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

Creekside Health and Rehabilitation of Cascadia

3500 Hilyard Street, Eugene, OR 97405 · For profit - Corporation · 87 certified beds · (541) 687-9211 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (541) 687-9211 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 9 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3525 Hilyard St · (541) 224-8090 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1501 Pearl St · (541) 485-1363 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Haggen0.3 mi
3075 Hilyard St · (541) 687-1742 · Call to confirm hours
Park
3350 Potter St · (541) 682-4906 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
3635 Hilyard St · (541) 686-0432

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 improved from 3 to 5 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 rating5★
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 increased7.1%14.9%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.6%4.7%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.6%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.1%2.0%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.7%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 injury0.6%2.4%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.0%20.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication27.6%12.4%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.9%5.8%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.3%21.8%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table9.6%13.9%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.1%81.2%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission12.6%21.4%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit14.3%16.1%12.0%worse

§ 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.

61.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 99 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

61.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
69.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.41U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.22hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 69.4% 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 85 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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.

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 SNF61.1%CMS range 52.2–69.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.7–14.410.7%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 discharge69.4%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 discharge56.5%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 discharge62.4%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 identified96.2%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.8%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 worsened1.9%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 hospitalization6.1%CMS range 3.3–10.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.871.02Oct 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

0.80
RN hours/ resident / day
0.95
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.12
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.88
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.50
RN hoursweekends
48.1%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 87 beds and averages 56.7 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 30 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 4.88 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.80 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.12 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 4.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.11 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.93 to 0.50 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-05-22)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-18)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2026-05-22 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    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 maintain a homelike environment for 1 of 1 facility reviewed. This placed residents at risk for living in an uncomfortable and un-homelike environment. Findings include: Resident 38 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with a diagnosis of quadriplegia.On 5/19/26 at 10:11 AM, Resident 38 stated the carpets were stained in several spots and needed to be replaced.On 5/21/26 at 10:12 AM, observation of all facility halls revealed multiple areas of stained and discolored carpeting throughout resident hallways. Large dark stains were observed on the carpeted walking surfaces. Multiple light-colored bleach stains were observed adjacent to resident room doorways. The carpets appeared worn, dingy and discolored, resulting in an unclean appearance.On 5/21/26 at 10:12 AM, Staff 7 (Maintenance Director) observed the 400, 600, and 700 halls confirmed the carpets were stained in multiple areas, large dark stains were observed in the carpet, and multiple light colored bleach stains were observed adjacent to resident rooms.…

    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 · D2026-05-22 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    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 store medications properly for 1 of 3 medication refrigerators. This placed residents at risk for receiving ineffective medication. Findings include:The CDC requires medication refrigerators to always maintain a temperature between 36 and 46 degrees Fahrenheit (F).On 5/21/26 at 1:37 PM, Staff 2 (DNS/CNO) provided the temperature log for the facility's narcotic refrigerator for the last 30 days. The temperatures were as follows:-4/21/26 at 7:00 AM 25.16 degrees F-4/21/26 at 7:00 PM 28.04 degrees F-4/22/26 at 7:00 AM 30.2 degrees F-4/22/26 at 7:00 PM 28.58 degrees F-4/23/26 at 7:00 AM 28.4 degrees F-4/23/26 at 7:00 PM 27.68 degrees F-4/24/26 at 7:00 AM 25.88 degrees F-4/24/26 at 7:00 PM 27.5 degrees F-4/25/26 at 7:00 AM 25.34 degrees F-4/25/26 at 7:00 PM 27.5 degrees F-4/26/26 at 7:00 AM 24.08 degrees F-4/26/26 at 7:00 PM 29.48 degrees F-4/27/26 at 7:00 AM 25.16 degrees F-4/27/26 at 7:00 PM 27.86 degrees F-4/28/26 at 7:00…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-22 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
    Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
    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 provide timely lab services for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 6 and 11) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for delayed treatment. Findings include: Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of acute pyelonephritis (severe kidney infection). Resident 6's 4/2026 BIMS Assessment indicated a score of 15 (cognitively intact). A review of the resident's clinical record revealed on 3/6/26 Resident 6 reported burning with urination for a couple of days to Staff 12 (NP). Staff 12 ordered a UA for Resident 6. Additional notes revealed the specimen was sent to the lab 3/6/26. No documentation was located in the clinical record of the lab results for the 3/6/26 urine sample. On 5/21/26 at 10:30 AM, Staff 4 (IP) stated the facility was notified by the lab on 3/10/26 the resident's name was not identifiable on the specimen. The clinical record revealed a new order was obtained for a UA 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-12 · 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 interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with dignity and respect for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#16) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for lack of dignity and respect. Findings include: Resident 16 was admitted to the facility in 3/2025, with diagnoses including anxiety. An admission MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident 16 was cognitively intact. The Baseline Care Plan dated 3/28/25, indicated Resident 16 used anti-anxiety medications, with interventions including she/he could become overwhelmed. Staff could assist with one-on-one support. Resident 16 required moderate assistance of one staff member for stand pivot transfers and toileting. A 3/29/25 facility investigation was initiated after two residents complained about Staff 5 (Former CNA). Multiple grievances against Staff 5 led to him being placed on administrative leave. Resident 16 filed a grievance on 3/29/25, which detailed an incident on 3/28/25 during the evening or…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-18 · 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 1 of 5 residents(#50)reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects to medications. Findings include: Resident 50 was admitted to the facility in 11/2024 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure. A 12/20/24 physician order for Enestro (a heart and blood pressure medication) indicated to hold the medication if Resident 50's systolic blood pressure(SBP)was less than 120. A review of the 1/2025 MAR revealed on 1/2/25 the PM dose of Enestro was given with a SBP of 118 and on 1/4/25 the PM dose of Enestro was given with a SBP of 110. A review of the 2/2025 MAR revealed on 2/1/25 the PM dose of Enestro was given with a SBP of 104. On 2/14/25 at 11:58 AM Staff 2(DNS)acknowledged Resident 50 received Enestro on 1/2/25, 1/4/25, and 2/1/25 when the medication should have been held per orders. On 2/14/25 at 2:19 PM Staff 10(LPN)stated he gave Enestro on 2/1/25 when it should have been held based on the blood pressure parameter order.…

