Rivercrest Post Acute
148 Hood Street, Oregon City, OR 97045 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 53 certified beds · (503) 656-4035 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $18,075 in federal fines (most recent 2024-11-22)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (63%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 12.8% | 14.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.3% | 4.7% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.4% | 1.4% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.3% | 2.0% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.9% | 4.9% | 6.5% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 2.4% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.5% | 20.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 4.0% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.6% | 95.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 8.0% | 5.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.0% | 21.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.4% | 13.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 69.0% | 81.2% | 79.4% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 56% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 53 beds and averages 51.0 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 4.95 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.68 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 4.51 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.12 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 63% is well above 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
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.
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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-13 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
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 provide a private space for resident council meetings for 1 of 1 resident council group reviewed for privacy. This placed residents at risk for a lack of participation in group discussions regarding facility policies, procedures and resident rights. Findings include:On 2/11/26 at 12:35 PM a resident council meeting was held in the facility dining room with state surveyors and eleven residents. The dining room was located next to the therapy gym with only a thin plastic room divider between the two rooms. The therapy gym had only one entrance and exit which required staff to pass through the dining area to get residents to and from therapy.On 2/11/26 between the times of 12:35 PM and 1:05 PM observations of the resident council meeting revealed the following:-Staff and other residents repeatedly entered the dining area in order to get to the therapy gym which caused the resident council meeting to pause.-Conversations between staff and other residents were heard from the therapy room and hallway which created…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-13 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor 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 advance directives were offered or obtained for 4 of 4 sampled residents (#s 4, 22, 25, and 26) reviewed for advance directives. This placed residents at risk for personal health care choices not being honored. Findings include: 1. Resident 4 was admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including liver failure and heart disease. A 10/28/25 care plan indicated Resident 4 had an advance directive. A review of Resident 4's medical record revealed no evidence of an advance directive. On 2/10/26 at 2:56 PM, Resident 4 stated she/he had an advance directive, but no one in the facility asked her/him about it. On 2/10/26 at 3:12 PM, Staff 7 (Social Service Director) acknowledged Resident 4 was not asked about an advance directive. Staff 7 stated the process was to ask residents if they had an advance directive upon admission, and if they did not have one, staff were to offer an advance directive at admission and periodically throughout their stay. 2. Resident 26 was admitted to the facility in…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-13 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 a recapitulation of the resident's stay at the time of discharge for 3 of 3 sampled residents (#s 61, 62, and 63) reviewed for Beneficiary Notification Review. This placed residents at risk for lack of knowledge regarding their care and treatment provided during their stay at the facility. Findings include: 1. Resident 61 was admitted to the facility in 12/2025 with diagnoses including sepsis and cellulitis.A review of Resident 61's medical record revealed she/he discharged from the facility on 1/8/26 and there was no indication a written recapitulation of Resident 61's stay was completed and provided to the resident at the time of discharge.On 2/12/26 at 10:42 AM Staff 3 (Assistant Regional Director of Clinical Services) stated at the time of discharge facility staff provided verbal education, a printed copy of the physician orders, lab results as applicable, a printed