South Van Ness Manor
South Van Ness Manor has eluded the city and was bought by a private buyer. Photo by Joe Eskenazi, Nov. 25, 2019

On Monday, Mayor London Breed announced the city will purchase South Van Ness Manor, a 29-bed licensed Board and Care facility in the Mission, following months of struggle to relocate its longtime residents.

At present, only six of the 27 residents remain in the facility. Former residents were last year relocated to other facilities, within and outside the county.

South Van Ness Manor is a 6,745-square-foot, family-owned and run board-and-care facility at 19th Street and South Van Ness Avenue that announced its pending closure in October.

Analyn Parangan, the facility’s administrator, said in November that she planned to close by Dec. 1, but  was “willing to continue to operate the facility until all residents have been relocated,” according to a November 2019 facility evaluation report.

“It’s actually positive right now,” said Ellen Julian, the building realtor, adding that the city “really likes the place.” 

Julian said she and the building owners received the city’s Letter of Intent of Purchase sometime last week.

The 129-year old house was initially listed close to $5 million, but it’s unclear how much the city has agreed to pay. 

“The City is currently in negotiations with the owner of South Van Ness Manor regarding its purchase,” according to Breed’s statement. 

Julian said that all parties are currently waiting for the final appraisal of the property, which is expected to arrive sometime in early March, or 30 days after the Letter of Intent to Purchase was submitted last week.

“It’s a difficult transaction and listing for me,” said Julian. She said that aside from the city going through hoops in its different agencies to make the purchase happen, the family that owns the facility is also “very selective on who’s gonna look at the property.”

The Parangan family has been operating the residential care facility at 822 South Van Ness Ave. since 1981.

District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen said that the city could not afford to lose the 29-bed residential facility. “In fact, with Mental Health SF, we committed to move forward so that the conditions that people see on the streets everyday will no longer be their reality or our reality in San Francisco,” she said. 

“Right now we have enough clients who need placement that even if we didn’t bring a single person back to South Van Ness, we can still fill it with new people,” said Jennifer Esteen, a psychiatric nurse helping secure placements for patients at South Van Ness Manor.

Down from almost 1,000 board-and-care beds operating in the city in 2013, there are fewer than 600 currently, according to Ronen.

“It’s just becoming financially infeasible that the programs are operating at a loss, even though the city has provided a subsidy for clients,” Ronen said. “It’s not enough to survive.”

Ronen called the purchase a  “no-brainer priority for the city.”  She credited community pressure and pressure from providers in pushing the city to make the purchase. 

Once the property is purchased, Ronen continued, the city will accept applications from “anybody who’s interested in operating the facility” and it will go through a competitive process before the Department of Public Health awards the contract.

Along with the news release of the city’s intent to purchase South Van Ness Manor, Breed also announced that the city has secured a $3.94 million loan from the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development to fund its purchase of Grove Street House, a nine-bed, 60-day residential mental health treatment facility located in North of the Panhandle.

Follow Us

Join the Conversation


Please keep your comments short and civil. We will zap comments that fail to adhere to these short and very easy-to-follow rules.

Your email address will not be published.

  1. I would hate to see the City take over this beautiful historic mansion, part of SF history predating the 06 quake. The city is good at trashing neighborhoods and facilitating drug dependency. Let it continue it’s operation as is. As a neighbor of 822 SVN it has always been well maintained with quiet residence. Having the city as the owner is the kiss of death for this historical mansion.

  2. I do not understand why the city doesn’t just make it financially worthwhile for the owner (and other owners) to keep operating. If the city took that $5M and increased the reimbursement per bed from what is it, something like $30/night to $100 or $150, how many more nights and beds could they fund? I bet a lot more than the 29 here which ends in a big payoff for one operator and uses up any monies that could be used to maintain the other 600 beds.

    1. Not sure how much the City (through city grants) and County (via Medi-Cal) and Feds (via Medicare) pay but I believe the city pays about $60 per person per night to agencies which provide mats on the floor to the homeless. Cannot believe that a board and care would be paid less than that.

      1. In San Francisco, they are barely getting $30 per day. It’s even less if they’re on a old contract.

      2. In San Francisco they barely get $30 per night. It’s even worst that sometimes the city doesn’t pay out the supplemental on time. Too many runarounds.