No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Curry Village Health And Rehab Of Cascadia

1 Park Avenue, Brookings, OR 97415 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 59 certified beds · (541) 469-3111 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuseBehavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2025
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS
Urgent care / clinic
603 Hemlock St Ste 3B · (971) 350-7514 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
407 Oak St Unit B · (541) 254-9282 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
97900 Shopping Center Ave · (541) 469-6666 · Call to confirm hours
Park
US 101, 7 mi. S of Gold Beach · (800) 551-6949 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased11.4%14.9%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight11.1%4.7%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.8%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.2%2.0%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.3%4.9%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury13.7%2.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.8%20.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.3%12.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.0%5.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control28.2%21.8%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table20.3%13.9%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.4%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.6%81.2%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission20.1%21.4%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.1%16.1%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.981.481.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days4.332.351.80worse

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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.

55.9% 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 209 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

55.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
52.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.33U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 52.9% 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 123 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 55% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 71% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF55.9%CMS range 50.1–62.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.7%CMS range 5.8–11.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge52.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge51.2%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge40.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge98.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened5.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.2%CMS range 4.2–10.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.991.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.65
RN hours/ resident / day
0.79
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.15
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.59
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.27
RN hoursweekends
53.4%
Total nursing turnover
44.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 59 beds and averages 38.6 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 20 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 4.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.15 is at or above 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 3.93 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.85 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-05-07)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2025-01-30)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

33 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2025-12-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to honor the resident's right to be free from physical abuse from another resident for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#2) reviewed for abuse. Resident 2 was sent to the emergency room with facial injuries inflicted by Resident 1. The facility identified an avoidable accident related to a failed mandated resident relocation. The facility relocated Resident 1 and 2 to another room, staff were trained and care plans were updated. Corrective actions were completed on 9/26/25. This failed practice was identified as past noncompliance. Findings include: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 7/2025 with diagnoses including stroke and lack of coordination. Resident 1's 7/22/25 admission MDS revealed a BIMS assessment with a score of 14 (cognitively intact).Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 8/2025 with diagnoses including cognitive impairment and cancer. Resident 2's 8/10/25 admission MDS revealed a BIMS assessment with a score of 15 (cognitively intact).A 9/26/25 Facility Investigation Summary and Conclusion…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-07 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to staff a registered nurse for 8 consecutive hours per day 7 days per week for 6 out of 122 days reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for unmet assessment needs. Findings include: A review of the Direct Care Staff Daily Reports dated 10/1/25 through 10/31/25, 11/1/25 through 11/31/25, 12/1/25 through 12/31/25 and 4/1/26 through 4/30/26 revealed there were 6 days:10/4/25, 11/22/25, 12/27/25, 4/4/26, 4/11/26 and 4/18/26 without 8 consecutive hours of registered nurse coverage on any shift in a 24-hour period. On 5/7/26 at 10:53 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) acknowledged there was no RN coverage on those above days.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    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 and interview the facility failed to ensure staff followed correct sanitation and food handling procedures to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed. This placed residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings include:On 5/7/26 at 12:01 PM, Staff 10 (Dietary Aide) was observed washing her hands. Staff 10 failed to practice correct hand-washing techniques by using a paper towel to turn off the faucet, a potentially contaminated surface, then drying her hands with the same paper towel. On 5/07/2026 at 12:04 PM, Staff 12 (Cook) completed buttering rolls and moved to a new task. Staff 13 changed her gloves between tasks but did not re-wash her hands. Staff 13 then removed her gloves, went to the walk-in refrigerator to remove juice and pour a glass of juice for a resident that was given to another staff person. Staff 13 did not wash her hands prior to getting the juice for the resident. On 5/7/26 at 12:17 PM, Staff 11 (Culinary Manager) was observed washing his hands. Staff 11 failed to practice correct hand-washing techniques by…

