Follow-up on corrections·October 2, 2025

Licensing Program Analyst Manuel Monter and Marcella Tarin conducted a POC case management visit to clear deficiencies cited on September 25, 2025, during an annual inspection visit. LPA also citing the facility an additional deficiency that erroneously not cited during the previous visit. Clearing pending Plan of Corrections: The facility was cited the following deficiencies on September 25, 2025 with the following POC dates: 87307 Personal Accommodations and Services (d)(6)- Type A- POC due date September 26, 2025. 87468.2 Additional personal rights of residents in Privately Operated Facilities (a) (4) Type A- POC due date September 26, 2025. 87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (a)(1)- Type A- POC due date September 26, 2025 87468.1 Personal Rights of Residents in All Facilities (a)(2) – Type A- POC due date September 26, 2025 87463 Reappraisals (a) – Type B- POC due date of October 2, 2025. During todays visit, LPA's toured the facility side entrance and observed the locked gate no longer had a lock. LPA's requested ADM to review the camera's video footage. ADM provided LPA's access to the cameras and confirmed they are not recording audio. LPA received plan of corrections by POC date. Deficiencies cleared during todays visit. Page 1 Out of 2. Follow Up, regarding 9/25/2025 annual inspection visit. During the annual inspection visit, the department inadvertently did not cite an issue that was noted during the end of the annual inspection. On September 25, 2025, LPA’s Manuel Monter and Marcella Tarin, during the conclusion as of the annual inspection, ADM2 asked if LPA's took photos during todays visit. LPA confirmed due to the current ongoing complaint investigation, LPA's did take photographs of the inside of the shed. ADM2 stated they LPA's cannot do this. ADM2 stated the lease agreement states the shed is not part of the facility. ADM2 stated LPA’s do not have the authority or right to inspect the shed in the backyard or take pictures of the inside of the shed. ADM2 stated if he was there when LPA's took the photos, he would have taken the phones and broken them. LPA told ADM2, the shed is not going to be discussed anymore and that the report needed to be reviewed. ADM2 stated he wanted to see the LPA's delete the photos or he wouldn't review the report or sign the report. LPA Monter told ADM2, the photos will not be deleted. ADM2 stated he refused to sign. ADM1 then attempted to interject, but ADM2 stated, no, and insisted that the photos needed to be deleted. During todays visit, LPA’s discussed Title 22 regulation, 87755 Inspection Authority of Licensing Agency (a). LPA’s also discussed that the administrator of the facility must collaborate with licensing. LPA’s informed ADM that, due to an open complaint about the backyard shed, the Department will fully investigate the allegation. The LPAs also brought up ADM2’s comment that was made on September 25, 2025 — that he would have broken the LPAs’ state phones if the shed photos were not deleted — noting that it could be construed as a threat or an intimidation attempt. A deficiency is being cited during todays visit. This report was reviewed with Licensees Yu Zhang & Xi-Hua Luo . A copy of this report and Appeal rights were provided. Administrator refused to sign. ADM2 stated if the report had anyting to do with the shed, he would refuse to sign.