See every facility — official ratings, family reviews, no referral fees.
Assisted Living

Alma Via of San Francisco

Families consistently rate this highly — reviewers highlight warm and professional staff. Schedule a visit to confirm the fit.

One Thomas More Way, Lakeshore · San Francisco, CA 94132175 bedsLicensed & Active
Source: CA CCLD — view official record
Google rating
4.7/5

based on 27 Google reviews

5
4
3
2
1
Alma Via of San Francisco Assisted Living in San Francisco, CA — Street View
Street View

Watch Alma Via of San Francisco

Get an email when new inspections, ratings, or penalties are published for this facility.

We’ll only email you about this — no spam, unsubscribe anytime.

What this means for your family

This facility is an excellent choice if you prioritize cleanliness, high-quality dining, and a visible sense of community engagement. The staff's dedication to knowing residents personally is a standout strength. However, while recent reviews are overwhelmingly positive, you may want to personally observe the front-desk interactions during your first visit to ensure the welcoming atmosphere extends to all visitors.

Google Reviews

Google Reviews

27 reviews on Google
Prospective families will find a highly positive consensus regarding the facility's cleanliness, the warmth of the staff, and the quality of the dining services. Reviewers frequently note that residents appear happy, engaged, and well-cared for during tours. While the vast majority of recent feedback is glowing, one older review noted a poor initial interaction with front-desk staff.

Quality Themes

Tap a score for details
Food9.0Staff10.0Clean10.0Activities9.0MedsN/AMemoryN/AComms8.0ValueN/A

Strengths

  • Warm and professional staff
  • Clean and well-maintained facilities
  • High-quality dining and food variety
  • Engaged and happy resident community
  • Convenient and bright location

Concerns

  • Unwelcoming reception/front desk attitude

Rating Trends

Tap a year to see what changed

2345.02016(1)4.52019(2)3.02020(3)5.02023(2)5.02024(2)5.02025(19)5.02026(1)

Distribution · 30 analyzed

5
27
4
1
3
1
2
0
1
1
12 reviews posted between May 22, 2025May 24, 2025 · 12 were 5-star

How They Respond to Reviews

89%response rate
Good

The owner provides highly personalized responses to 5-star reviews, frequently using the reviewer's name and referencing specific details like food, cleanliness, or staff friendliness. For lower-rated reviews, the responses shift to a more formal, templated, or defensive tone.

Questions for Your Tour

  • 1We've heard wonderful things about the dining variety here; could you tell us more about how the menus are planned and how much input residents have in their meals?
  • 2The facility looks incredibly bright and well-maintained; what are some of the favorite social activities or community events that keep the residents engaged?
  • 3How does the care team handle medical emergencies or changes in health needs during the overnight hours?
  • 4We noticed the management is very responsive to feedback; how does the leadership team typically communicate with families regarding any facility updates or concerns?
  • 5Since the community seems so vibrant and happy, what are some ways the staff helps new residents integrate and feel welcome during their first few weeks?
  • 6Could you walk us through the process of how the staff manages day-to-day care needs to ensure the high standard of cleanliness and professionalism the community is known for?

Personalized based on this facility's data


Key Review Excerpts

The building maintains solid staffing ratios, and it shows. Residents receive attentive, compassionate care, and the team always takes the time to greet you with warmth and professionalism.

Care manager · 2025★★★★★

The facility was spotlessly clean but one thing that stood out, and is most important to me, was that the staff clearly knew the residents well, which added to the sense of a tight-knit community.

Prospective resident's family · 2025★★★★★

No funny odors like some other facilities we've been to. Felt just like home.

Friend of a new resident · 2023★★★★★
Source: 27 Google reviews

State Inspection History

State Inspections

Source: CA Community Care Licensing Division

17total
9deficiencies
4 Type A— immediate health risk
5 Type B— non-compliance
Oct 7, 2025Routine
CleanReport

The facility underwent an unannounced annual inspection on October 7, 2025. The inspection covered various areas, including kitchen, medication storage, and resident rooms. The report explicitly states that no citations were issued during this visit.

