Arbor Valley of Cascadia

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

56.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 127 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 75.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 76 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 148 beds and averages 136.8 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.50 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.87 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.97 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.71 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.72 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

25 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-05-16 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on policy review, facility grievances, review of call light logs, and resident interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure enough staff were available to answer call lights in a timely manner. This was true for 7 of 27 residents (#12, #24, #50, #64, #76, #97, and #116) reviewed for staffing concerns. This deficient practice created the potential for physical and psychosocial harm if residents did not receive appropriate care or received a delay in care. Findings include: The facility's Quality of Life policy revision date 10/15/22, documented the call light response is provided by nursing and non-nursing staff within their skill set. Resident needs are addressed in a timely and courteous manner. 1. Facility grievance/concerns for 6 months were requested. Two of the grievances dated 3/4/25 and 4/8/25, documented complaints with call light response time. A concern form dated 3/4/25, documented Resident #97 reported when she turned on her call light she had to wait an hour. It had only happened when one nurse was on duty, LPN #3. When Resident #97 told LPN #3 she…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, and interviews it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect. This was true for 1 of 10 residents (Resident #21) reviewed for respect and dignity. This deficient practice placed residents at risk of embarrassment and diminished sense of worth. Findings include: The facility's Quality of Life policy dated 10/15/22, documented staff were to refrain from practices demeaning to residents such as keeping urinary catheter bags uncovered. Resident #21 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Myotonic Muscular Dystrophy (a genetic disorder that causes progressive muscle weakness, stiffness, and other symptoms) and functional quadriplegia (a complete inability to move all four limbs due to severe physical disability or frailty, but without actual physical injury or damage to the brain or spinal cord). On 5/12/25 at 2:20 PM, observed a Hoyer lift transfer from bed to…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0559 — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, policy review, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received prior written rationale regarding room changes. This was true for 2 of 27 residents (#38 and #97) whose records were reviewed. This deficient practice placed residents at risk of embarrassment and diminished sense of worth. Findings include: The facility's Room to Room Transfer policy dated 11/28/17, documented under procedures: - Facility discusses transfer with resident, family and/or responsible party in advance to explain rationale and rights. - Residents are offered an opportunity to tour the room prior to a room move. - Residents are introduced to the new roommate prior to a room move. a. Resident #38 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including diabetes and acquired absence of left leg below knee. On 5/12/25 at 3:30 PM, Resident #38 stated when he was outside in his wheelchair smoking on 3/7/25, the CEO came…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, record review, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to assess residents for safe smoking practices. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #97) whose medical records were reviewed. This deficient practice placed residents at risk for harm when proper smoking assessment or supervision was not provided. Findings include: The facility's Smoking Campus policy dated 10/5/22, documented the interdisciplinary team evaluates residents desiring to smoke for their ability to smoke independently or dependently upon admission, quarterly, with a significant change or as deemed necessary. Resident #97 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cutaneous abscess of abdominal wall and bipolar disorder. Resident #97's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE], documented a BIMS score of 15 (meaning she was cognitively intact). On 5/12/25 at 4:29 PM, Resident #97 stated she is an independent smoker. Resident #97's…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure 1 of 5 residents (Resident #123), received recommended specialized services, identified by the state's Level II PASARR process. This deficient practice had the potential to cause significant harm if the resident's mental health needs were not adequately met. Findings include. The facility's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) policy, revised 11/19/24, documented the following: - The state-designated authority determines the appropriate setting for the individual and recommends what, if any, specialized services, and/or rehabilitative services the individual needs. - Individuals who have or are suspected to have MD, ID, or a related condition (as indicated by a positive Level I screen) may not be admitted to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility unless approved based on Level II PASARR evaluation and determination. Resident #123 was…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure 1 of 5 resident's (Resident #123), plan of care included recommended specialized services, identified by the state's Level II PASARR process. This deficient practice had the potential to cause significant harm if the resident's mental health needs were not adequately met. Findings include: The facility's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) policy, revised 11/19/24, documented the following: - The state-designated authority determines the appropriate setting for the individual and recommends what, if any, specialized services, and/or rehabilitative services the individual needs. - The facility's interdisciplinary Team uses the PASARR when conducting their assessments of the resident developing the care plan, when transitions of care occur to promote a comprehensive assessment, and development of a plan of care for residents with mental…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide respiratory services as ordered by the physician. This was true for 2 of 8 residents (#2 and #18) whose records were reviewed for respiratory services. This failure created the potential for residents to experience increased fatigue and low oxygen levels. Findings include: a. Resident #2 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including cerebral palsy (a group of neurological disorders that affect movement, balance, and posture, and can also affect learning, speech, and other functions) and acute respiratory failure (a life-threatening condition where the lungs are unable to adequately exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide). On 5/13/25 at 9:02 AM, observed Resident #2 in bed sleeping with a nasal cannula in her nose with the oxygen concentrator liter flow set at 0 liters per minute. Resident #2's physician's order dated 3/12/25, ordered oxygen at 2 liters…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, observation, record review, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to provide adequate pain management. This was true for 1 of 27 residents (Resident #61) whose medical records were reviewed. This failure created the potential for residents to experience continual pain and distress. Findings include: The facility's Quality of Life policy dated 10/15/22, documented the facility provides the appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his/her ability to carry out the activities of daily living and their abilities do not diminish unless circumstances of the individual's clinical condition demonstrate such diminution was unavoidable. Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including end stage renal disease (a serious medical condition where the kidneys are no longer able to filter waste and excess fluid from the blood, requiring dialysis or a kidney transplant to survive) and cerebral palsy (a group of neurological disorders…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, policy review, and review of the Idaho Food Code, the facility failed to ensure food items were dated and labeled, sanitary, and hygiene practices followed. These deficient practices had the potential to impact all residents who received meals prepared in the facility's kitchen. This placed residents at risk for potential contamination, use of spoiled foods, and adverse health outcomes including food-borne illnesses. Findings include: The FDA Food Code Section 3-501.17 stated, Ready-to-Eat, Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Date Marking, states refrigerated, ready-to-eat, time/temperature control for safety food prepared and held in a food establishment for more than 24 hours shall be clearly marked to indicate the date or day by which the food shall be consumed on the premises, sold, or discarded . Review of the facility's Resident Personal Food policy revised 4/10/24, documented food items should be labeled with a 3-day use-by date. On 5/12/25 at 11:18 AM, observed in the kitchen with the Culinary Manager (CM) present, stacked clean dry…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure infection control and prevention practices were maintained to provide a safe and sanitary environment when staff did not perform proper hand hygiene during wound care, did not follow proper wound care protocol, and did not clean equipment between resident use. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for wound care and resident transfers using the Hoyer lift. These failures had the potential to impact all residents in the facility by placing them at risk for cross contamination and infection. Findings include: The facility's Hand Hygiene policy, revised 2/11/22, documented alcohol-based hand rub or soap and water was to be used before moving to a clean body site after caring for a soiled body site, after contact with any objects in the immediate vicinity of the resident, and after removing gloves. The facility's Clean Dressing Change policy, dated 11/28/17, documented: - Perform hand hygiene…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CASCADIA HEALTHCARE — 46 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $641K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in ID