meeting in Nov, 2010. She said that once you hang your license for business, your are subject to our search and residents have given up their right to be treated like law binding resident in their own home. I called Bob Hing, the new chief who replaced retired Tom Shekta. I said You (DSS) came for retaliation on me (the licensee and administrator). Search me not my residents in Rose Garden He calmly said we (DSS) couldnt give you a citation by searching your own home.
261
My 6 bed facility had resident walking and no one ever fall or get hurt in my facility. Everyone walk out of my facility when they move out at end of May, 2011 for closing.
262
In that facility I survey, an alert and oriented resident was placed in a room with one severely demented resident and one hospice resident. This alert resident told me that D bed was the dead bed. For the sick and dying they move them in that bed. She was alert and watch everything. The Chaplin and priest, the daughter and the family was there. She watch and watching the one dying in bed and everything they do. The nurses said that because that was a room close to the nursing station, patient wanted to be close to the nursing station. They have not assess and acknowledge the feeling and the emotion of the other resident who told me how she feels, sad and anxious with her moist eyes. It is as if she is watching herself dying in bed. This resident was admitted to the facility for depression, anxiety and paranoia, currently on psychotropic medication, she is a very nice woman. I called her the guardian angle. She was afraid to tell staffs who work in there and also these had been her room for a long time. Only the sick and dying was moving in and out of her D bed shortly. Resident compatibility is very important.
263
I found a resident with open right nose ulcer due to basal cell carcinoma of the skin, scant amount of bright red blood and moist red wound bed not cover like the MD order to use A and D ointment and cover with dry dressing. This demented resident had her, not so nice looking wound exposed, in front of every one who were also eating breakfast in the dinning room. I asked for why didn't she get a dressing to cover her ulcer for infection control and dignity reason. Nurse told me that they had care plan for it and resident removed her bandage all the time. They took her inside and put on a bandage on the nose and it stay very well, she made no attempt to remove the bandage and she was in bed sleeping later the day. The next day, I saw the same resident with a bandage on her nose but also a marker initial and date on the bandage and on her nasal ulcer wound. Resident couldn't express her wish bec of severe dementia and Think about it yourself what is wrong with this picture.
264
As conclusion, dept had double standard and ccl came to me for retaliation, they didn't come because of no reason. They were in my home to carry out an order. It is no coincident. Susan Roman Clark kept signing and sending a stack of letters for fine and money, 30 thousand dollars and there was no actual potential harm to residents. Why didn't they removed the resident immediately except only interest in getting the money for almost 6 months to finish me up, made their last appearance on March 18, 2011 for Charles Boatman to call me on March 21, 2011 on Monday. (I have been calling Charles Boatman everyday all that week but he put it off every day and set the final day on Monday for the result of his decision. I asked him for his result of denied over the phone, he said "you are not in compliance." I asked for a denial letter that I have never gotten one from him as of today 6/27/11 for more than 3 months after this conversation on the phone and even my care home has closed.
265
Licensing had no concern of quality of care, no concern of resident's safety but it appeared that they only want the penalty money. They came down everytime I was going to talk to Charles Boatman. All licensing asked was their penalty money, they did nothing for the residents. We took care of the residents and we didn't get any money from the government by doing that. We didn't charge the government 200 to 300 dollars per bed, a day for the share room. We didn't get Medicare and Medical money. Every dollar they take away from me is every dollar they rob away from the residents. CCL asked for 200 penalty fee for one day late of paying the licensing fee. I have gotten a letter to request for money to renew my license this year.
A meeting with Marcroft and Susan Roman Clark, Marcroft told me that their staff only listen to her and no one else. She had someone record the meeting and asked me to sign. I told her that I am not signing anything without my legal representation and she didn't tell me that I came for she deposition. Marcroft and Clark asked me to leave when I refused to sign the document they prepared.
266
Please visit my website for detail. This story started in 2006 and I have complaint to the former California Governor's administration but nothing happened and it only get worse. I was told now that I have to complained again because of the new Governor Jerry Brown's administration. I kept calling the dept but I would only get one response that they are under investigation to a point I gave up. I could not tolerate Department of Social Service(DSS), Community Care Licensing (CCL), Administrator Certification Unit (ASC) suppression anymore.
267
268
As soon as I arrived, the caregiver called John the new owner and they talked over the phone and they refused to let me unload Mr. Hood's things because they were "trash", the boxes. Linda handed me the phone and told me to talk to the owner of the facility. Owner rejected them and told me to take it back and not to unload. Mr. Hood came out and said the these were his belonging and said everything were important. Mr. Hood said that he wanted them. I took some of the things to his room (room 5) and saw that he had a broken door in his room. The upper hinge was screw-less. The door was merely hanging with the lower hinge. I didn't know how many times Mr. Hood open and close this door everyday. John had already hang up the phone and he, the administrator was not on site. It would be considered as a potential for harm and injury to Mr. Hood, an elderly 91 years old ambulatory resident. Because it is in his room and being use frequently, it needed to be fix immediately or be use again. There was no broken door nor warning sign for not to use the door. I called Nikki Manske, ombudsman in San Mateo to take a look at the broken door. She has not call me back but she had been very responsive in the past. I loaded all the boxes in the parking lot and let Mr. Hood know that all his 269