    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 · D2026-05-07 · tag F0552 — isolated
    Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were given the right to make informed treatment decisions for 1 of 5 residents (#20) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents and their representatives at risk for not being able to make informed treatment decisions. Findings include: Resident 20 was admitted to the facility in 2/2026 with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease. The resident's BIMS assessment completed in 3/2026 revealed a score of 5 (cognitively impaired). The resident's representative with power of attorney (POA) was not available for an interview. The resident's clinical record revealed the resident had a tab alarm (a device that makes an audible warning when the resident attempts to stand without assistance). No assessment or informed consent for the tab alarm was located in the resident's clinical record. On 5/7/26 at 9:09 AM, Staff 9 (RN) stated an assessment should be completed prior to using a tab alarm with a resident and consent must be given by the resident or resident representative. Staff 9 stated it was nursing staff'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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-07 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' MDS assessments were completed for 3 of 8 sampled residents (#s 2, 29, and 39) reviewed for pain, unnecessary medications, and activities. This placed residents at risk for lack of activities, pain, and unmet psychosocial needs. Findings include: 1.Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 11/2025 with a diagnosis of heart failure. Resident 2's 2/24/26 Significant Change in Status MDS revealed section F - preferences for routine and activities was not assessed. On 5/7/26 at 11:49 AM, Staff 3 (MDS Coordinator) stated she was responsible for the oversight of MDS completion, including follow up with staff regarding incomplete sections. Staff 3 confirmed the activity section for Resident 2 was incomplete. On 5/7/26 at 1:32 PM, Staff 5 (Activity Director) stated she completed the activity evaluation and submitted it to the MDS coordinator, who put the information into the residents' MDS assessment. Staff 5 said she did not know preferences for routine and activities was incomplete for…

    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 · D2026-05-07 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to administer pain meds per physician orders for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#50) reviewed for pain. This placed residents at risk for unresolved pain. Findings include: Resident 50 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of rib fractures. Resident 50's 9/3/26 hospital Discharge Medication List revealed staff were to administer Resident 50 Tylenol (non-narcotic pain medication) every six hours for 10 days and Robaxin (muscle relaxant) every six hours for 10 days. Resident 50's Progress Notes revealed she/he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] at 4:30 PM, was alert, able to communicate needs, and reported she/he only had pain with movement. Resident 50's 9/2025 MAR revealed her/his Robaxin and Tylenol were scheduled to be administered at 6:00 PM, 12:00 AM, 6:00 AM and 12:00 PM. Resident 50 was not administered Robaxin on 9/3/25 at 6:00 PM or on 9/4/25 at 12:00 AM. Resident 50's Tylenol was not administered on 9/3/25 at…

    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 · Fcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure food was stored properly in 1 of 1 resident refrigerators, failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and handled properly in 1 of 1 kitchen, and failed to keep kitchen equipment clean. This put residents at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings include: During the initial kitchen observation on 1/27/25 at 8:15 AM the following items were found in the walk-in refrigerator: - A plastic wrapped white tube containing a soft white substance, a white tub of semi hard white substance, and a white tub with dark liquid inside did not have labels or open dates - A metal bowl covered with plastic wrap labeled streusel topping, a used jug of thickened orange juice (juice with a thickening agent mixed into it), a used jug of 1% milk, a used carton of almond milk, used bags of shredded cheddar and mozzarella cheese, a box containing opened and uncovered packages of meat, and a used package of cheese slices with hard edges wrapped in plastic wrap did not have open dates - Two uncovered trays of hamburger patties…

