complaint·January 21, 2025

INVESTIGATION REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: Allegation #1: Staff did not provide a lawful eviction notice to resident in care. The complaint asserted that the facility issued an unlawful eviction notice to Resident #1 (R1). The complaint specified that management had reached a final decision to cease collaboration with (R1) and was no longer willing to accept further payments for services. It was reported that (R1) received a 30-Day Eviction Notice that did not adhere to the requirements set forth by the California State Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing (CDSS/CCL) Title 22 Regulations. On April 9, 2024, between 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM, the Department conducted interviews with two staff members, designated as Staff #1 and Staff #2, concerning the allegation that (R1) had failed to comply with the facility's general policies. Staff #1 indicated that (R1) exhibited behaviors that were prohibited and adversely affected other residents and the community. Additionally, according to Staff #2, (R1) is an accumulator who collects unsanitary items, which are subsequently brought back to the room. Staff #1 maintained that the eviction notice issued to (R1) was compliant with Title 22 Regulations, stating that such action was necessitated by (R1's) inappropriate behaviors and the impact on the health and safety of other residents. On January 17, 2025, between 1:30 PM and 3:30 PM, the Department interviewed a staff member identified as Staff #3 regarding this allegation. Staff #3 reported that (R1) was relocated from the facility on April 5, 2024, with assistance from the placement agency Brightside Referrals, and is currently no longer residing at Studio Royale. Staff #3 also noted that the eviction notice and (R1's) departure from the facility occurred prior to (S3's) employment with Studio Royale. An additional interview with Staff #1 was not feasible, as (S1) is no longer employed with Studio Royale and no forwarding contact information was provided. The Department was likewise unable to interview Resident #1 (R1) due to the absence of forwarding contact information. The Department's review of service files and the 30-Day Notice to Terminate Tenancy (dated 03/05/24) revealed that management issued an invalid eviction notice, failing to comply with (CDSS/CCL) Title 22 Regulations concerning eviction procedures. (Evaluation Report continues LIC 9099-C) The eviction notice was found to be incomplete, lacking several critical pieces of information, resources available to assist with alternative housing and care options, referral services for alternative housing, and confirmation that a written eviction notice should be submitted to the licensing agency within five days. The Department concluded that there is sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation based on information gathered from facility inspections, observations, interviews, and records analysis. Consequently, the allegation regarding the violation of personal rights, specifically that "Staff did not provide a lawful eviction notice to a resident in care," has been deemed substantiated. An exit interview was conducted with William Boles, during which copies of the reports were distributed along with appeal rights.