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

Marquis Wilsonville Post Acute Rehab

30900 SW Parkway Avenue, Wilsonville, OR 97070 · For profit - Corporation · 50 certified beds · (503) 682-2840 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (503) 682-2840 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 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 (5/5) — 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)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
8855 SW Holly Ln Ste 133 · (503) 890-2454 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.4 mi
9450 SW Wilsonville Rd · (503) 582-1498 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
30300 SW Boones Ferry Rd · (503) 570-3500 · Call to confirm hours
Park
SW 4th St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 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 increased19.0%14.9%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.4%4.7%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.3%1.4%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.0%2.0%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.3%4.9%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.0%2.4%3.3%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication4.5%12.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.7%95.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.8%5.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.3%21.8%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table18.1%13.9%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.0%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.8%81.2%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.1%21.4%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.9%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.

76.0% 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 187 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

76.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
62.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.46U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.25hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 62.1% 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 103 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 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 SNF76.0%CMS range 69.4–79.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.0%CMS range 6.0–13.110.7%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 discharge62.1%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 discharge60.2%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge57.3%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 discharge97.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.3%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 worsened4.6%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 hospitalization5.4%CMS range 3.3–10.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.711.02Oct 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

0.58
RN hours/ resident / day
1.39
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.98
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.95
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.38
RN hoursweekends
44.6%
Total nursing turnover
54.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 39.0 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.98 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 4.39 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.17 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.66 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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 (2026-04-10)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-20)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-10 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide adequate nail care for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#32) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for poor hygiene. Findings include: Resident 32 was admitted to the facility in 3/2026 with diagnoses including fracture of the left leg.Resident 32's 3/25/26 Personal Hygiene Care Plan directed the resident's hygiene needs would be met and the resident required constant supervision and physical assistance from staff with hand washing. Resident 32's 3/31/26 admission MDS indicated the resident was cognitively impaired and required substantial to maximum staff assistance for personal hygiene. Observations from 4/6/26 through 4/7/26 between the hours of 8:37 AM and 12:44 PM revealed Resident 32's fingernails and cuticles on both hands were coated in dark, black thick debris collected underneath the nails and built up around the cuticles.Resident 32's health record did not include documented evidence specific to the provision of nail care. On 4/6/26 at 10:14 AM Resident 32 was unable to…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident respiratory equipment was maintained for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#44) reviewed for respiratory care. This placed residents at risk for increased respiratory concerns. Findings include:A 3/2015 Oxygen Administration facility policy indicated oxygen concentrator filters were to be cleaned weekly. Resident 44 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. Resident 44's physician order dated 3/30/26 revealed she/he required supplemental oxygen use to maintain oxygen saturation. On 4/6/26 at 1:49 PM and on 4/7/26 at 11:30 AM the oxygen concentrator was observed to have an external foam filter with a thick layer of dust. On 4/7/26 at 3:30 PM Staff 3 (Interim DNS/Corporate RN) acknowledged Resident 44's concentrator foam filter was covered in a thick layer of dust. Staff 3 stated she expected the filters to be…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-20 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#27) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for unmet bathing, grooming and vision needs. Findings include: Resident 27 was admitted to the facility in 9/2024 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease and macular degeneration (vision impairment). a. Resident 27's 9/15/24 admission MDS indicated the resident wore glasses and it was very important to read. The vision CAA, completed by Staff 5 (Social Services) indicated the following: - ensure glasses were clean and appropriately worn. Resident 27's 9/2024 Care Plan did not include a focus, goals or interventions related to her/his vision and the use of glasses. On 12/17/24 at 1:27 PM, 1:47 PM and 2:01 PM Staff 10 (CNA), Staff 11 (CNA) and Staff 12 (RN) stated they referred to the Care Plan to determine Resident 27's care needs. Staff 10, Staff 11 and Staff 12 stated they were not sure if Resident 27 wore glasses. On 12/18/24 at 11:22 AM Staff 5 stated her role…

    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 · D2024-12-20 · tag F0660 — isolated
    Plan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the resident was involved and informed of the discharge plan for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#30) reviewed for care planning. This placed residents at risk for being uninformed about their discharge plan. Findings include: Resident 30 was admitted to the facility in 11/2024 with diagnoses including Raynaud's syndrome (disorder of the blood vessels). Resident 30's 9/15/24 admission MDS indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Resident 30's 11/8/24 Discharge Care Plan, created by Staff 5 (Social Services) indicated the following: - Anticipated discharge plan is to: HLOC, prefers AFH No other information was found on the Care Plan related to Resident 30's discharge plan. Resident 30's 11/14/24 Care Conference indicated the discharge plan was reviewed with the resident and the projected discharge date was 12/11/24. On 12/16/24 at 11:44 AM Resident 30 stated she/he did not feel included in the discharge plan. The resident stated nobody ever talked to me or kept her/him informed about where or when…

