As some one who has interacted with UCSF folks on HF national circuit, my impression is that their threshold to transplant/VAD is quite high (unlike other famous centers on west coast) and they are restrictive in their listing. I sometimes refer patients to UCSF and places in LA like Cedars/UCLA etc since I am in their vicinity. My sense is that at UCSF they will practically use every option before they will list someone (like catheter ablation, structural intervention in ACHD patients, bi-v pacing etc). It is a sentiment i can understand. Faculty seem to be very involved in patient-care as I sometimes will get calls from them! But like most people who are passionate about their work, strong personalities abound. Their numbers are just not there at par with other major centers in california (UCLA, Stanford, Cedars). I suspect that their HF patients predominantly belong to two groups- granola-chewing-fruit and vegetable-eating medically compliant patient and polysubstance-abusing patients. Good luck transplanting both populations!
Cedars is more transplant-happy. If you want some one to be transplanted, send them to Cedars. They are great at transplants and desensitization, and will get it done no matter what! It is a very efficient private practice model. I am sure it makes for great training for fellows.
Cost of living at SF is a problem. Housing around UCLA/Cedars is not cheap either. Not sure how much UCSF'S housing stipend helps. The UCSF name does open doors in academia across the country and pvt practice in nor cal.
Echo lab (Schiller et al) and EP lab (Scheinmann et al ) at UCSF have traditionally been very strong.