progress note, and home health details.On 2/13/26 at 12:07…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to investigate the root cause of resident falls for 8 of 10 sampled fall investigations and the facility failed to ensure safety interventions were in place to prevent smoking related accidents for 1 of 6 sampled residents (#7) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for further falls and smoking injuries. Findings include: 1. Resident 4 was admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including seizures and dementia. On 2/9/26 at 10:35 AM, Resident 4 stated she/he had a lot of falls due to self-transferring when she/he was tired of lying in bed. A 12/27/25 facility investigation indicated on 12/11/25 Resident 44 was found on the floor in the dining room. The investigation did not include an analysis of the root cause of the fall, or whether care planned interventions were effective, or if any additional interventions were put in place. A 12/27/25 facility investigation indicated on 12/12/25 Resident 44 was found on the floor in her/his room. The investigation did not include…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-13 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
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 CNA staff annual performance reviews were completed for 2 of 5 sampled CNA staff (#s 15, 16, and 17) reviewed for sufficient and competent nurse staffing. This placed residents at risk for a lack of competent staff. Findings include:A review of personnel records indicated the following employees did not receive their annual performance evaluations:-Staff 15 (CNA), hire dated was 4/9/22 and a performance review was not completed.-Staff 16 (CNA), hire date was 1/17/22 and a performance review was not completed.-Staff 17 (CNA), hire date was 10/1/13 and a performance review was not completed.On 2/12/26 at 2:26 PM Staff 3 (Assistant Director of Clinical Services) confirmed annual performance reviews for Staff 15, Staff 16, and Staff 17 were not completed.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 report allegations of abuse for 1 of 1 sample resident (#2) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for resident-to-resident abuse. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 5/2025 with diagnoses including anxiety and depression.Resident 43 was admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including traumatic brain injury and depression.A 11/8/25 Progress Note indicated Resident 2 was involved in a verbal altercation with Resident 43 and Resident 43 threatened to hit Resident 2 with her/his hand and with a box of gloves.A 11/8/25 written statement by Staff 23 (CNA) indicated Resident 43 rose her/his hand towards Resident 2 and Resident 2 expressed fear.Resident 2 was unable to be interviewed related to this incident due to cognitive impairment. On 2/11/26 at 11:51 AM, Staff 2 (DNS) acknowledged there was no investigation completed for the 11/8/25 altercation between Resident 2 and Resident 43 and stated the incident was not reported to the State Agency.On 2/11/26 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 investigate an allegation of abuse for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#2) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for continued abuse. Findings include:1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 5/2025 with diagnoses including anxiety and depression.Resident 43 was admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including traumatic brain injury and depression.A 11/8/25 Progress Note indicated Resident 2 was involved in a verbal altercation with Resident 43 and Resident 43 threatened to hit Resident 2 with her/his hand and with a box of gloves.A 11/8/25 written statement written by Staff 23 (CNA) indicated Resident 43 rose her/his hand towards Resident 2 and Resident 2 expressed fear.Resident 2 was unable to be interviewed related to this incident due to cognitive impairment.On 2/11/25 at 11:51 AM, Staff 2 (DNS) stated there was no investigation completed for the 11/8/25 altercation between Resident 2 and Resident 43.On 2/11/26 at 1:35 PM, Staff 23 (CNA) stated on 11/8/25 Resident 43 became upset…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 accurately code an MDS assessment for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for respiratory care. This placed residents at risk for unassessed needs. Finding include:Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 9/2025 with diagnoses including cancer of the larynx and lungs.A 12/10/25 Physician Order revealed orders for oxygen as needed.A review of the 12/2025 MAR revealed Resident 1 received oxygen daily.A 12/10/25 Physician Order revealed orders to monitor for need for suctioning every four hours.A review of the 12/2025 MAR revealed documentation Resident 1 needed suctioning two to three times a day.A 12/20/25 Significant Change MDS indicated Resident 1 did not receive oxygen and did not need to be suctioned.On 2/12/26 at 1:26 PM, Staff 3 (Assistant Director of Clinical) stated Resident 1 received oxygen and suctioning during the look back period for the 12/20/25 Significant Change MDS. Staff 3 acknowledged the MDS was coded incorrectly.