    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 · E2025-01-30 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure food for the residents was prepared in a manner which preserved the nutritional value for pureed texture diets. This placed residents at risk for nutritional deficits. Findings include: An observation of lunch meal service on 1/29/25 at 11:43 AM revealed pureed cranberry chicken as a main course available to residents with puree texture diets. On 1/29/25 at 3:15 PM Staff 19 (Dietary Aid) stated food was mixed with water to create the puree texture. He also stated the puree texture consistency was determined by sight. On 1/29/25 at 3:27 PM Staff 12 (Culinary Manager) stated the recipes and texture guidelines for the kitchen came from Sysco (a kitchen food and non-food product supplier). He stated the kitchen staff were instructed to use water to make the puree texture. Staff 12 stated he would bring the survey team the recipes and guidelines from Sysco. No further information was provided to the survey team. A 1/30/25 review of pureed food recipes and texture guidelines on Sysco'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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was assessed to self-administer medications for 1 of 1 resident (#2) observed during dining observations. This placed residents at risk for an unsafe medication regimen. Findings include: Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 6/2006 with a diagnosis of paralysis of the lower body. A 1/19/25 quarterly MDS revealed Resident 2 was cognitively intact and did not have difficulty swallowing. On 1/30/25 at 8:22 AM Resident 2 was observed in the dining room sitting alone at a table with her/his breakfast tray. Next to Resident 2's tray on a paper napkin were 12 medications and a staff member was not by her/his side to ensure she/he swallowed the medications. On 1/30/25 at 8:23 AM Staff 10 (RN) stated she always left Resident 2's medications on a napkin at breakfast because Resident 2 liked to take them while she/he ate. Staff 10 stated Resident 2 sat alone at meals. On 1/30/25 at 8:25 AM with Staff 2 (Chief Nursing Officer) and Staff 3 (Clinical Resource) Staff 2 stated if…

    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 · D2025-01-30 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received required assistance with ADLs for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#36) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: Resident 36 was admitted to the facility in 1/2025 with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and diabetes. A review of the admission MDS with an Aessment Review date of 1/7/25 revealed Resident 36's BIMS was six, indicating a severe cognitive impact. Resident 36 required partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene. A review of Resident 36's care plan dated 1/7/25 revealed she/he had an ADL self-care performance deficit and required partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene and bathing. A Documentation Survey Report from 1/2025 revealed Resident 36 received bathing on Saturdays and Tuesdays. On 1/25/25 there was no record Resident 36 was offered or refused bathing. An unnamed document dated 1/25/25 indicated Resident 36 was not assigned to a staff member for bathing on 1/25/25. On 1/27/25 at 1:00…

    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 · D2025-01-30 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    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, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident received ROM for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#18) reviewed for mobility. This placed residents at risk for decreased ROM. Findings include: Resident 18 was admitted to the facility in 2/2024 with a diagnosis of incomplete quadriplegia (limited movement below the neck). An 8/5/24 significant change MDS revealed Resident 18 had dementia, was blind, and required assistance with ADLs due to her/his quadriplegia. Resident 18 had functional limitations in ROM to both sides to the arms and legs. A 10/22/24 quarterly MDS revealed Resident 18 continued to have functional limitation in ROM to both sides to the arms and legs. A care plan initiated 11/4/24 revealed Resident 18 had Parkinson's disease and quadriplegia. Goals included Resident 18 would remain free of complications related to Parkinson's disease and maintain optimal quality of life within limitations imposed by her/his neurological deficits.…

    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
Show the remaining 22 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents did not receive unnecessary psychotropic medications and failed to monitor for side effects of psychotropic medications for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 7 and 28) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects of medications. Finding include: 1. Resident 7 was admitted to the facility in 10/2017 with diagnoses including anxiety disorder. A review of Resident 7's signed physician orders dated 1/15/25 instructed staff to administer Xanax (to treat anxiety) every eight hours PRN for anxiety for 90 days, starting on 10/18/24. A review of the 1/2025 MAR instructed staff to administer Xanax every eight hours PRN for anxiety for 90 days, starting on 10/18/24. The MAR indicated Resident 7 was administered Xanax on 1/17/25, 1/18/25, 1/19/25 1/22/25, 1/23/25, 1/26/25, 1/27/25 and 1/28/25. Resident 7 was administered Xanax eight times after the end date of 1/16/25. No end date was documented on the MAR. On 1/30/25 at 6:28 AM, Staff 8 (LPN) stated staff…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. The facility administration error rate was 7.41% with two errors in 27 opportunities. This placed residents at risk for an ineffective medication regimen. Findings include: Resident 92 was admitted to the facility in 1/2025 with a diagnosis of malnutrition. A 1/27/25 hospital After Visit Summary form revealed Resident 92 was to be administered medications including Ferrous Sulfate EC (enteric coated) 324 mg (supplement) and Calcium with Vitamin D (supplement). On 1/28/25 at 7:48 AM Staff 11(LPN) was observed to administer Resident 92 medications including one Slow Iron 45 mg tablet. Staff 11 did not administer Calcium with Vitamin D. On 1/28/25 at 9:24 AM Staff 11 stated when a resident was admitted to the facility with new orders Staff 18 (Medical Records) entered the orders into a resident's clinical record and a nurse was to review the orders prior to administering the medications to ensure all the orders were entered correctly. Staff 11…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-09-22 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#2) and 2 of 4 halls (#s 1 and 3) reviewed for dignity and random observations. This placed residents at risk for lack of dignity. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 12/2010 with diagnosis including quadriplegia. A 7/24/23 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 2 had an indwelling catheter. On 9/18/23 at 2:37 PM Resident 2 stated she/he preferred to have her/his urinary catheter bag covered with a privacy bag when she/he was in bed. The urinary catheter bag was observed hanging on the bed with no privacy cover and urine could be seen in the bag. Resident 2 stated people should not have to look at her/his urine. On 9/20/23 at 7:18 AM Resident 2 was in bed with urinary catheter bag hanging on the bed with no privacy bag. Urine could be observed in the bag from the hallway outside of Resident 2's room. On 9/20/23 at 10:48 AM Staff 4 (CNA) stated Resident 2's urinary catheter bag should have…