belonging were here with him. I wouldn't take all inside for him. There were 3 workers in house for this 14 beds care home. 2 females and one male. They had taken 2 of my residents in. I suggested that Mr. Hood to screen and take his belonging inside. Mr. Hood said that He was an old man, He could not do it himself. I told him to get help from the male caregiver. Linda, the female care giver, told me that this male caregiver had recent surgery with hernia couldn't help. I am less than 5 feet but I could load and unload all boxes for him. I believe that anyone could do it slowly and a little bite at a time, if they allow him. My facility never had any broken door and these personal belonging was Mr. Hood's personal things over 6 years.
270
Here is the letter I got from CCL for fine and there are more in a form of registered mail in the post office. Since I have been away to survey and I dont live there and no one lives there, the registered mail will be return to the sender. It was demand for money from CCL.
271
I got a letter from Gloria Merk, I have send her a letter before but she never responded, so I dont even know if she got my letter or not but this time she responded because it was the senator who wrote to her. She call both dept ASC and CCL but of course she got her unilateral story. She had never talked to me and ask me but sent me a letter spelling out what these people said, to her was 100 % true in cover up. Merk was doing this for self preservation. What she had written down was all hearsay from the perpetrators and abusers in one page thru 6 years ordeals and she called this investigation. What she heard from her staffs were all grain of truth? Cast no doubt. She never responded to me the complainants.
272
Please visit my website for detail. This story started in 2006 and I have complaint to the former California Governor's administration but nothing happened and it only get worse. I was told now that I have to complained again because of the new Governor Jerry Brown's administration. I kept calling the dept but I would only get one response that they are under investigation to a point I gave up. I could not tolerate Department of Social Service(DSS), Community Care Licensing (CCL), Administrator Certification Unit (ASC) suppression anymore.
273
Everyone in my care home was gone, the place was deserted and vacant. I got a letter from Community Care Licensing demanding money $26400 plus dollars. Caregiver told me that Mr. Hood wanted to bring his things with him to the new care home but the new care home licensee who came to pick him up refused and said the if he bring everything with him in his car, he would get a flat tire. Mr. Hood was crying. He wanted his belonging which the new owner considered "trash". Mr. Hood wanted to call the police. This new care home licensee called John took Mr. Hood in his car and left. These were Mr. Hood's belonging in his private room and private bath for 6 years and he only pay SSI rate (less than 1000 a month). He had total autonomy and self decide on keeping his personal things.
274
275
As soon as I arrived, the caregiver called John the new owner and they talked over the phone and they refused to let me unload Mr. Hood's things because they were "trash", the boxes. Linda handed me the phone and told me to talk to the owner of the facility. Owner rejected them and told me to take it back and not to unload. Mr. Hood came out and said the these were his belonging and said everything were important. Mr. Hood said that he wanted them. I took some of the things to his room (room 5) and saw that he had a broken door in his room. The upper hinge was screw-less. The door was merely hanging with the lower hinge. I didn't know how many times Mr. Hood open and close this door everyday. John had already hang up the phone and he, the administrator was not on site. It would be considered as a potential for harm and injury to Mr. Hood, an elderly 91 years old ambulatory resident. Because it is in his room and being use frequently, it needed to be fix immediately or be use again. There was no broken door nor warning sign for not to use the
276
door. I called Nikki Manske, ombudsman in San Mateo to take a look at the broken door. She has not call me back but she had been very responsive in the past. I loaded all the boxes in the parking lot and let Mr. Hood know that all his belonging were here with him. I wouldn't take all inside for him. There were 3 workers in house for this 14 beds care home. 2 females and one male. They had taken 2 of my residents in. I suggested that Mr. Hood to screen and take his belonging inside. Mr. Hood said that He was an old man, He could not do it himself. I told him to get help from the male caregiver. Linda, the female care giver, told me that this male caregiver had recent surgery with hernia couldn't help. I am less than 5 feet but I could load and unload all boxes for him. I believe that anyone could do it slowly and a little bite at a time, if they allow him. My facility never had any broken door and these personal belonging was Mr. Hood's personal things over 6 years.
277
2/10/2012
Gloria Merk
278
I got a letter from Gloria Merk, I want to bring up this points.
Please noted that I live in Former Rose Garden Residential Care facility which located on 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd., not 107 E. Hillside Ave
I am in City of San Mateo with zip code 94403, not 92553 which is Moreno Valley in Ca She tried to dissociation DSS from CCL illegal and abusive actions to Rose Garden in an act of retaliation by saying on the letter that appeal of the denial for your application to the become ICTP an CEPT vendor Nothing was mentioned on what happened from 2006 to 2012 every months. I had never communicated by anyone in DSS CCL ACS office and on this letter, there was no case number for referencing and where did they file and who should I following up with. 2/10/12 was the only letter I got and nothing else and it was going to be year now. On this letter she said there would be delay, may be indefinite until when.
Carol Marcroft: Picture taken June 9, 2009
280