    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 · D2025-02-18 · tag F0810 — isolated
    Provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
    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 provide assistive devices for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#313) reviewed for nutrition. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: Resident 313 was admitted to the facility in 1/2025 with diagnoses including anxiety. A 1/23/25 Nutrition Evaluation indicated Resident 313 had difficulty grasping a fork related to hand tremors and the RD recommended adaptive ware (flatware in foam tubes to make it easier to grip) for all meals. A 1/23/24 order indicated Resident 313 was to have adaptive flatware for all meals. On 2/10/25 at 12:52 PM Resident 313 was observed eating in the dining room, no adaptive ware was observed. On 2/11/25 at 1:38 PM Resident 313's tray was observed without adaptive ware. On 2/12/25 at 12:25 PM Resident 313's tray was observed without adaptive ware. On 2/12/25 at 12:25 PM Staff 18 (Dietary Aide) stated adaptive ware are added to the trays during the tray line in the kitchen based on what the tray tickets indicated. On 2/13/25 at 2:52 PM Staff 13 (RD)…

    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 · D2023-10-20 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to update resident care plans for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 6 and 36) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for lack of ADL care needs and safety. Findings include: 1. Resident 36 was admitted to the facility in 9/2023 with diagnoses including multiple pressure ulcers and legal blindness. Review of Resident 36's Care Plan initiated 9/29/23, revealed the resident had an ADL self-care performance deficit related to blindness, decreased mobility and wounds. The resident required one or two-person extensive assist with toileting, substantial/maximum assistance for repositioning, personal hygiene and dressing. The resident was encouraged to use her/his pressure sensitive call device to ring for assistance. The admission MDS, dated [DATE], revealed Resident 36 had a BIMS score of 11 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Random observations from 10/16/23 through 10/18/23 revealed Resident…

    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 · D2023-10-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    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 implement care planned interventions related to fall safety for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#36) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for injury. Findings include: Resident 36 was admitted to the facility in 9/2023 with diagnoses including multiple pressure ulcers and legal blindness. A review of an incident report, dated 10/1/23, indicated Resident 36 had an unwitnessed fall and was found next to her/his bed on 10/1/23. The resident indicated she/he attempted to reposition herself/himself in bed, slid off the bed and onto the floor. The resident was assessed and not injured from the fall. Review of Resident 36's Care Plan, initiated 9/29/23, revealed the resident was at risk for falls related to visual impairment and impaired functional mobility. A revision on 10/6/23 revealed the resident had a non-injury fall out of bed on 10/1/23 and interventions included a fall mat at bedside, bed in a low position 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-10-20 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
    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 free from unnecessary bowel medications for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#18) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for loose stools and diarrhea. Findings include: Resident 18 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including diabetes. Resident 18's current physician orders indicated the resident had an order for MiraLAX (a laxative) once daily for constipation. The medication was to be held for loose stools. Bowel elimination records from 9/20/23 through 10/17/23 revealed Resident 18 had loose stools or diarrhea documented on the following dates: - 9/20/23, 9/28/23, 9/29/23, 10/4/23, 10/6/23, 10/13/23, and 10/17/23. Resident 18's MARs from 9/20/23 through 10/17/23 indicated the scheduled MiraLAX was not held for the loose stools. On 10/18/23 at 2:20 PM Staff 5 (LPN) stated Resident 18's MiraLAX should have been held on the days the resident had loose stools. On 10/19/23 at 12:09 PM Staff 2 (DNS) verified Resident 18 was administered MiraLAX…

    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
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 5 of 53.0+2.0 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.7+1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.9+1.1 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 5Curry Village Health And Rehab Of CascadiaBrookings, OR 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 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
CASCADIA OREGON OPERATIONS LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/30/2022
CASCADIA HC GROUP LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/05/2025
CASCADIA HEALTHCARE LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/30/2022
CASCADIA HOLDCO LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/05/2025
HAMMOND, OWENIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/30/2022
LAFORTE, STEPHENIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/05/2025
NELSON, TIMOTHYIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/05/2025
EUGENE 3500 REALTY, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/05/2025
WHITE OAK HEALTHCARE FINANCE LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 08/11/2022
CASCADIA SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/17/2025
POSEY, JAMMIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023
VELLODY, NITAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 12 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.

7 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.

$7.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+3.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$371K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 58%Medicare 10%Other / private 33%

This home reported $371K 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

$554per resident / day
operating cost
$16,853per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$576per 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 385147. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-22, 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