    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 · E2023-09-22 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    5. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 6/2002 with diagnosis including cerebral palsy (a movement disorder). An 8/3/23 Multidisciplinary Care Conference form revealed the following: -Meeting time and date were blank. -Attendance was blank. -Key review section was blank. -Resident and responsible party expectations and concerns were blank. -Comments and recommendations had notes with names of two other people who were not the resident and information about the two other people. -Recommendation section was blank. -The check boxes for care plan reviewed and updated and current orders and care plans reviewed with resident or representative and copies provided were not marked. A review of Social Services Notes for 7/2023 and 8/2023 revealed no social service notes pertaining to care conferences. On 9/21/23 at 12:52 PM Staff 3 (Social Services Coordinator) stated Resident 1's care conference date was noted as 8/3/23 on her hand-written calendar. Staff 3 stated she would have to look for additional information about the care conference. No additional information was provided. On…

    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 · Ecited before2023-09-22 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a RN was available for at least eight consecutive hours per day seven days per week for 9 out of 32 days reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for unmet assessment needs. Findings include: Direct Care Daily Staff Reports reviewed from 8/19/23 through 9/19/23 indicated there was no RN coverage on the following dates: 8/25/23, 8/26/23, 8/30/23, 9/1/23, 9/7/23, 9/8/23, 9/9/23, 9/15/23, and 9/16/23. On 9/21/23 at 10:45 AM Staff 1 (Chief Executive Officer) and Staff 2 (DNS) stated one of the facility's RNs retired and there were now some days without the required RN staffing.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-09-22 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — pattern
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure an antibiotic stewardship program was implemented for 1 of 1 facility and for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#3) reviewed for UTI. This placed residents at risk for worsening infections. Findings include: An Antibiotic Stewardship Policy last revised on 10/15/22 revealed the IP would track cultures and sensitivity reports routinely as part of the surveillance of the infection. Resident 3 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including heart disease. Resident 3's 9/15/23 and 9/16/23 Progress Notes revealed the resident had increased confusion, the physician was notified and a urine sample was obtained to rule out a UTI. The resident was started on Levofloxacin (antibiotic) per physician orders. The 9/15/23 final urine culture was received at the facility via fax on 9/20/23. This was five days after the culture was verified. The culture results revealed the resident was on the appropriate antibiotic to eliminate Resident 3's infection. On 9/20/23 at 2:07 PM with Staff 2 (DNS) and Staff 14 (LPN…