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 complete a baseline care plan within 48 hours of a resident's admission for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#28) reviewed for dialysis. This placed residents at risk for dialysis access site complications. Findings include: The facility's Baseline Plan of Care policy, last updated 9/2024, indicated the following:-It is the policy of this facility that direct caregivers have accurate information available to them to properly care for their residents.-The licensed nurse completes the initial nursing database upon admission. The nurse collects information about the resident and their needs. Interventions are implemented and available on the plan of care for the CNA and other caregivers to review.The facility's Hemodialysis Care policy, last updated 9/1/24, indicated the following:-Care Plan interventions are individualized to the resident, but also include the following:a. No blood draws on access arm.b. No blood pressure readings on access arm…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 22 and 28) reviewed for nutrition and pain. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include:A review of the undated facility Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Plans policy revealed the following:-The care plan interventions are derived from a thorough analysis of the information gathered as part of the comprehensive assessment.-The comprehensive, person-centered care plan: a. includes measurable objectives and timeframes; b. describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being c. includes the resident's stated goals upon admission and desired outcomes; d. builds on the resident's strengths; and e. reflects currently recognized standards of practice for problem areas and conditions.-Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as…
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.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-13 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 received treatment and care for a catheter for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#25) reviewed for urinary catheter. This placed residents at risk for urinary tract infections. Findings include: Resident 25 admitted to the facility in 12/2025 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis (bone infection) and neurogenic bladder (loss of bladder control). A 12/15/25 Nursing admission Assessment revealed Resident 25 admitted to the facility with a catheter in place.A 12/22/25 admission MDS revealed Resident 25 had an indwelling catheter in place. A review of Resident 25's physician orders revealed no orders related to the care of her/his indwelling catheter until 2/9/26.On 2/9/26 at 1:53 PM Resident 25 was observed with a catheter. Resident 25 stated she/he felt the facility did not provide required care for the catheter. On 2/10/26 at 2:54 PM Staff 19 (RN) stated physician orders were required to direct the nursing staff to provide care for catheters, including when to flush and change them.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary antiplatelet medications for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#28) reviewed for dialysis. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects. Findings include:Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and acute embolism and thrombosis of deep veins in lower extremity (a blood clot forms inside a blood vessel then breaks off and travels through the bloodstream until it lodges in a narrower vessel).A review of the 1/24/26 Hospital Transfer orders revealed Resident 28 was to start Eliquis (an anticoagulant) on 1/24/26. Resident 28 was to then start Plavix (an antiplatelet) on 3/6/26. Special instructions stated to not take Plavix while on Eliquis.A review of the January 2026 MAR revealed Resident 28 started Eliquis on 1/24/26 per physician orders and continued receiving Eliquis through 2/9/26. The MAR also revealed on 1/28/26 an 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to store resident food in a sanitary manner for 1 of 1 resident refrigerator reviewed for food safety. This placed residents at risk for contamination and at risk for foodborne illness. Findings include:A review of the 9/1/24 Resident Food from Outside Source facility policy revealed the following:-Refrigerated food items from an outside source are stored in a container with the date it was received, name of product type, and resident name/room number.-Refrigerated products are discarded on the following schedule: homemade items, restaurant leftovers, take out items, milk, cottage cheese and similar type items are discarded on day three. During a review of the resident refrigerator located in the dining room on 2/12/26 at 3:50 PM, the following was found:-One clear plastic container that contained what appeared to be sliced peppers that were brown in color. It was labeled with a resident's name and dated 1/6/26 (stored 37 days).