Aug 19, 2025Other

The unannounced case management visit identified a significant deficiency regarding the use of physical restraints. Specifically, staff were found to have restrained a resident using a gait belt, which violated regulations prohibiting the limitation of a resident's hands or feet. The facility acknowledged the incident and has taken corrective actions, including staff termination and retraining.

Type ACCR 87608(a)(5)

Postural supports must never include tying, depriving, or limiting the use of a resident's hands or feet under any circumstances.

Type ACCR 87608(a)(5)

Staff restrained a resident using a gait belt, which limited the resident's hands, posing an immediate risk to health, safety, and personal rights.

May 29, 2025Follow-up
CleanReport

The report documents a Case Management visit conducted on May 29, 2025, to deliver an amended report related to a previous finding. The visit involved a review of the amended report with the Administrator and an exit interview. No specific deficiencies were cited in the provided text.

Apr 17, 2025Complaint

This report details the findings of a complaint investigation regarding alleged improper rate increases for a resident. The allegation was found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Two specific deficiencies were cited concerning the failure to provide proper and detailed written notice of rate increases for dates in 2020 and 2021.

Type BN/A

The facility failed to provide proper notice of rate increase for resident (R1) regarding the effective date of 10/1/2020. The notice did not clearly indicate the modified conditions and rate structure when compared to the ledger and invoice.

Type BN/A

The facility failed to provide proper notice of rate increase for resident (R1) regarding the effective date of 7/1/2021. The notice did not indicate the approved monthly fee discount applied, which was evident when comparing it to the ledger and invoice.

Apr 17, 2025Follow-up

This report details the findings of a complaint investigation regarding alleged improper rate increases for a resident. The allegation was found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Two specific deficiencies were cited concerning the failure to provide proper and detailed written notice of rate increases for dates in 2020 and 2021.

Type BCCR 87507(g)(4)

The facility failed to provide proper notice of rate increase for resident R1, specifically regarding modification conditions and rate structure changes. This was noted for notices dated 7/31/2020 and 4/30/2021.

Apr 11, 2025Follow-up
CleanReport

The facility was visited for a Case Management review on 04/11/2025. The Licensing Program Analyst noted that no deficiencies were cited during this visit. The report is an amendment to a previous report dated 04/14/2025, confirming no citations were issued.

Apr 2, 2025Complaint
CleanReport

This report details a complaint investigation conducted on 04/02/2025 regarding alleged failures in providing resident appraisals and records. All allegations cited in the report were found to be unsubstantiated due to inconsistent information and lack of corroborating evidence. Consequently, no deficiencies were cited.

Oct 15, 2024Complaint

The complaint investigation substantiated the allegation that lack of supervision resulted in a resident eloping from the facility. Two deficiencies were cited, both related to insufficient personnel and supervision, which were deemed immediate health and safety risks. The facility was required to implement corrective actions, including staff termination and retraining, to address these critical findings.

Type ACCR 87411(a)

Personnel Requirements: Facility personnel shall at all times be sufficient in numbers, and competent to provide the services necessary to meet resident needs. This was not met as evidence by: Administrator failed to prevent resident (R1) from eloping the facility.

Type ACCR 87411(a)

Based upon interview with Administrator, it was found staff (S1) was asleep during the incident, and not properly supervised resident (R1). Record review shows R1 is diagnosed with dementia, at wander risk and unable to leave the facility unassisted. This serves as an immediate health & and safety risk.

Ownership & Operations

Who Operates This Facility

Owner / Operator

Elder Care Alliance of Sf, Elder Care Alliance

Administrator

CLEITUS JONES

Source: State licensing data

Contact

Get in Touch

Contact this facility directly and verify the details that matter most to your family.

References & Resources

EveryPlace is a research directory. Facility information is compiled from public sources — Medicare.gov, state licensing portals, Google Places, and publicly available street-level imagery. Listings do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or advertisement, and we do not accept payment for placement. Families should verify all details directly with the facility and the original sources linked above before making any care decisions. See our Research Policy for our editorial standards, correction process, and image-removal policy.

Nearby Alternatives

Call