    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
  • Potential for harm · E2023-09-22 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received vaccines, education, and risk and benefits for 5 of 5 sampled residents (#s 2, 7, 11, 15, and 16) reviewed for immunizations. This placed residents at risk for infections and lack of information. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 2010 with diagnoses including paralysis. Resident 2's record revealed the resident received a pneumonia vaccine but the consent with risk and benefits was not located in the resident's record. The record also did not indicate which pneumonia vaccine the resident received. On 9/20/23 at 4:00 PM and 9/21/23 at 12:33 PM Staff 2 (DNS) stated Resident 2 received the PPSV23 vaccine, acknowledged Resident 2's pneumonia series was not complete and the record did not include the consent with risk and benefits. 2. Resident 7 was admitted to the facility in 2018 with diagnoses including heart failure. Resident 7's record revealed the resident received the PPSV23 vaccine but the consent with risk and benefits was not in the resident'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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-22 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure preferences were honored for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#2) reviewed for choices. This placed residents at risk for lack of support for preferences. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 12/2010 with diagnosis including quadriplegia. The 7/24/23 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 2's BIMS score was 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. a. A revised 8/7/23 care plan indicated Resident 2 had a self-care performance deficit and needed assistance with her ADLs. Resident 2 preferred to be up in her/his wheelchair for breakfast and required two staff assist for morning care. Resident 2 prefered early morning showers. On 9/19/23 at 8:46 AM Resident 2 was observed in bed eating her/his breakfast. On 9/20/23 at 7:18 AM Staff 5 (CNA) was in Resident 2's room while Resident 2 was in her/his bed. Staff 5 stated to Resident 2 as soon as she got all the feeders (residents who require assistance with eating) up she would come back and assist Resident 2 to get…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided advance directive information for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#3) reviewed for advance directives. This placed residents at risk for end-of-life decisions not being honored. Findings include: Resident 3 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including heart disease. An 8/10/23 Clinical Evaluation admission form revealed the resident did not have an advance directive. An 8/15/23 admission MDS indicated Resident 15 was cognitively intact. An 8/31/23 Care Plan revealed staff were to review advance directive information with Resident 3 and/or her/his appointed representative on admission, with a change of condition and at least quarterly. There was no documentation on the care plan to indicate advance directive information was provided. On 9/20/23 at 12:26 PM Staff 3 (Social Services Coordinator) stated if a resident had an advance directive it was scanned into the record. If the resident did not have one, the information was offered and then documented in the…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident privacy was provided for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#2) reviewed for dignity. This placed residents at risk for lack of privacy. Findings include: Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 12/2010 with diagnosis including quadriplegia. The 7/24/23 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 2 had a BIMS score of 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact with no behavioral concerns. An 8/27/23 revised care plan revealed Resident 2 had an ADL self-care performance deficit with interventions including the resident required one staff for bathing, and two staff for AM shift care. On 9/18/23 at 2:49 PM Resident 2 stated she/he felt exposed as staff only partially closed her/his privacy curtain and not her/his room door during cares. Resident 2 indicated when she/he could see people in the hallway, the people in the hallway could see her/him. On 9/20/23 at 10:48 AM Staff 4 (CNA) stated when only one staff member assisted Resident 2, staff left the room door ajar because Resident 2…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow-up on a resident grievance in a timely manner for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#8) reviewed for personal property. This placed residents at risk for missing personal items. Findings include: Resident 8 was admitted to the facility in 2020 with diagnoses included muscle weakness. A 7/17/23 admission MDS revealed the resident was cognitively intact. An 8/2/23 Concerns/Complaints/Compliments/Grievances Follow-up form revealed the resident reported she/he was missing four shorts, three sweat pants, three shirts, one underwear and two jeans. The form indicated the CNAs, housekeeping and social services searched the facility for the missing clothing. There was no resolution documented on the form. On 9/18/23 at 3:45 PM Resident 8 stated she/he received clothing for her/his birthdays and holidays and many items were missing including jeans. She/he submitted a grievance and did not have a resolution yet. Resident 8 stated all her/his clothing were marked with her/his name. On 9/20/23 at 12:07 PM Staff 3 (Social…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0622 — isolated
    Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was permitted timely return to the facility after a scheduled outpatient medical procedure for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#83) reviewed for change of condition. This placed residents at risk for loss of rights to return to the facility. Findings include. Resident 83 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with an arm fracture. Resident 83's 4/12/23 and 4/13/23 Progress Notes revealed the ward clerk made arrangements for the resident to go the the hospital emergency department to have her/his cast removed because the resident refused to attend the scheduled orthopedic office appointment to have the cast removed. The resident's physician was notified and the resident was agreeable to go to the hospital via non-emergent transport to be evaluated for x-rays and cast removal. There was no indication in Resident 83's record she/he was discharged from the facility. An 4/14/23 Emergency Department Note revealed the resident was sent to the emergency department because the resident refused to be seen…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman was notified of resident hospitalization for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#15) reviewed for hospitalization. This placed residents at risk for lack of advocacy by the Ombudsman's office. Findings include: Resident 15 was admitted to the facility in 7/2023 with diagnosis of kidney disease. The 7/11/23 Health Status Note indicated Resident 15 was sent to the hospital. The 7/18/23 admission Summary Note indicated Resident 15 readmitted to the facility. No evidence was found in the resident's clinical record to indicate the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman was notified of Resident 15's hospitalization. On 9/21/23 at 11:15 AM Staff 1 (Chief Executive Officer) stated historically the facility did not send out written hospital notifications for the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-22 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a significant change MDS was completed for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#5) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: Resident 5 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses related to adult failure to thrive. Resident 5's Progress Notes dated 8/14/23 and 8/16/23 revealed the resident's physician discontinued all non-essential medications, she/he was discharged from skilled therapy and placed on comfort care. On 9/20/23 at 10:53 AM Staff 15 (RNCM) stated on 8/14/23 Resident 5 elected end of life care provided by the facility versus hospice services. Staff 15 stated a significant change MDS should have been completed but was not done.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-22 · 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