    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 · Dcited before2024-12-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide adequate bathing and grooming for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#27) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for poor hygiene and grooming. Findings include: Resident 27 was admitted to the facility in 9/2024 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, restlessness and agitation. Resident 27's 9/15/24 admission MDS indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment and required moderate staff assistance for personal hygiene and grooming. Resident 27's 9/2024 Bathing and Personal Hygiene Care Plan indicated the resident required staff assistance and constant supervision for bathing and personal hygiene and the resident's hygiene needs will be met. Resident 27's Bath/Shower Task Flowsheet revealed the resident did not receive a bath/shower for 27 days between 11/19/24 through 12/15/24. On 12/16/24 at 4:11 PM Witness 2 (Family) stated the resident used to be clean shaven all the time. On 12/16/24 at 10:33 AM and 12/17/24 at 1:15 PM Resident 27 had long, unkempt facial hair.…

    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 · D2024-12-20 · tag F0685 — isolated
    Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
    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 vision services for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#27) reviewed for vision. This placed residents at risk for unmet vision needs. Findings include: Resident 27 was admitted to the facility in 9/2024 with diagnoses including macular degeneration (vision impairment). Resident 27's 9/15/24 admission MDS indicated the resident wore glasses and it was very important to read. The vision CAA, completed by Staff 5 (Social Services) indicated the following: - Ensure glasses were clean and appropriately worn; - Resident has macular degeneration that impairs vision. [Resident] has a visual deficit and has glasses [she/he] does not use because [she/he] needs a new glasses prescription. [Resident stated] They aren't the correct prescription any way. Resident 27's health record revealed no evidence the facility facilitated vision services to ensure the resident was assessed for glasses and had the appropriate prescription. 12/16/24 at 4:14 PM Witness 2 (Family) stated Resident 27…

    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 · D2024-12-20 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were followed up on for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#10) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse medication reactions. Findings include: Resident 10 was admitted to the facility in 2/2024 with diagnoses including depression and hypotension. Monthly pharmacist reviews of Resident 10's medication regimen revealed the following: -On 11/4/24 the pharmacist recommendation advised the prescriber to discontinue PRN haloperidol after 14 days (11/15/24). If necessary, write a new order x 14 days only after direct examination and documentation is completed. No response from the provider was found in Resident 10's health care record or provided by the facility. -On 11/4/24 the pharmacist recommendation advised the prescriber to provide the following rationale and duration: It is appropriate for PRN lorazepam to be extended beyond 14 days. Medication necessary to help with comfort as resident transitions towards end-of-life. Continue order for 6 months at which…

    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 · D2024-08-07 · 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

    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 bowel medication for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#3) reviewed for medication. This placed residents at risk for adverse medication side effects. Findings include: Resident 3 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including stroke and post hospital procedure for intestinal obstruction. The 4/16/24 hospital orders indicated Resident 3 was to receive loperamide 2 mg (antidiarrheal medication) two capsules twice daily and one capsule every six hours as needed for diarrhea. The 4/17/24 order indicated Resident 3 was to receive Miralax powder (laxative medication) once daily for bowel care. Hold for loose stools. The 4/2024 MARs indicated Resident 3 received Miralax once daily from 4/17/24 through 4/29/24. Resident 3's bowel records indicated the following dates when she/he had loose or watery stools on one or more occasions: -4/17/24 -4/18/24 -4/19/24 -4/21/24 -4/23/24 -4/24/24 -4/27/24…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    1. Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the care plan reflected management of potential complications associated with a tracheostomy tube for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#17) reviewed for respiratory care. This placed the resident at risk for delayed care. Findings include: Resident 17 was admitted to the facility on 9/2022 with diagnoses including acute and chronic respiratory failure and history of stroke. The resident had a permanent tracheostomy (an opening in the front of the neck into the windpipe [trachea] with a tube in the opening to keep it open for breathing.) Resident 17's comprehensive Care Plan dated 12/12/22 (last reviewed 7/10/23) included a focus area related to impaired/compromised respiratory function and ability to communicate related to the tracheostomy. The care plan did not include information related to the availability of spare inner or outer tracheostomy tubes at the resident's bedside or emergency management of complications associated with the tracheostomy tube. On 8/23/23 at 11:34 AM Staff 4 (LPN) confirmed…

    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
  • No harm found · B2026-04-10 · tag F0628 — pattern
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the State Long Term Care Ombudsman Office was notified of resident discharges as required for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for discharge. Findings include: The facility's undated Notice Transfer Discharge Policy & Procedure specified the facility business office will notify the state ombudsman office of all transfers and discharges monthly, or by cadence defined by the state ombudsman's office. On 4/9/26 at 3:14 PM and 3:41 PM Staff 9 (Business Office Manager) stated a list of discharged residents was not sent to the state ombudsman office since 10/2025. On 4/10/26 at 10:44 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) stated the facility process included sending a monthly update of discharged residents to the state ombudsman office. Staff 1 explained the facility experienced business office staffing changes and acknowledged the list of residents was not sent to the state ombudsman office.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to MARQUIS COMPANIES — 15 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 54.3+0.7 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.8+1.2 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.2-0.2 vs chain
The other 14 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.3★, per CMS)

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
MARQUIS COMPANIES I, INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 04/01/2013
FOGG, PHILLIPIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/22/2012
FOGG, STEVENIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2013
TONE, STACIIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2013
FOGG, ZACHARYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2021
LAGAZON, MARY ANNIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner 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.

$10.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-9.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$586K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 20%Medicare 7%Other / private 72%

This home reported $586K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$361per resident / day
operating cost
$10,986per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$330per 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 385266. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-10, 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