-A clump of thick brown creamy substance located on the ceiling of…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow transmission-based precautions for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for infection control. This placed residents at risk for infection. Findings include:Resident 25 was admitted to the facility in 12/2025 with diagnoses including diabetes.On 2/9/26 at 11:47 AM Resident 25 was observed to have a urinary catheter in place, and Staff 20 (CNA) was observed transferring Resident 25 into her/his wheelchair without a gown on.On 2/9/26 at 12:02 PM, Staff 20 stated Resident 25 was on enhanced barrier precautions, and she should have worn a gown when transferring Resident 25 out of bed.On 2/11/25 at 1:19 PM Staff 4 (LPN Infection Preventionist/Assistant Director of Nursing) stated Resident 25 was on enhanced barrier precautions due to having a urinary catheter and wounds. Staff 4 stated when residents were on enhanced barrier precautions, staff were expected to wear gloves and a gown when providing direct patient care such as transferring residents out of bed.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for 2 of 6 sampled residents (#s 2 and 22) reviewed for medication. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects. Findings include:1. Resident 2 admitted to the facility in 2025 with diagnoses including depression and adjustment disorder.The 1/29/25 Care Plan indicated Resident 2 experienced pain due to a recent surgery and motor vehicle accident with multiple fractures. Interventions included to administer medications as ordered.A 4/8/25 physician order indicate Resident 2 was to receive oxycodone 5 mg every four hours as needed for pain and 10 mg every four hours as needed for pain. The medication was not to exceed more than 40 mg daily.A 4/24/25 progress note indicated Staff 5 (LPN) signed out a dose of oxycodone and noted Resident 2 received 50 mg of Oxycodone on 4/23/25. The medication was to not exceed 40 mg per day. Resident 2 was notified and the on call provider was notified. Resident 2 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure falls were evaluated to ensure resident safety and to ensure care plan interventions were followed for 2 of 4 sampled residents (#s 3 and 7) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for continued accidents. Findings include: 1. Resident 3 admitted to the facility in 11/2024, with diagnoses including heart failure. A 12/1/24 at 02:26 AM Progress Note indicated Resident 3 slid out of bed, landed on the floor and got a skin tear on her/his leg. The same progress note indicated Resident 3 was sent out to the hospital per her/his request, not due to injury. The resident did not return to the facility. The progress note did indicate if Resident 3's fall was witness or unwitnessed. Record review found no documented evidence to show the resident's fall was evaluated to ensure resident safety and care plan interventions were followed. On 4/18/25 at 10:15 AM, Staff 2 (DNS) and Staff 3 (RN consultant) confirmed that a thorough and complete analysis was not done for Resident 3's fall incident. 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 staff followed contact precautions for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for infection control. This placed residents at risk for cross contaminations. Findings include: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on 5/2024, with diagnoses including a stage 4 and stage 3 pressure ulcer. On 4/17/25 at 9:09 AM, Staff 4 (LPN) and Staff 5 (CNA) performed a dressing change for Resident 1. Staff 4 removed the old dressing and carefully cleaned Resident 1's wound. Staff then re-dressed the wound per physician order. Staff 4 did not change her gloves between handling soiled dressings and clean dressings. On 4/17/25 at 9:18 AM, Staff 4 (LPN) removed her PPE gown improperly. Staff 4 came into contact with the exterior side of the gown when it was removed. On 4/17/25 at 9:21 AM, Staff 4 (LPN) confirmed she was aware she should have changed her gloves between dirty and clean portions of the procedure. Staff 4 stated she understood the contamination risk related to how a PPE gown should be removed.…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-10-11 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