    2. Resident 19 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including pneumonia. Resident 19's current care plan identified problems of diabetes, use of an intravenous line for the delivery of antibiotics, dehydration related to poor intake and pain related to skin conditions. The care plan did not include: -The use of two diuretics (medication to increase urination) to treat lymphedema (blockage in the lymph system causing swelling in the arms or legs) which could lead to dehydration. -Lymphedema, diabetic neuropathy (nerve damage leading to pain and numbness), peripheral vascular disease (plaque build up restricting blood flow causing pain and leg cramps) and immobility which could cause pain. -Visual problems due to glaucoma and a cataract. -Severe kidney disease with recent consideration for dialysis (a process to eliminate toxins from the blood). -Sleep apnea (condition that causes a person to stop breathing while sleeping). On 9/22/23 at 8:55 AM Resident 19's care plan was discussed with Staff 2 (DNS). Staff 2 stated she expected resident conditions being treated at the…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided supplies for independent in-room activities for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#8) reviewed for activities. This placed residents at risk for lack of meaningful activities. Findings include: Resident 8 was readmitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including heart disease. A 7/17/23 admission MDS revealed Resident 8 was cognitively intact and it was somewhat important for her/him to do her/his favorite activities. Resident 8's 8/23/23 through 9/20/23 activity documentation revealed Resident 8 participated in two group activities. There was no one to one activity or self directed activity documented. A Care Plan initiated 5/26/23 revealed staff were to invite the resident to activities of choice, provide an activity calendar and respect the resident's wishes to decline activities. The care plan did not specify the type of activities the resident liked or the type of supplies the resident may need. On 9/18/23 at 3:38 PM Resident 8 stated the facility had supplies in a bin,…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 1 and 8) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse medication reactions. Findings include: 1. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 6/2002 with diagnoses including diabetes. A signed 9/1/23 physician order instructed staff to check Resident 1's BMP (basic metabolic panel, a group of blood tests to show how well the kidneys work), CPK (creatine phosphokinase, a blood test that measures the creatine in the blood, an enzyme required for muscle function and energy production) and ALT (alanine transaminase, a blood test which measures the amount of ALT in the blood to help with early detection of liver disease) every three months in March, June, September and December with an order date of 4/17/19. No documentation was found in clinical record to indicate Resident 1's 6/2023 BMP, CPK and ALT tests were completed. On 9/22/23 at 8:14 AM Staff 1 (Chief Executive Officer) and Staff 2 (DNS) stated it was expected of staff 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-22 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure sufficient fluids were provided for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#3) reviewed for hydration. This placed residents at risk for dehydration. Findings include: Resident 3 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including heart disease. A Care Plan initiated 8/15/23 indicated the resident was at risk for dehydration due to the use of diuretics (medications to help remove extra fluids from the body) and staff were to monitor the resident. An 8/25/23 Nutrition Evaluation Comprehensive form revealed the resident's most recent laboratory studies and meal intakes were reviewed. The resident's fluid consumption was assessed to average 120 to 240 ml per meal. The resident was assessed to require 1650 to 1850 mL each day. The recommendation was for the resident to be on a hydration pass. Resident 3's Care Plan was not updated to include a hydration pass after the 8/25/23 nutrition evaluation. Resident 3's record did not include additional documentation to indicate the resident received…