Dss Rebuttal To Court Paper 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dss Rebuttal To Court Paper 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

June 1, 2012 marked the closure of Rose Garden first anniversary.

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by DSS CCL

11.3 miles or 15 min distance

E. Hillsdale Rose Garden 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd San Mateo, Ca 94403

11.3 miles or 15 min distance

E. Hillsdale Rose Garden 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd San Mateo, Ca 94403

DSS CCL came on these date to Rose Garden

4/24/2009 excellent visit 6/30/2010 came 3p-5p

7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

LPA Audrey Jeung: I couldnt say more

LPA Audrey Jeung: I couldnt say more

It was a messy mess.

Careless handling of confidential documents

DSS CCL came on these date to Rose Garden

4/24/2009 excellent visit 6/30/2010 came 3p-5p

7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

11.3 miles or 15 min distance

E. Hillsdale Rose Garden 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd San Mateo, Ca 94403

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by DSS CCL

6/30/2010 CCL came to do a Narcotic search in Rose Garden

Snap shot taken on 7/21/12

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by CCL

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by CCL

There was death in this assisted living facility on 8/3/2010

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by CCL

My staffs registered in CCL

DSS CCL came on these date to Rose Garden

7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22m by CCL

My staffs registered in CCL for background clearance

6/17-18/10 P1 I found Charles Boatman and the

6/18/10 P2 I found Charles Boatman and

the department chiefs in the following activities

6/18/10 P2 I found Charles Boatman and the

6/18/10 P3 I found Charles Boatman and the

DSS CCL came on these date to Rose Garden

7/1/2010 all day

7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

DSS CCL came on these date to Rose Garden

6/30/2010 7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

DSS CCL came on these date to Rose Garden

6/30/2010 7/12/2010 8/3/2010 8/9/2010 9/16/2010

1 Attached file| 54KB rcfe correction.docx Download

RE: follow up on application submitted

June 2011 to now

Differ LPA in DSS and HFEN in CDPH

11.3 miles or 15 min distance

E. Hillsdale Rose Garden 107 E. Hillsdale Blvd San Mateo, Ca 94403

My RCFE Rose Garden was quickly removed in June 2011

Something is missing here per title 22

Something is missing here per title 22

Please look at the following report from the ombudsman

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22

On Report of the patient care ombudsman

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22

Retype in next slide

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22

Title 22 stated that Intentional mis-interpretation of Title 22 by CCL

Sequoias This is one case in assisted living with DSS

Health Care Forum in Los Altos

I got a letter from Gloria Merk, I want to bring up this points.

Carol Marcroft: Picture taken June 9, 2009