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 have the Medical Director attend the Quality Assessment and Assurance and Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAA/QAPI) committee meetings. This placed residents at risk for unidentified needs. Findings include: Documentation of QAA/QAPI meeting minutes were requested from 4/2024 through 9/2024 which revealed Staff 23 (Former Medical Director) did not attend any of the QAA/QAPI meetings. On 10/8/24 at 9:59 AM, and on 10/11/24 at 1:51 PM, Staff 1 (Administrator) stated Staff 23 the Former Medical Director refused to attend the QAA/QAPI meetings in person or via skype.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure carpet, flooring and doors were in good repair 1 of 1 facility and 3 of 19 resident rooms reviewed for homelike environment. This placed residents at risk for injury from damaged surfaces and lack of a homelike environment. Findings include: Multiple observations between 10/7/24 and 10/11/24 revealed hall carpet throughout the facility was heavily stained and worn. Observations on 10/9/24 at 9:36 AM revealed a metal floor latch socket was missing below the fire doors between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. This created a hole in the flooring 2.5 inches long, 1.5 inches wide and an inch deep; large enough for canes and walkers to catch on. On 10/10/24 at 10:50 AM the floor covering surrounding the base of the toilet between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] was observed to be damaged with exposed under floor. The exposed surface was rough, brownish-gray and was not a cleanable surface. The rest of the bathroom floor was worn and had patches of gray…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to promote self determination for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#5) reviewed for choices. This placed residents at risk for lack of honoring choices and room preferences. Findings include: 1. Resident 5 was admitted to the facility on 9/2020 with diagnoses including anxiety and schizoaffective (a condition that is marked by depression and mania) disorder. The Quarterly MDS dated [DATE], revealed Resident 5 had a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Random observations from 10/7/24 through 10/10/24 revealed her/his room was cluttered with multiple items on the bedside table, bed, dresser and on the floor. Resident 5 was observed using a front wheel walker, frequently going out to smoke or walking up and down the halls. On 10/7/24 at 10:44 AM, Resident 5 and Staff 8 (LPN) were present for an interview. Resident 5 stated she/he was told by management she/he would have to move out of her/his room,…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 informed in writing of changes in financial coverage for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#3) reviewed for advance beneficiary notification. This placed residents at risk for unknown financial liabilities and lack of knowledge regarding the right to appeal the decision. Findings include: Resident 3 admitted to the facility in 5/2024 with diagnoses including lower extremity paraplegia (the inability to move lower extremities). A review of Resident 3's electronic health record revealed she/he was discharged from Medicare Part A services on 8/9/24 with 37 skilled days remaining. The resident remained in the facility. No evidence was found in the resident's record to indicate she/he received a Notice of Medicare Non-coverage form (NOMNC) or a Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNF ABN). In an interview on 10/9/2024 at 3:16 PM Staff 4 (Social Services Coordinator) stated she was unable to locate a NOMNC or a SNF ABN for Resident 3. In an interview on 10/11/24 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep 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 personal privacy was honored for 1 of 1 resident (#187) reviewed for privacy. This placed residents at risk for breaches of confidentiality. Findings include: Resident 187 admitted to the facility in 9/2024 with diagnoses including intracranial (inside the skull) abscess. On 10/10/24 from 1:00 PM through 2:00 PM, Resident 187 was observed meeting with Staff 27 (Physician's Assistant) in a corner of the main dining room. The survey team was meeting in the activity room adjacent to the main dining room and the two rooms were separated by a curtain. The survey team was able to hear the medical conversation. The resident and Staff 27 were discussing private health information including diagnoses, symptoms, medications and prognosis. Resident 187 was overheard telling Staff 27 about her/his discomfort with the lack of privacy associated with sharing a room with three roommates and stated she/he wanted to leave the facility due to the lack of privacy. In an interview on 10/11/24 at 9:28 AM…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person centered care plan for 1 of 3 recently admitted residents (#85) reviewed for incontinence and respiratory care. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: Resident 85 was admitted in 9/2024 with diagnoses including diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, history of lung cancer, heart failure and generalized weakness. Resident 85's admission MDS and CAAs dated 9/24/24 identified the resident was frequently incontinent of urine related to weakness and the use of diuretic medication, and the resident required staff assistance with toileting. Current Physician orders for Resident 85 included an order for a 2000 ml per day fluid restriction. Resident 85's care plan dated 9/21/24 identified bladder incontinence related to the use of diuretic medication, impaired mobility and the need for extensive assistance with transfers. Interventions directed staff to check