    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 · D2023-09-22 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow up on pharmacy recommendations for 3 of 5 sampled residents (#s 1, 8, and 19) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for ineffective and adverse medication reactions. Findings include: 1. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 6/2002 with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder (a mental health disorder with symptoms such as delusions and hallucinations), and depression. a. An 8/4/23 Behavior Psychoactive Meeting revealed pharmacy and physician recommendations. Resident 1 was due for a gradual dose reduction of risperidone (used to treat certain mental and mood disorders), fluoxetine (used to treat depression), and divalproex sprinkles (used to treat epilepsy and bipolar disorder). A letter was sent to the physician. A 9/6/23 Consultation Report indicated a repeat recommendation from 8/9/23: Resident 1 received risperidone, fluoxetine, and divalproex sprinkles and was due for an annual review of the medications. The report had a fax date on the top of 9/19/23 and…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-22 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were provided non-pharmacological interventions prior to the use of PRN psychotropic medications for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 5 and 8) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for sedation. Findings include: 1. Resident 5 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including failure to thrive. Resident 5's Progress Notes dated 8/14/23 and 8/16/23 revealed the resident's physician discontinued all non-essential medications, the resident was discharged from skilled therapy and placed on comfort care. A 9/2023 MAR from 9/1/23 through 9/19/23 revealed the resident was administered lorazepam (antianxiety medication) up to four times a day for anxiety/restlessness. The documentation indicated the medication was effective. The MAR also had directions for staff to try non-pharmacological interventions prior to use of PRN medications including repositioning, offer warm blankets, distraction and to decrease environment stimulation, and staff were to document the…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure 2 of 2 staff (#s 12 and 13) wore appropriate PPE for a resident who required aerosol generating proceduress (AGPs). This placed residents at risk for cross contamination. Findings include: On 9/20/23 at 9:15 AM room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with a sign on the door. The sign included the resident had AGPs completed at 7:47 AM, precautions ended at [no time was written]. The sign instructed authorized, trained staff to wear a gown, N95 mask, eye protection and gloves. Staff 12 (Housekeeper) was observed to enter the room with only a surgical mask and gloves. Staff 12 stated she only wore eye protection and a gown if a resident had COVID-19. On 9/20/23 at 9:30 AM Staff 13 (Activities Assistant) was observed to enter room [ROOM NUMBER] with only a surgical mask. On 9/20/23 at 9:32 AM and 10:15 AM Staff 14 (LPN IP) stated all staff were to wear PPE as directed on the sign for two hours after the AGPs stopped.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-22 · tag F0887 — isolated
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received risk and benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine for 3 of 5 sampled residents (#s 7, 15, and 16) reviewed for immunizations. This placed residents at risk for uninformed decisions. Findings include: 1. Resident 7 was admitted to the facility in 2018 with diagnoses including heart failure. Resident 7's record revealed the resident received the COVID-19 vaccines and boosters in 2021 and 2022. The record did not include education was provided to the resident including the risks and benefits. On 9/20/23 at 4:00 PM and 9/21/23 at 12:33 PM Staff 2 (DNS) stated she was not able to find documentation to indicate staff provided education to Resident 7 prior to the vaccines. 2. Resident 15 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including kidney disease. Resident 15's record revealed she/he refused the COVID-19 vaccines and boosters, dates were not listed. The record did not include education was provided to the resident including the risks and benefits. On 9/20/23 at 4:00 PM and…