and change frequently throughout the shift and PRN. The care plan did not include…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 residents received appropriate ADL assistance for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#136) reviewed for activities of daily living. This placed residents at risk for lack of grooming and personal hygiene. Findings include: Resident 136 was admitted to the facility in 10/2024 with diagnoses including stroke. A review of Resident 136's Baseline Care plan dated 10/5/24 revealed the resident required substantial/maximal assistance from one person for showers. A review of Resident 136's 10/2024 shower task form revealed the resident received a bed bath on 10/6/24. An observation and interview on 10/7/24 at 2:36 PM revealed Resident 136 was in bed and her/his hair was greasy. Resident 136 stated she/he received one bed bath since admission, but her/his hair was not washed, which would have been nice. Random observations from 10/8/24 through 10/9/24 revealed Resident 136 was in her/his bed or up in her/his wheelchair, and the resident's hair was greasy. On 10/9/24 at 11:56 AM Resident 136 stated…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 residents received support to maintain continence for 1 of 2 residents (#85) reviewed for incontinence. This placed residents at increased risk for skin breakdown and loss of dignity. Findings include: Resident 85 was admitted in 9/2024 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure and generalized weakness. Resident 85's admission MDS dated [DATE] identified the resident was frequently incontinent of urine and the resident required staff assistance with toileting. The 9/24/24 Urinary Incontinence CAA identified the type of incontinence as a mixture of urge, related to use of diuretic medication and functional, due to weakness and impaired mobility. According to the CAA as the resident regained strength, it was anticipated the resident would be more able to self-toilet and avoid incontinence issues. Resident 85's care plan dated 9/21/24 indicated the presence of moisture associated skin breakdown…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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 follow physician's orders for continuous oxygen use for 1 of 1 (#85) sampled resident reviewed for respiratory care. This place residents at risk for complications related to chronic respiratory disease. Findings include: Resident 85 was admitted to the facility in 9/2024 for rehabilitation with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), obstructive sleep apnea and heart failure. Resident 85's physician orders dated 9/17/24 and Comprehensive Care Plan dated 9/21/24 directed staff to administer continuous humidified oxygen at 6 liters per minute via nasal cannula to keep oxygen saturation (percentage of oxygen in the resident blood) between 89 and 92%. Review of a published cylinder duration chart for medical oxygen indicated an E-cylinder, if full, would last 1.7 hours at a flow rate of 6 liters per minute. This information was not part of the resident's plan of care. On 10/7/24 at 1:23 PM Resident 85 was observed to transfer from a wheelchair to bed. The resident had a…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure medication storage areas were free of expired medication and biologicals for 1 of 1 medication storage room and 1 of 3 treatment carts reviewed for medication storage. This placed residents at risk for diminished treatment efficacy. Findings include: On [DATE] at 11:08 AM observations within the medication storage room refrigerator revealed a vial of tuberculin used for tuberculosis screening labeled as opened on [DATE]. Staff 2 (DNS) confirmed the tuberculin was to be discarded 30 days after opening. A bottle of acidophilus with an expiration date of 8/2024 was located in the door compartment of the refrigerator. Staff 2 confirmed it was expired. Observations of one of three facility treatment carts on [DATE] at 11:20 AM revealed a vial of Bacitracin (antibacterial) ointment with an expiration date of 8/2024. Staff 2 (DNS) confirmed the used tube of Bacitracin was expired.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-07-14 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
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 CNA staff annual performance reviews were completed for 3 of 5 sampled CNA staff (#s 8, 11 and 12) reviewed for sufficient and competent nurse staffing. This placed residents at risk for a lack of competent staff. Findings include: A review of personnel records on 7/13/23 indicated the following employees had not received their annual performance evaluations: -Staff 8 (CNA), hire date 4/9/22: no annual performance reviews were provided. -Staff 11 (CNA), hire date 10/2/01: last performance review was completed on 2/20/20. -Staff 12 (CNA), hire date 2/27/17: last performance review was completed on 12/10/20. On 7/13/23 at 10:56 AM PM Staff 13 (Human Resource Director) confirmed annual performance reviews were not completed for the identified staff.
- Potential for harm · E2023-07-14 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
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 CNA staff received 12 hours of in-service training annually for 4 of 5 randomly selected staff members (#s 8, 9, 10 and 12) reviewed for evidence of in-service training. This placed residents at risk for lack of quality care. Findings include: On 7/13/23 at 9:48 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) stated in-service trainings were provided according the facility's training calendar, monthly staff meetings and via online courses. On 7/14/23 at 10:59 Staff 1 provided the following annual CNA training hours for the past year: -Staff 8 received five hours of annual in-service training; -Staff 9 received six hours of annual in-service training; -Staff 10 received six hours of annual in-service training and -Staff 12 received nine hours of annual in-service training. On 7/14/23 at 10:59 AM Staff 1 stated she expected CNA staff to receive at least 12 hours of in-service training annually.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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's orders for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#17) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse medical consequences. Findings include: 1. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease (a disorder that affects movement), end-stage renal disease with dialysis, astherosclerotic heart disease (disease of the heart's major blood vessels) and depression. a. A 5/1/23 physician order indicated Resident 17 was prescribed carbidopa-levodopa (Parkinson's medication) three times a day. A review of Resident 17's 6/1/23 through 7/11/23 MAR indicated the resident's carbidopa-levodopa was not given according to physician orders on the following days: -6/3 mid day and evening doses; -6/5 morning and mid day doses; -6/6 mid day dose; -6/8 morning, mid day and evening doses; -6/9 evening dose; -6/10 morning dose; -6/12 morning and mid day doses; -6/13 morning and mid day doses; -6/15 morning and mid day doses; -6/16 mid day dose;…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-14 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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 follow physician orders for oxygen therapy for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#17) reviewed for oxygen. This placed residents at risk for unmet respiratory needs. Findings include: The facility's Respiratory Treatment Policy and Procedure last revised 6/22/22 indicated the following: -When residents had continuous oxygen therapy, the licensed nurse was responsible for checking residents oxygen therapy each shift and validating the regulator was set for the appropriate liter flow. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including end-stage renal disease, chronic respiratory failure and heart failure. Resident 17's 5/1/23 physician order indicated she/he required continuous oxygen at four liters per minute when resting, with activity and when sleeping. On 7/11/23 at 2:30 PM and 7/12/23 at 12:09 PM Resident 17 was observed with oxygen administration being provided via nasal cannula between 1.5 and two liters per minute. A review of Resident 17's 7/2023 health care record…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to store drugs and biologicals in locked compartments for 1 of 2 medication carts observed during this survey. This placed residents at risk for medication diversion and accidents. Findings include: The facility's Medication Administration Policy indicated: Unlock medication cart: Cart may remain unlocked only when in direct line of sight and control by the nurse or medication aide who is administering the medications. On 7/11/23 at 1:11 PM a medication cart was observed to be unlocked near the nurses' station. The nurse was not in view of the cart. Staff 5 (LPN) verified the cart was unlocked. On 7/11/23 at 2:10 PM a medication cart was observed to be unlocked near the nurses' station. The nurse was not in view of the cart. Staff 6 (LPN) verified the cart was unlocked. On 7/12/23 at 2:58 PM Staff 1 (Administrator) stated it was her expectation the carts remained locked when staff were not using them.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-14 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 physician's visit notes were in the resident's clinical record for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#2) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for inaccurate or incomplete records. Findings include: Resident 2 was re-admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including disorder of the colon. A review of Resident 2's clinical record revealed no routine regulatory physician's visits from 1/1/23 through 7/14/23 were documented in the resident's record. On 7/14/23 at 9:51 AM Staff 2 (DNS) verified there were no regulatory physician's visit notes in Resident 2's clinical record. Staff 2 stated she was trying to obtain copies of the notes from the physician's office.
- No harm found · B2026-02-13 · tag F0577 — patternAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
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 survey results of the previous year were readily accessible for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for resident council. This placed residents and the public at risk for not being informed of the facility's survey history. Findings include:On 2/12/26 at 8:46 AM after the resident council meeting, Resident 37 stated she/he reviewed the survey results binder, and she/he noticed the survey results posted in the binder were from two years ago.On 2/12/26 at 9:16 AM the survey binder was observed near the entrance of the facility. The report from the facility's most recent survey was not found.On 2/12/26 at 10:52 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) acknowledged the most recent survey results were not included in the facility survey binder.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$18,075 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $18,075 — penalty dated 2024-11-22
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 4.4 | -1.4 vs chain |
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 273; 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 / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| TRUIST BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 09/01/2024 |
| APT, FREDERICK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/10/2024 |
| BAILEY, SPENCER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/10/2025 |
| JERGENSEN, JOSHUA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/10/2024 |
| MITCHELL, JOHN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/10/2024 |
| MORRIS, CHRISTOPHER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/10/2025 |
| RAMI, ZAHLIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/19/2025 |
| OREGON CITY 148 REALTY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| PROVIDENCE ADMINISTRATIVE CONSULTING SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $549K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OR
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.
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 385245. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-13, 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.