    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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 53.0-2.0 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.8-0.8 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.7-1.7 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.9-0.9 vs chain
The other 45 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, per CMS)
1 of 5Caldwell Care of CascadiaCaldwell, ID 1 of 5Cascadia of BoiseBoise, ID 1 of 5Cherry Ridge of CascadiaEmmett, ID 1 of 5Coeur d Alene Health of CascadiaCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Colfax Health and Rehabilitation of CascadiaColfax, WA 1 of 5Colville Health and Rehabilitation of CascadiaColville, WA 1 of 5Eagle Rock Health and Rehabilitation of CascadiaIdaho Falls, ID 1 of 5Mount Ascension Transitional Care Of CascadiaHelena, MT 1 of 5Orchards of Cascadia, TheNampa, ID 1 of 5Spokane Valley Health And Rehabilitation Of CascadSpokane Valley, WA 1 of 5Teton Healthcare of CascadiaIdaho Falls, ID 2 of 5Cascadia of NampaNampa, ID 2 of 5Royal Plaza Health and Rehabilitation of CascadiaLewiston, ID 2 of 5Salem Transitional CareSalem, OR 2 of 5Secora Rehabilitation Of CascadiaPortland, OR 2 of 5Snohomish Health and Rehabilitation of CascadiaSnohomish, WA 3 of 5Arbor Valley of CascadiaBoise, ID 3 of 5Brookfield Health And Rehab Of CascadiaBattle Ground, WA 3 of 5Clarkston Health And Rehab Of CascadiaClarkston, WA 3 of 5Clearwater Health & Rehabilitation of CascadiaOrofino, ID 3 of 5Highland Health And Rehabilitation Of CascadiaBellingham, WA 3 of 5Northpark Health And Rehabilitation Of CascadiaPhoenix, AZ 3 of 5Shaw Mountain of CascadiaBoise, ID 3 of 5Weiser Care of CascadiaWeiser, ID 4 of 5Canyon West of CascadiaCaldwell, ID 4 of 5Cascadia of LewistonLewiston, ID 4 of 5Cove of Cascadia, TheBellevue, ID 4 of 5Grangeville Health & Rehabilitation of CascadiaGrangeville, ID 4 of 5Lewiston Transitional Care of CascadiaLewiston, ID 4 of 5Mountain Valley of CascadiaKellogg, ID 4 of 5Paradise Creek Health and Rehab of CascadiaMoscow, ID 4 of 5Stafholt Health And Rehabilitation Of CascadiaBlaine, WA 4 of 5Wellspring Health & Rehabilitation of CascadiaNampa, ID 5 of 5Alderwood Park Health And Rehab Of CascadiaBellingham, WA 5 of 5Aspen Park of CascadiaMoscow, ID 5 of 5Bend Transitional CareBend, OR 5 of 5Boswell Transitional Care Of CascadiaSun City, AZ 5 of 5Creekside Health and Rehabilitation of CascadiaEugene, OR 5 of 5Fairlawn Health And Rehabilitation Of CascadiaGresham, OR 5 of 5Hudson Bay Health And RehabilitationVancouver, WA

Showing 40 of 45; lowest-rated first.

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
LAFORTE, STEPHENIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL33%since 06/05/2025
NELSON, TIMOTHYIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL33%since 06/05/2025
CASCADIA HEALTHCARE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2023
CASCADIA SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/09/2025
HAMMOND, OWENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2023
STOWE, JACKIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/18/2025
VELLODY, NITAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
BROOKINGS 1 REALTY, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 06/05/2025
WHITE OAK HEALTHCARE FINANCE LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$4.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$213K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 34%Medicare 17%Other / private 49%

This home reported $213K 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

$508per resident / day
operating cost
$15,446per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$500per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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 OR

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Oregon Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Oregon
$16,760/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$18,448/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,875/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 385165. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-07, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next